Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Rather, the point is that arguing on the basis of penile development as evolutionary genius is misguided. It is essentially an argument from intelligent design. In other words, there are valid arguments for countering infant circumcision that are far better than "that's how god intended it."
|
I may misunderstand you here - evolution has no intelligence or intent.
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evoli...article/evo_32
Quote:
Because natural selection can produce amazing adaptations, it's tempting to think of it as an all-powerful force, urging organisms on, constantly pushing them in the direction of progress — but this is not what natural selection is like at all.
First, natural selection is not all-powerful; it does not produce perfection. If your genes are "good enough," you'll get some offspring into the next generation — you don't have to be perfect. This should be pretty clear just by looking at the populations around us: people may have genes for genetic diseases, plants may not have the genes to survive a drought, a predator may not be quite fast enough to catch her prey every time she is hungry. No population or organism is perfectly adapted.
Second, it's more accurate to think of natural selection as a process rather than as a guiding hand. Natural selection is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity — it is mindless and mechanistic. It has no goals; it's not striving to produce "progress" or a balanced ecosystem.
|
I think people are saying that foreskins are a successful adaptation, and not necessarily a perfect adaptation.