Our bodies are defenceless?

[Skirr]

I've been reading 2001: A Space Odyssey lately and one passage early on reads:

(In regards to man in general): "As his body became more and more defenceless, so his means of offence became more frightful. With stone and bronze and iron and steel he had run the gamut of everything that could pierce and slash, and quite early in time had learnt how to strike down his enemies from a distance. The spear, the bow, the gun and finally the guided missile had given him weapons of infinite range and all but infinite power."

Right so this is about evolution so if you don't believe in that, don't contest it. It's not about that.

But do you think our bodies have become defenceless through evolution? I mean, we've lost any protective layers apart from the skin; no thick body hair etc., for dampening blows.

But we can move much faster, our agility and fitness is much greater (not all of us, and nowhere near say anything from the big cat species) but lack of these protections has given rise to martial arts. Animals fight purely on instinct, and we don't have that so trained our bodies to be specialized into combat forms. Some of which are based on animals, surely that makes our defences without weapons a whole lot greater too?

Discuss.

[Wras]

Intelligence.

= win

[CakeSpoon]

Using tools is just as important evolution-wise as growing claws or fur. Many animals use rocks to open shells, nuts & insect structures, humans have just taken it to another level. Sure in a fight something like a bear would probably beat an average person, unless the person found a sharp stick or something, then it would even out.

[Skirr]

^Dude that's not what I'm asking at all. The quote says that we make offences and that our body loses natural defences. But I'm saying our body has gained natural defences by becoming so mobile and agile.

[CakeSpoon]

It seems I misunderstood your question, but my interpretation of the quote is that man needs technology to make up for his body's frailty & how that relates to evolution.

Let me try another go at the question. Yes I agree, man has evolved into a very agile & adaptable creature. Whether this is greater than the overall defence something like thick fur could give is uncertain.

[Aidan]

We're only especially mobile and agile with our hands. Generally speaking we're much less agile or mobile than most animals. Pretty much all other primates win for agility.

[Oxyuranus]

I've been reading 2001: A Space Odyssey lately and one passage early on reads:

(In regards to man in general): "As his body became more and more defenceless, so his means of offence became more frightful. With stone and bronze and iron and steel he had run the gamut of everything that could pierce and slash, and quite early in time had learnt how to strike down his enemies from a distance. The spear, the bow, the gun and finally the guided missile had given him weapons of infinite range and all but infinite power."

Right so this is about evolution so if you don't believe in that, don't contest it. It's not about that.

But do you think our bodies have become defenceless through evolution? I mean, we've lost any protective layers apart from the skin; no thick body hair etc., for dampening blows.

But we can move much faster, our agility and fitness is much greater (not all of us, and nowhere near say anything from the big cat species) but lack of these protections has given rise to martial arts. Animals fight purely on instinct, and we don't have that so trained our bodies to be specialized into combat forms. Some of which are based on animals, surely that makes our defences without weapons a whole lot greater too?

Discuss.

We absolutely DO posess instinct. The most praised fighter in the world could still loose to an average Joe if survival instintc kicks in on the Joe's side. The only thing martial arts has given us is the ability to push off that instintc through rational and focusing on stabibility in a "human fight". Lock Bruce Lee in a room with a polar bear and see just how much effect his "martial arts" has. Martial arts is designed for fighting another human. They are techniques developed to counteract human movements alone and at best, with a hand held weapon, like a axe or sword. Aginst a bear he will be running like a little girl, useing that "human" brian without of thinking about it, looking for ways to escape. His instinct would be kicking in because his brain would realize that all of his training cant help him aginst a bear. Instinct is there is every living orginism. Humans are just able to push off the chances of "needing" said instincts because of neat gadgets we have come up with that put us on a near god like level, comparatovly speaking to animals of cource. We also tend to "huminize" instintcs. If you have a family in a burning house and the instinctual response would be "everybody for themselves"! but since we are able to think and rationalize based on things other then pure survival, we can stop our bodies from the flight reflex and go upstairs and save the 3 yr old kid. or atleast some of us can.

We also use intincts in everyday situation. It is an instinctual response for me to get up and go to work everyday because I know Ill have my life repoed away if I dont. This intinct makes sure I get up everyday at 5:20 am (I know, it sucks!) whether or not I set the alarm. In a way, this could be considered instinct eveloution. Its an instinct developed for a modern senario.


In response to the question, no, I dont think developing our human mind has dulled our eveloution in regards to instinct but I do think its stunted our growth in physical atrributes. Our brain made it so that we dont need to worry about built in survival gear like other organisms i,e fur, blubber, retracting eyelids etc. Our thinking ability pushed us over the edge. We absolutely evolve we just do so in thinking, not with traditional, physical mechanics. Our brains have taught us how to evlove and adapt to anything the earth can throw at us. If your talking a 1 on 1 Bear aginst person senario and whther or not being human has hindered our chances for survival, of cource it has. On the same note, the first huminids wouldnt have faired much better, nor the primates that came before them, nor the tiny, rodent like creatures that gave birth to the mammals. They would still be just as dead as us. The reason they survivied was due to being able to out think their problems and get around them. To realize there is safety in numbers. To realize how to hide away in the winter etc.

