32: Does survival of the fittest force us into war

Many people claim that naturally established laws support a concept known as the survival of the fittest. They claim that Earth's circle of life only allows the strongest individuals and species to survive. Fighting for the remaining means of survival within a war of all against all is claimed to be a natural goal. The notion follows that the winners of this harvest war are superior and represent the natural selection of evolutionary champions.

Imagine a family that always eats together. During each meal, there are ample amounts of food prepared so everyone can be adequately nourished. If the family exists in peace, then the family members will allow each other to meet their individual needs. The family will realize that all of the food is required so none of the food is foolishly wasted. Each member of the family will have enough to eat. The family will consume the meal while sharing information, telling jokes and feeling secure.

If the family exists in war, the family members will grab the food with no regard for each other. The stronger members of the family will be able to control more food than they need. They will not be concerned if some of their food is foolishly wasted or excessively consumed. Each member of the family will not have enough to eat. Could a family member justify the condition of a starving brother or sister by claiming to be superior? Does any compassion exist in the logic of superiority?

The fact that strength can overpower weakness is a natural law. Throwing a rock as hard as we can at someone's head will cause an injury or even death. Since it is a natural law, should we walk around throwing rocks at other people's heads as hard as we can?

We use natural laws in our ability to swim. Can we teach someone to swim by only explaining the natural law of our bodies pushing against the water? We can all imagine a person thrashing violently in the water until drowning by only knowing this one physical law.

If we really want to teach someone how to swim, we will explain how the natural laws are applied. Swimming is only achieved through the cooperation of an individual and the water. Body parts still push against the water according to natural law, but it needs to be done according to the original goal of swimming. A tiny change in how we choose to apply natural laws makes a huge difference between thrashing in the water until drowning and achieving the wonderful feeling of swimming.

31: Is war our goal

In order to survive as a species, some experts argue that we must establish dominance over every other species. Because of this, many people believe that it is their duty to ensure that humanity is the strongest species on Earth by conquering, claiming and controlling everything else. In order to continue existing as a species, many experts claim that we must win the survival of the fittest competition.

The survival of the fittest concept does have considerable merit in evolutionary terms. Species are in a constant struggle to maintain a role within Earth's circle of life. Our human bodies shed old skin when it is no longer fit to protect our bodies. Similarly, Earth also has a system for getting rid of species that do not fit within a balanced system of health.

The word fit doesn't always mean strong. We are only fit for survival if we fit within the balance of a healthy circle of life. Life is only possible if diverse components interact with each other for the purpose of mutual aid. The components of life compete with each other, but it doesn't make sense for them to wage war against each other. War isn't exactly a wise option within a community of life.

Survival of the fittest does not mean that the strongest will survive in a competition producing a single champion. If this were true, then our human bodies and Earth would only consist of components that had previously defeated the weaker components of the body. Instead, after lengthy evolutionary struggles, our human bodies and Earth's circle of life are full of diverse and fragile components that are all crucial to a healthy existence.

In terms of being fit for survival on Earth, should we rely more on our muscles or on our minds? Humanity will be considered fit for continued survival on Earth only if we are wise enough to cooperate within the overall balance of Earth's circle of life. Peaceful competition and innovation are available within a diverse and sustainable global economy.

By deciding we are fit only to dominate and control everything on Earth, the circle of life is being weakened. While natural survival of the fittest laws may exist, the strong controlling and destroying the weak according to a false hierarchy of being is nothing more than the barbarous exploitation of our partners in life. Is this our goal?

Do we have any other options? Can we choose to live in peace? Do we have the option of peacefully maintaining a balanced human existence within a healthy and abundant circle of life? Can we exist as a species while sharing information, telling jokes and feeling secure? It is our decision to make.