Well, of course, the ultimate arrogance of the Social Darwinist/Eugenics movements was the belief that they knew who was "fit", without ever investigating it. So far as I can tell, gang members are, in general, more fit than people in the same immediate environment who are not members of gangs.
If you are trying to change the environment, so that some other set of phenotypes is more fit, you might well get annoyed that the gangs don't want their world changed, but that doesn't mean they are not well adapted to their circumstances. Think of any old western with a gang in it... prior to the wandering protagonist... who is doing better, the townspeople or the gang? Eric On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 11:53 AM, glen <g...@ropella.name> wrote: > Douglas Roberts wrote at 09/26/2012 09:03 PM: >> dead gang members are far more productive members of society than >> live ones, I suspect. > >And here I was worried I wouldn't get enough _hate_ in my diet today. > >-- >glen > >============================================================ >FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > ------------ Eric Charles Assistant Professor of Psychology Penn State University Altoona, PA 16601
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
