|
|
|
|
|
|
by developer93
1876 days ago
|
|
|
I would suggest as well that the components of athletics, e.g. running, is something that we're evolutionarily used to - being a better runner would mean you would be less likely to be eaten/more likely to eat. Arbitrary tasks have no evolutionary advantage to them, so there's no a) biological systems for getting good at them or b) positive emotional feedback to incentivise getting good at them. If we'd had the same factory work for millions of years, we might have some mechanisms to enjoy or get good at it. |
|
|
> If we'd had the same factory work for millions of years, we might have some mechanisms to enjoy or get good at it.
This is simply NOT how evolution works. It's not intelligent and does not super-optimize a species for some task.
It's very chaotic and messy and constantly gets stuck into local minima/maxima where species are barely "good enough" to survive.
Furthermore, it works only on a set of physical attributes. There isn't a set of genes for liking repetitive work, or pop music, or similar abstract psychological traits.
This is why the infamous eugenics experiments of the 1940s could not develop superhuman psychological traits.