In a message dated 1/16/2006 4:56:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Somewhere I've heard that the biological drive to procreate can only > >> be completely satisfied by grandchildren. :-) I have quite a few > >>years > >> to wait before first-hand experience. > >> > There a sense in which this is true. The biologic imperative is to pass along ones genes. Creating offspring is only part of the job. What really counts is how many copies of your genes make into the subsequent generation. So you could have 20 kids but if none procreate you would end up not passing your genes along. There are lots of strategies avalialbe. One can produce a huge number of offspring and just hope some of them make it to the next generation. You put all of your energy into making offsping and none into raising them. The ultimate example is some aphids who are born pregnant. Makes sense for creatures who are small short lived and dependentt upon waxing and waning conditions to reproduce. Basically make hay while the sun shinges. On the other extreme there are organisms who have few offspring but invest huge amounts time and energy in raising those offsrping. These offsprings are large long lived and capable learning and complex behavior. Sound familiar? Basically putting all of your eggs in one basker. By the way this a trait of all great apes more or less. But it is probably not a great one until one peculiar primate with a new trick came along. Up until then primates had been dwindling for about 20 million years losing out to monkeys which were becoming more numerous. Having said this I don't think there is any drive to create grfandchildren. That is too abstract a concept to be built into an organism including us. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
