Mr Munky; i have been waiting for you. what took you so long?
It has been a long time since i last read the word nematode.
to return the favour, i understand that the peacock's tail feathers are an even better example of 'status' than the lion's mane.
but as you prefer.
certainly, the acquisition of wealth is used as a criterion in selecting a breeding partner. of course, such doesn't ensure the exclusion of cheats, such as gold diggers and succubuses!
but we are mixing things up here to satisfy a POV. the arguement is that we are intrinsically selfish. evidence of this lies in our capitalistic, 'greed is good' mentality. but this monetary system is a byproduct of just one aspect of human behaviour and as such, is not a direct genetic trait.
therefore the money hungry greed 'instinct' is not an instinct at all, but is simply a product of our environment; we are told that girls like the fast cars, big TVs and designer clothes, but that doesn't make it any more true, than wimmin being told that those fellas with such things are the best sperm donors!
it all boils down to the same drive: Win the best mate by being the most attractive option, pass on the genes, and ensure your offspring's survival and fitness.
it does indeed. but once again, cash-centric propaganda implies the fallacy that riches are a good thing, if not the only thing to succeed in such immortality for your genetic code.
you then of course have to correlate this conclusion with those suggested by your goodself elsewhere; succinctly described as idiocracy. richness = fitness?
To deny some level of greed is to deny part of what makes us living, evolving, organisms.
and the bone of contention strikes again.
you say this as if it is proven.
it is not.
this expectation for greed is based entirely within the capitalistic model which you proceed to say has gotten 'out of hand'. and it is this out of hand that has doomed it to failure and yet was the fundamental value underscoring all of it. it is self destructive, unethical and ultimately a fraud AGAINST humanity.
and we are to believe it is within our nature?
This is also where communism falls flat on its face. Communism is a great idea on paper, but....
but it is the same as capitalism, in that it is a philosophy based upon and tailored entirely to, sustain and promote a monetary system; a system which is self destructive and unethical in that it makes victims of humankind!
Someone else always has a better TV, car, more food... whatever.
and still, this is a symptom of the monetary system. i am not trying to bust your chops here by labouring this point; it is just that it is a difficult concept to convey.
the idea of someone having a qualitative better blah blah blah is a consequence of scarcity. without money, everyting is attainable. suddenly, without the desire for 'keeping up with the Jones' you do not need to entertain the superficial and consumeristic.... you can simply spend all of your time finding what makes you genuinely content and then if so inclined, you can share it with anybody and everybody else.