As I grow older the more I become uncertain of this threads topic, so I hope to hear everyone's opinion...

All I have to do is turn on National Geographic and watch a predator chase down his prey to believe this...

I will be posting alot of videos with regard's to this topic in this thread so your free to do the same...

No.

oioioi wrote:

Can’t agree more.

'Survival of the fittest' for the human race is something we abandoned as soon as we made reasonable advancements in medicine. I know it’ll sound insensitive but a lot of folks with a myriad of health conditions wouldn’t had survived as they do today if you’d let natural selection to take its course. That covers the biological aspect of the 'Survival of the Fittest'. Then there’s the socioeconomic aspects of it. Some of the most apt among us wither in economical adverse environments while the privileged thrive regardless of mental or physical aptitude.

So in short, as oioioi said: No.

Social Dawrinism evaporates as soon as a Socilal Darwinist screams "no fair".

oioioi wrote:
‘Adam Smith was wrong’ >> LOL! No sh!t Sherlock!

Yet there are still people subscribing to this dinosaur ideas, basing economic models on dribble that wasn’t even close to 'right' (as in correct) in the 17 hundreds when he first uttered them...

From Thatcher's lies about Victorian Values that would have had her thatching houses (or rather her male relatives as she was in the kitchen) to the absurdity of American Exceptionalism when "we have da bombs" is used as a Might is Right bollox, I think we an put this distortion of organism adaption = I can do what the fuck I want to bed now.

If not, then all mods and morals are now suspended.

If you want biggest nastiest cunt wins then I am gonna start getting nasty cunty and big.

You dig?

No?

Oh well.

Too bad.

*sharpens claws*

No whining now

mikey mikey wrote:
Innit.

mikey mikey wrote:
You've lost me lad... gonna have to explain that to me

In regards to the OP's question, it's a NO from me too.

psketti wrote:
I think his point was/is if we are to accept the survival of the fittest idea it basically boils down to last cunt standing, if that's the case 'unleash the cunt' is the only obvious course of action to take to survive.

Sounds fun when I put it like that.

Thank you. Makes sense now. I'm a tad slow today for one reason or another

Okay

I see a lot of neo darwinism (which is often a horrible distortion of what he scientst intended).

So here is my passionate (and often aggressive) objection.

Unless one takes on board the idea that might and right are not the same thing, you abondon all rules and it is a gloves off situation.

There is no grey area here: Or you agree that we can agree to a common accord of behaviour or you do not.

No way, ever again, do I settle for a suggestion that "I can do with whatevber I want cos that is the natural law" without my reponse: which is "Well my law is to fuck you up in defense".

Saw too much of this shit.

So if one suggests there are no rules to life: well I put down mine and get gnashing.

This is one of the reasons why I got banned from DIF.

And no.

There is no "abstract" convo with me.

Chat's gonna be interesting tonight!

oioioi wrote:
Me and mikey can have a cunt-off to see which of us truely is the biggest one... what ya say mikey?

there

mikey mikey wrote:
Where?

There on the stair.