Science Memes

11586 readers

1320 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
Keep it rooted (on topic).
No spam.
Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

[email protected]

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1097

Spearmint (mander.xyz)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

90 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Nacktmull 12 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Depends on how you define success. If you look purely at population numbers, yes. However, if you look at how they live in industrial animal mass production facilities, no.

[–] TORFdot0 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Evolution only cares about population numbers so evolutionary successful and quality of life successful are two very different concepts.

[–] Nacktmull 5 points 10 months ago

Yes, that is what I tried to say.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Evolution doesn't really care about quality of life, so long as an organism still reproduces. If every organism in a species is in horrendous, absolutely unconscionable pain and suffering for their entire existence but always manages to successfully pass on their genes, then the species can absolutely be deemed "successful". In a way, we have a symbiotic relationship with e.g. cows: even if we cause them mass suffering as individuals, as a species our relationship is mutually beneficial and that's all evolution really cares about at the end of the day.