Evolution: Unalienable Rights, trumps, "survival of the fittest"

Thank you Con for arguments based on the classical logic of "survival of the fittest." Earlier Pro gave an example of Einstein giving the scientific community a better understanding by claiming Newtonian physics was incomplete and needed refinement. Shortly after Einstein's claim, the scientific community took a defensive position in defending the classical understanding of Newtonian physics and this is a normal process in the evolution of going forward in knowledge. This debate is a microcosm of the same resistance in going forward from the classical "survival of the fittest" paradigm to the more comprehensive Unalienable Rights. The drawback concerning the "survival of the fittest" paradigm for evolution is its narrow scope fails to address evolution before life. Evolution started right after the Big Bang. The foundation to evolution is the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and in part, this Law deals with flow. That is, the natural flow of heat moves from high temperature to a lower temperature. When dealing with pressure, there is a natural flow from high pressure to a lower pressure. Everyone could relate to a pressurized aerosol spray container. Did anyone ever notice, the spray from a hair spray container going in the opposite direction? That is, back into the can. The answer is NO. To continue, electrical current flows from high resistance to low resistance. Water flows from the height of a mountain to the lowest level in a valley or the ocean. And so on. Flow within the matrix of the Second Law of Thermodynamics is the key to the current evolutionary state of the universe. Since humanity is a product of the Laws of Nature, it is fascinating to see symmetry in populations of human behavior relative to the Second Law. That is, the desire to take a path from high to lower resistance. Do less work for the same result. Population migration from the high resistance found in tyranny, to the low resistance found in freedom. The desire to move from a higher taxed area, to a lower tax community having the same standard of living. The enjoyment of the transition from high emotional stress to lower stress. Choose the lower price supplier for a given product. And so on.Flow is the key to evolution. According to the Constructal Law, for both animate or inanimate (Bejan http://www.amazon.com...): “Given freedom, for a finite-sized flow system to persist in time (to live), its configuration must evolve in such a way that provides easier access to the currents that flow through it.” Please see the youtube video overview on the Constructal Law (). There is symmetry, correlation and mapping between Constructal Law and life's Unalienable Rights. For example, the term “freedom” in Constructal Law (CL), maps to the term “Liberty” in Unalienable Rights (UR). The phrase “(to live)” in CL, maps to “Life” in UR. The phrase “easier access” in CL, maps to “the pursuit of” in UR. The phrase “flow through” in CL, maps to “positive-feedback” in UR (Takac http://www.amazon.com...). Pro fails to see any symmetry, correlation or mapping between "survival of the fittest" to Constructal Law. In general, evolution is a slow process based on easier access relative to flow within an environment. Such a process took us from the Big Bang, to the formation of the elements found in the periodic table, to the configuration of DNA, evolving to more complex life forms. The flow of life, within any environment, includes taking the path of least resistance in maintaining survival from threats, while optimizing the energy in the pursuit of food. According to Bejan:“Life is movement. Every living system performs better when the power that is required for maintaining its movement is minimized. Just as lightning bolts and river basins should generate treelike structures to reduce thermodynamic imperfection and increase flow access, animals should have evolved to cover a greater distance for less effort, which means per unit of useful energy derived from food.”The evolution of complex life forms includes us humans. We are still evolving through life changing science, technology, social-systems, markets, etc., all having its roots from easier access relative to flowing in that desired direction maintaining positive-feedback. Evolution encompasses a deeper understanding pertaining to the currents of flow relative to the simple classical view of "survival of the fittest." In fact, the concept of "survival of the fittest" may be completely wrong. Take for example, the weakest among us, a premature human baby who would have died years ago, but through technology and positive-feedback from the baby's parents, thousands are saved each year to grow up to healthy humans. In other words, there are thousands of cases of “survival of the weakest,” therefore, challenging the concept of "survival of the fittest." In fact, one of the nine Properties of the physical Laws of Nature is the True Property. That is, for an observable phenomena to become a Law in Nature, must pass the test of not having any“... repeatable contradicting observations.” (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Since thousands of premature humans were the weakest to survived, contradicts “survival of the fittest;” making this paradigm more philosophy than part of evolution. There are other examples of the weakest within a civil society, through the force of morality, resulting in “survival of the weakest.” One cannot argue humans are the exception, because humans are part of nature, part of evolution. Morality maintains the primitive of doing something Right, or the immoral primitive of doing something Wrong, relative to the Unalienable Rights of other living-systems resulting in either positive-feedback embracing a group, pack, flock, tribe, life, etc, or negative-feedback embracing conflict, dispersion, chaos, distress, death, etc; these are the forces of good and bad respectively throughout the universe of life. Again, Morality is an outgrowth of life's Unalienable Rights, which is an outgrowth of the Constructal Law, which is an outgrowth of the Second Law of Thermodynamics; thus, the traceable link to the physical Laws of Nature.With that said, one may argue that it is immoral to kill life for food. Nature is not cruel or kind, just indifferent as it gives all life the Right to “Life” through freedom (“Liberty”) in “the pursuit of” survival (positive-feedback, aka “Happiness”). Survival includes the evolution of reproductive quantity, self-defense and hunting skills. This balance in nature seems to be sustaining life throughout the ages of evolution, up to and including, the hallmark of humanity and beyond. The evolution of science, technology and knowledge is not one of "survival of the fittest," but one of “survival of the happiest.” Personal happiness from the emotional outcome of positive-feedback when unlocking the secrets of nature. Happiness from the recognition of discovery from your peers. Happiness from income compensation, resulting in more money, equating to more freedom (“Liberty”). Happiness in the potential improvement of the standard of living throughout the world, etc.In free-market capitalism, it is easy to trivialize such a market as “dog-eat-dog” or applying the simple logic of "survival of the fittest." In fact, a free-market system is dependent on “survival of the happiest.” A supplier of a product must embrace the “Happiness” of a customer, before a customer will voluntarily pay the supplier for such “Happiness.” In return, the supplier is financially Happier; hence, everyone is Happier. One may point out the “dog-eat-dog” competition within a free-market system. Competitors who morally follow the laws within a civil-society, are dependent on the Natural Selection Process. That is, customers who are looking for Happiness, will Naturally Select those producers who will satisfy their Happiness, putting the non-happy suppliers out of business. The beauty of free-market evolution based on “survival of the Happiest,” advancing the standard of living to a Happier state throughout the world. The relatively new science of Happiness: http://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org... http://www.amazon.com...http://harvardmagazine.com...http://www.huffingtonpost.com...In any debate, it is expected for Pro and Con to pursue positive-feedback (aka happiness) from supporting voters. The additional happiness for Pro in this debate, is sending a message to academia throughout the world about morality being part of the Laws of Nature, clearing a path for better understanding of moral evolution from man's scriptures of the supernatural, and processes of good and bad events in group formation throughout the evolution of live. Finally, aloud me [Pro] the pleasure to hand you, your students, and Con, the key to utopia: --- Survival of the Happiest ---In closing, I thank Con for her time on this important subject. On the other hand, Pro has mix feelings whether to wish Con successful “dog-eat-dog” conflicts during her life of "survival of the fittest," or should Pro wish Con a long and healthy “Life,” with ample freedom (“Liberty” aka money), in the moral pursuit of Happiness?” Whatever she feels comfortable with, I tip my hat on a good debate and looking forward in meeting Con on the debating floor again.