• cm0002@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    115
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    what’s the point, evolutionarily, to self destruct after reproducing?

    There is no point, evolution is about successful reproduction and everything else is just random chance.

    If a evolutionary tweak happens that gives your off spring better chances, but your arms fall off after sex then it’ll probably perpetuate.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        But that’s just moving the goalpost, so to speak. You’ve just built a different parenting framework that requires you to stick around. You’re still hunting the same goal: self sufficient offspring

        (Not negging you)

        • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          True, I’m just being pedantic and pointing out that “reproduce and that’s it” isn’t the case for some species.

          Some species carry it on to “reproduce and ensure your offspring reproduces too.”

    • x4740N@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wouldn’t it make them easier to he hunted by prey or just die from not being careful

      People with dementia can end up getting themselves fatally injured so I don’t see an octopus can’t

      So I don’t see how it’s beneficial to help them survive

      • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not but, the evolutionary goal is compete.

        There’s no way for the octopus to pick a mate with out the side effect, so the lack of post-nut clarity continues through the generations.

    • serenissi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      everything else is just random chance.

      nope, then you’d see some of same species showing the behaviour, others not.

      • activ8r@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sorry I’m really struggling to parse what you are saying here 😄 my fault.
        Can you explain further?

        • Demdaru@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          To my understanding:

          nope, then you’d see some of same species showing the behaviour, others not.

          Nope, then you’d see some animals of the same species showing the new behaviour while other animals, still of the same species, would not.

          Also my comment: We absoluteky see this, just on small scale tho. :|