The bottom line is no, I do not think we have been left defenseless. Our brain is the most powerful weapon on earth and at the rate human tech keeps evolving I think its safe to say that we as a species probally evolve faster then anything else. We just do it up stairs, in our heads and without the constant, phisical mutations.

[Wras]

We also use intincts in everyday situation. It is an instinctual response for me to get up and go to work everyday because I know Ill have my life repoed away if I dont. This intinct makes sure I get up everyday at 5:20 am (I know, it sucks!) whether or not I set the alarm. In a way, this could be considered instinct eveloution. Its an instinct developed for a modern senario.

Wouldn't that be habit though, and not really "instinct"? Your body gets used to it even if you don't set the alarm and you get up every day because you've been getting up every day, but waking at 5:20 AM is not an innate pattern of behavior.

[Meta]

I've finished reading the latest series of Baki the Grappler and it seems that the writer agrees with what the OP claims.
The generic theory claims that not only our bodies become even more defenseless with the passing millennium,but we're becoming weaker and weaker,more powerless in comparison to what the prehistoric human was.
Well you can say that all these weaknesses can be ''masked'' by our intelligence(human grows smarter with the passing centuries)

[Skirr]

Yes but our bodies are becoming fitter as well. Less natural defences but look at that dude that can run that fast (you know the one, something 'bolt'? I don't remember his name.) Like, three generations ago that would've seemed impossible.

[Meta]

I'm positive that an average prehistoric ''human'' walking on both feet and hands would have been a lot faster than Usain Bolt.

[nasandre]

I think I read somewhere that humans have good stamina when compared to other creatures and we used to hunt by chasing our prey until it passed out from exhaustion.

[Wras]

I think I read somewhere that humans have good stamina when compared to other creatures and we used to hunt by chasing our prey until it passed out from exhaustion.

Yeah makes perfect sense. All those years of smoking will slow those lions down.

[Rurudyne]

Intelligence.

= win
Not only that but humans can eat almost anything. Some of us practically do.

Sure, we can't chow down on roadkill like a dog can (I'm gonna say that's the dog's loss even then) but our diet and calorie needs are highly favorable.

[Ascendancy]

Intelligence.

= win

A classic example is planet of the apes.

[RsR]

the true measurable evolution that man has created is the choice of defense it enables itself with plus the combination of adaptability to our genetics.

the ability to choose our defense becomes our true offense.

the better we are at the game the harder it becomes to play it...

[notorious UZIMAKI]

shiaat. man is fairly well off in the evolutionary sense. only threat to us is us. well... that and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus.

[Seanc]

No. We are only defenseless in the fact that we don't have have claws and fangs to fight with. Our weapons are our intelligence and cunning. Give us the means to build and there is no foe we cannot beat.

[MMZ]

Right so this is about evolution so if you don't believe in that, don't contest it. It's not about that.

There is Biblical basis to the topic too. Evolution has it's place to the extend of things adapting or changing over time, just not the changing of species like ape-to-man... but I digress that's a whole other discussion.

Like I mentioned, even Biblically speaking it wasn't uncommon at one point for people to live 300-500 years old. The famed oldest man ever 'Methuselah' is listed to have died at the age of 962. I'd say peoples bodies would be much more durable then if they'd last that long. There's also the "Nephilem" essentially the race of giants so to speak that would stand 9ft+. Goliath of "David & Goliath" was about 9'6" for that matter.

Point in the end I would say is that physically we're getting screwed and weaker, but adept at making new ways to make up for it. Weapon development aside, you got to include medical advances seeing as our immune system is a form of defense and without it the simplest virus would wipe us out.

[Aya]

^Dude that's not what I'm asking at all. The quote says that we make offences and that our body loses natural defences. But I'm saying our body has gained natural defences by becoming so mobile and agile.

you dont need natural defence as much as 100000 years ago, so why even discuss it, all it needs now is brains, thats how evolution goes :neutral:

[Skirr]

Isn't that the point of hypothetical questions?

[pds]

Yes, through evolution humans have become weaker, only with technology we can make up for this shortcomings.

[Yexley]

We may (not really sure) be more agile now than we were but we're still shit compared to most predators. Our mind is the only thing we have that doesn't suck.

[Skirr]

Yeah, but completely defenceless? I bet Bruce Lee could beat up a top predator (maybe not one known for speed, like a cheetah) through use of like understanding his own body/body of enemy.

Obviously not everyone is Bruce Lee, but my point being that our defences don't always have to rely on our brainpower, the human body is diverse enough to do everything and nothing. No?

[pds]

Yes, but in general predators still have the most advantage over us (average/normal human body). Like speed and power in general.

