Individual mechanics ≠ Group mechanics

This should be a golden rule, in page 1 of every evolutionary textbook. That’s why [naive] evolutionary biology can’t beat [complex] classical education. History of ancient world provide us with nice metaphors on “evolutionary fitness”

Example: Who was more fit in a battle 2500 years ago?
– A poor peasant (untrained soldier)?
– Or an aristocrat (trained for years) using cavalry (horses + rich equipment)?
In one-by-one comparison it’s obvious: cavalry.

The ancient greek army made all major decisions in a systems level: did NOT focus on cavalry (thus, denying military power & prestige to aristocrats) and created something new: phalanx (φάλαγξ). Groups of untrained (“unfit”) peasants built the most deadly fit infantry.

Students of classics often wonder how philosophers, like Socrates, describe their days in battles as simple soldiers. How on earth can you have unfit individuals in an army fit enough to beat the Persians? This is where most evolutionary textbooks fail.

Aristotle goes as far as proposing that democracy is a political regime that is ONLY fit for a collective body of peasants of middle income (military untrained). It’s [almost] impossible for a group of military trained to naturally form democratic (pluralistic) government.

If you notice, most “evolutionary” atheists focus on comparing individuals: a modern “scientist” vs. an ancient “dogmatic”. They have failed to give examples (modern or ancient) where collective atheist communities produce anything more than self-righteousness & misery.


Source

Textbook Monoculture

Why most textbooks in the same subject teach the same material & views? Take any random english textbook in medicine, biochemistry, statistics etc. you’ll see more or less the same structure. In non-english background, suddenly, contents & views may vary.

Example: in clinical physiology, english textbooks handpick a set of diseases (the same set) and present their underlying mechanisms. Non-english textbooks in physiology often focus on pragmatic real-life clinical issues like fever, pain etc.

Example: open any random english textbook in biochemistry, pathology etc., you can predict even the diagrams and the images you’re going to see. They’re copy-paste. But if you open a book, in the same subject, from Jaypee Brothers (India) you may see a different approach.

Textbook monoculture gives the false impression to students that there is such a thing that we call “science” which is solid and everybody agrees with. All medical textbooks present the same images on how lipids cause heart attacks & questioning this becomes a hubris.

The heart-bit of textbook monoculture is centralised examinations & credit transfer. US textbooks prepare students for SAT exams, USMLE exams (for doctors), bar examination (for lawyers), providing the “correct answers” for those exams.