2 results for (book:ur2 AND session:705 AND stemmed:surviv)
mutants
cells
kingdoms
species
cellular
For now think of it as you usually do, in a time context. It has been fashionable in the past to believe that each species was oriented selfishly toward its own survival. Period. Each was seen in competition with all other species. In that framework cooperation was simply a by-product of a primary drive toward survival. One species might use another, for instance. Species were thought to change, and “mutants” form, because of a previous alteration in the environment, to which any given species had to adjust or disappear. The motivating power was always projected outside* (underlined).
4. Jane and I understand Seth’s point when he tells us that “the cells of a man or woman may become the cells of a plant or an animal.” However, for the reasons given in Note 3 for Session 687, in Volume 1, we’d rather think of the molecular components of cells as participating in the structures of a variety of forms. (And I can note a week later that at the end of Session 707, Seth makes his own comment about cells surviving changes of form.)
evolution
Darwin
appendix
dna
realism
[...] Deoxyribonucleic acid may exist within its host, whether man, plant, or animal — or bacteria or virus — in cooperative altruistic ventures with its carrier that are quite beside purely survival ones. [...] Basically, then, an overall genetics of cooperation becomes a truer long-run concept than the postulated deadly struggle for survival of the fittest, whether between man and molecules, say, or among members of the same species. [...]
[...] For how can you look at yourselves with self-respect, with dignity or with joy, if you believe that you are the end product of forces in which the fittest survive? Being the fittest implies those given most to what would appear to be murderous intent — for you must survive at the expense of your fellows, be you leaf, frog, plant, or animal.
You do not survive through cooperation, according to that theory, and nature is not given a kind or creative intent, but a murderous one. [...] How can you believe that you live in a safe universe when each species exists because it survives through claw, if it must hunt and kill out of murderous intent, as implied in the theories of evolution and of reality itself?
[...] (See Note 5.) Thus, in a process called gradualism, there has been over many millions of years the slow development of flora and fauna from the simple to the complex, with those structures surviving that are best suited to their environments — the “survival of the fittest,” in popular terms.