[Sotnos]

I think our brain developpement made us being able to defend ourselve with tools and not our body. Thats my darn short answer bleh.

[Rurudyne]

Just as a spurious aside: one could look at Bleach in this light too ... ordinary hollow, scads of 'natural' animalistic strength and defenses and yet so much canon fodder to the tool wielding men in black....

[Yexley]

@ Skirr: I don't see Bruce Lee being able to tackle any top predator with just his body tbh. I mean how would he deal with any of the big cats, bears, stuff like alligators or sharks. No way humans can beat them in a straight up fight without backing off and using our heads.

[ismey]

we have adapted to our enviroment with the use of our tools and brains so that makes up for most fallbacks......so your typical deer or moose would fail against any spear or dagger and with modern weapons/tools we can destroy any flora and fauna in our way.

[TW501]

We're not as fast and strong as a lot of animals, but we have other advantages besides intelligence.

We have exceptional endurance. We can't run as fast as other animals, but we can run a lot longer. We're also very adaptable. Few other animals can eat such a variety of foods and live in such a variety of places. Along with mice, rats, and roaches, we're probably the most adaptable animals on earth.

[B_K_E]

I think I read somewhere that humans have good stamina when compared to other creatures and we used to hunt by chasing our prey until it passed out from exhaustion.

That was only a certain group of indians, I forget what they were called. Though Bear Grylls talks about them in Man vs Wild in an episode, I forget which one.

[Sotnos]

We're not as fast and strong as a lot of animals, but we have other advantages besides intelligence.

We have exceptional endurance. We can't run as fast as other animals, but we can run a lot longer. We're also very adaptable. Few other animals can eat such a variety of foods and live in such a variety of places. Along with mice, rats, and roaches, we're probably the most adaptable animals on earth.


Thats a good point, we live everywhere on the planet afterall. Never thought of that.
In my opinion, or intelligence can also accentuate our endurance. Because we have the power of saying to ourselves sentences such as "Ok I endure it just a little bit longer and then it's done, I can do it" which makes a difference.
We also, in some situations, accept pain, and when its accepted, it hurts less(well we feel like it). Animals tend to struggle until its done and dont assume it can be for their own good.

[Ash]

But do you think our bodies have become defenceless through evolution? I mean, we've lost any protective layers apart from the skin; no thick body hair etc., for dampening blows.

What have we lost through evolution? Humans never had much in the way of natural defences. Claws, fangs, secreting poison from our skin or mouths.
If anything we only lost things that were basically useless to us. Body hair? That's not much of a defence mechanism.

Our bodies haven't so much gained natural defences as we've learned them. A child is not born knowing martial arts or having the agility and strength to defend themselves. They are things we learn and train to do through the course of our lives.

@ MMZ

People died when they were in 30's back in the middle ages, birth rates were extremely low. How can you say we used to be more durable. That's complete and utter garbage you can't compare some rubbish from the bible stating a man was over 900 years old as a basis for that.

[Matthew]

Well we can base it off evolution then. Survival of the fitness (Charles Darwin), those who were genetically fit survived. If your health was frail, cancer, plagues, etc or maybe you were a slow runner and sucked at hunting. Then back then you would probably die and only the healthiest had the chance to pass their genes on.

Today, the goodness of modern medicine and the dependance on technology (i.e - inserting fossil fuels into foods to increase yields) has kept many more people alive. It's great and all, but people have stopped evolving. Basically because someone weak will have the same chances as the strong in reproducing. Thus the next generation will have the same problems.

Get what I mean?

[Rurudyne]

Well we can base it off evolution then. Survival of the fitness (Charles Darwin), those who were genetically fit survived. If your health was frail, cancer, plagues, etc or maybe you were a slow runner and sucked at hunting. Then back then you would probably die and only the healthiest had the chance to pass their genes on.
Something to consider: these days we seem to place greater importance in having a cute bum. This has been going on for quite a while.

Thus, despite those who want to dream of an evolving race, what we should rather expect is that future humanity will be bullocks compared to us in many ways but they WILL be rather attractive....

[NakeBenihime]

Our bodies are pretty defenseless but the one thing we have over other animaqls is intelligence. But in a combat situation that can't always save your life.

[Matthew]

@ruru, well the future can be the least from what we expect

just a few centuries ago overweight women were found attractive

[Rurudyne]

@ruru, well the future can be the least from what we expect

just a few centuries ago overweight women were found attractive
:amused:

Ask the ladies if they have an easy time staying fashionably slim? :blink:

[dyne]

overweight women were not found attractive. it just meant they were wealthy

[metalsoup111]

Fat chicks need love too, dyne...

[Sotnos]

Plump women were seriously seen as attractive girls, not fat, but plump.
It was showing they were wealthy but good curves were also a proof of fertility, and saw as pretty traits(yah Im obviously talking about big boobies)
If you read old books they dont say 'What an ugly plump rich chick', its written 'Her attractive breast and misterious eyes...blahblah'

And yah, fat chicks do need love :(