Are people from Africa less evolved?

Question

First off, I mean nothing by this. At all.

In my mind...I think they would actually be more evolved because they were here first.

I know nothing about this, though.

What do you guys think?

Answer 1

Biologically, all humans are one species that has not had time to diverge into sub species and be reproductively isolated. As the world is, that would not be possible, now. We humans are all at the same evolutionary mark.

Answer 2

To answer this question, you have to define what you mean by "evolved".

For example, one way something can be considered "more evolved" than something else is by the number of genetic changes it took to get from a previous to the present state. But by this reasoning, chimpanzees are actually more evolved than humans. The modern chimpanzee is more mutations away from the common ancestor than humans are.

The other definition of evolved centers around "betterness", or being improved, but this is actually not a valid argument in evolution, because "survival of the fittest" has to be looked at in context of environment. Crocodiles haven't changed in over 1 million years, but they have no need to. They are very well adapted for the environment they live in. What works for one species in one environment would be determinetal in another environment. For example a polar bear would not do well in the Sahara desert and a camel would not do well in Alaska.

Concerning human race, light skin seems to be more recent than dark skin, however consider this. Africans have dark skin, and so are very well adapted to the high levels of UV radiation Africa receives from the sun. If it weren't for their dark skin they would burn severely and be at risk for skin cancer and vitamin D overdose (your body manufactuers viatmin D from UV light). However, dark skinned people in parts of the world that recieve very low amounts of UV light risk getting a disease called rickets, unless they are careful to eat foods high in vitamin D.

On the other hand, whites who live in areas of the world with low levels of UV, such as parts of Europe, are able to manufactuer enough vitamin D from the available UV light. It should be noted that white Australians have 4 times the skin cancer rates as white Europeans, because Australia receives high levels of UV light.

So people from Africa are not less evolved in any sense of the word that  matters.

Answer 3

If by evolved you mean the genetic mutations that take place during the course of nature and time then the answer would be no.  The modern white man of today evolved from Africans, so rest assured we are all indeed homo sapiens. If you're talking about being civilized then the answer would be yes, Africans are less civilized mainly because they have had little influence from European explorers and due to this lack of interference they have remained in their primitive state long held by tradition and ancestry.

Answer 4

Um, the fact that you agree with the other answerer means yes, you are racist.

This question just reeks of ignorance. Read a book, learn about other cultures, and don't have such a narrow worldview.

Answer 5

Its important to answer this objectively. Are African societies less evolved- absolutely. The reasons for this vary, but most scientists agree that harsh climate is at the heart of preventing critical knowledge transfer that passed between Asia and Europe into Africa. Simply put, there were simply not enough resources to move technology and progressive concepts in agriculture beyond the Sahara.

This likely does not apply to the genetic aspects of the continent. Everyone is so touchy about the racist implications, but science actually does bear out that IQ levels among native Africans hold the same level of variance as non-Africans (vetting of course for education).  Africa's backwardness is therefore a function of sociocultural issues (ie inter-tribal warfare, lack of cohesiveness) AND its interweaving with the climate problems that have made it hard for Africa to get ahead- not any innate differences in ability.

Answer 6

They didn't stop evolving when the first modern humans left Africa.  It is likely there is a minor difference because moving to a new environment causes more changes when adapting to a new environment.  Those changes are not necessarily what you would normally think of as "evolved".

Answer 7

I know nothing of the one's in Africa, but some of the Africans in this country sure seem to be "less evolved" as you put it.

Answer 8

First, understand evolution. There is no such thing as "more evolved". Of a jellyfish, a butterfly, and a man, NONE is more evolved. Each has evolved to fit a niche in which it can survive and thrive. There is no higher or lower, nor any cosmic goal at the end other than simply the survival of the species.

Answer 9

Wow...and I thought the "other cultures" forum reeked of sleazy racists. I do, however, think this forum is ever so slightly worse because at least in "other cultures" the bigots don't try to put an "air" about their virtual mental vomit.

Answer 10

Individuals of African ethnicity are just as "evolved" as any other Homo sapien on the planet.  If you are implying that due to their level of industrialization (lack of) or cultural practices, they are less evolved, then that would also be incorrect and very ethnocentric of you.  They have different cultural practices, that is all.  Since you posted this question in the anthropology section, I suggest you take a couple of courses or read an anthro book.

Answer 11

I am continually disgusted to see that people associate 'tribal societies' (generalising your posts) as being primitive (or not fully evolved)....

it is all relative/subjective...

the east african cattle pastoralists are nomadic- a direct result of socio-cultural practices (and environmental context)...

never did an occasion arose when the culture needed/wanted to develop electricity (yes an e.g)...

however their understanding of their surroundings and their knowledge of nature were remarkable...

it is the same in many indigenous cultures...

many anthropologists have debated the idea 'why would a tribal society be better to live in than an industralised/westernized'... their are arguments for each side..

when people think of the advantages of living in the western world, themes of innovations and comfortability come to mind...

however we never think about the world poverty, or the state or the environment (also a direct result of industrialisation)..

when comparing the activites of daily living, some have argued that hunter-gather/tribal bands have a higher quality of life...

however, as first said- it is all relative/subjective... (with many also not being objective.)..... very sad stuff

Answer 12

No. Culturally, no; biologically, no.

As has been pointed out by answerers above me, we have been separated from the African people for (at least) less than 200,000 years. Evolution-wise, that's a drop in the bucket. Each  population would have time to do little else than adapt more efficiently to respective environments, but we're all part of the same species, and have evolved at the same rate.

And, culturally, most emphatically no! I am astounded that on an anthropology forum, so many people would bandy about words like "uncivilized" and "primitive," especially with such an air of authoritative knowledge. In general terms, African cultures (and I am speaking of those before Western cultural influences) work just as well socially as any of our Western cultures. African cultural groups have food sources, working social systems dictating marriage, religion, gender roles, etc. and rich cultural traditions. What else could you possibly want in an "evolved" culture? I suppose many people would say steamboats or refrigerators. Sheesh. Talk about ethnocentrism.

Answer 13

well, they're still living in the stone age, do you think they evolved?