(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Daughter dead of measles. Why would the parents think that way? An evolutionary view [1]
['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']
Date: 2025-03-22
Introduction
Just before heading to bed, I read the diary with the story of the parents of the girl who died from measles, saying it was no big deal, and after all, they had four other kids, who survived and (in some sense) benefited from the experience.
www.dailykos.com/...
Reproductive strategies facing competition and resource constraints
In one of those waking moments, this reminded me strongly of K-strategy vs r-strategy reproduction.
r-strategy species (or tribes, or individuals) deal with competition by having lots of offspring, typically investing very little in their care or development. Even if each has a very low chance of survival, with enough (metaphorical) tickets in the lottery, it’s likely some will survive, a few will thrive, and perhaps one or two hit the jackpot.
K-strategy entities tend to have few offspring, and prepare each (or at least most) for competition by investing heavily in their rearing and preparation for adulthood. Even though there are few entries in the race, each has been well-trained and ideally will be able to use their gifts to outcompete/outcooperate/outcheat their peers, and make best use of their environment. (Of course, if this is a group strategy, many of their peers will also have had those benefits.)
There are of course intermediates and hybrids, and many entities will have a fair number of offspring, even a fair number at a time, but also devote significant care at least to the infants, although they may chase them away at some point to fend for themselves. To my mind, cats and dogs seem to be such hybrid strategists. Wolves and other pack animals also have a strong sense of community in which individuals have distinct if somewhat formulaic roles.
Evolutionarily, K-strategies tend to succeed best when resources are scarce, populations are close to their carrying capacity (how many the environment can support), and/or the environment is stable. r-strategies tend to work best in the opposite situation, and in particular with higher reproductive rates are more likely to have beneficial mutations, although the carrier still has to survive to reproduce.
What is going on here?
OK, this is pushing it a little—but in my mind, only a little.
In human terms, and moving from evolutionary survival to an economic and social context, r-strategy followers tend to value reproduction at all costs, cutthroat competition, and risk-taking. K-strategists value empathy, education, and reflection. In terms of group behaviors, the r’s tend to favor group identity, and the K’s cooperation.
If you look at individuals, hypermasculinity, and having as many kids with as many women as possible is a clear r-strategy, and the women’s perspective appears to be informed by K-strategy considerations.
From this perspective, it seems that (wittingly or not) the current conservative movement and in particular the current administration wants to impose an r-strategy on all of us. Devalue education and empathy, privilege reproduction and competition, discourage individual viewpoints and promote tribal identity. Promote the masculine and denigrate the feminine. Add to this classism and racism, which is perhaps not much more than a translation of pack rank and stratification.
However, the environment does not seem suitable for the long-range success of the r-folks. Resources are constrained, we are overpopulated, and ignoring serious risks endangers the species and its bioresources.
Moreover, even though r-strategy can provide evolutionary advantages in fast-changing environments, the culture this particular group has developed seems (inadvertently?) tailored to being unable to adapt to the changes and transformations that are likely to occur in the medium term.
Thoughts?
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/3/22/2311867/-Daughter-dead-of-measles-Why-would-the-parents-think-that-way-An-evolutionary-view?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web
Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/
