Co-operate or Annihilate?

Question

Is co-operation (mutual aid) more beneficial than annihilation (survival of the fittest)?

Answer 1

In general the purpose of a society is to benefit the population by cooperation and members helping eachother.  That's how we became the dominant species on the planet.

Answer 2

Survival of the fittest is applicable when the resources are too small to sustain the current population, even with the greater efficiencies gained in groups.  

Cooperative effort or team work is beneficial when resources are plentiful or when more can be achieved together than alone.      

Reality on our planet of the animal species, including homo sapiens (humans).

Answer 3

On the contrary to what Jennifer wrote, I think co-operation might be beneficial during resource shortages, but due to the eternal nature of panic, possibly never occurs.

'Survival of the fittest' is tempered and even obscured by civil society anyway, so it no longer operates as might once have done.

Short of banding together and planning genocide, co-operation is integral to decent, continued existence, but some people seem to thrive on opposition (as I'm sure we all do at times).

Answer 4

Co-operation or peaceful co-existence is more beneficial than annihilation or war which always destroys the fittest.

C. :)

Answer 5

Co-operation is not necessarily good because it can result in undesirable characteristics being passed on to the next generation.  Survival of the fittest results in better overall health of the population.  Many of the diseases that are common today were unknown hundreds of years ago.

Answer 6

Most of the answers are correct at least in some way, others are generally correct.

Co-operation provides protection from threats and rescue from adverse situations (other animals or humans in the first instance and getting stuck in quick sand in the second).  However, as happened on Easter Island, co-operation did not solve the problem of over-population which cause wars and starvation, because all of their resources were depleted.

Annihilation is always harmful, although it does not prohibit survival "of the fittest".  Annihilation functions on "cliques" and victimization, with favoritism to the "approved" or "desireable".  Human sacrifices of the Aztecs, Maya and Inca relate to the last example.

Any extreme can produce a survivability factor, as the Third Reich proved, and yet, what did it get them?  What did the members of the Donner Party feel after they finally reached civilization, after having eaten their dead family and friend members?  Though 20,000 people perished on Easter Island, about three hundred of them survive to this day!  What do you think is best, working together to help each other or fighting off the weak and the undesireable so only the best can survive?

Answer 7

Survival of the Fittest is not equal to annihilation. Cooperation is a method of survival. I call it Survival of the Thickest. If you consider situations whereby a group stick together, there's more opportunity for survival by reproduction and this is the major vehicle in the race for survival. If we don't breed we don't maintain life.

Answer 8

I think it actually takes a bit of both of them.

In a modern society where everything is purring along and running as normal, then of course co-operation is the only way to survive.  If you try annihilation, eventually you get caught, have a spectacular trial, and get to rot in jail for a long time.

However lets say things are not purring along, and something catastrophic has happened.  A disease, something akin to bird flu that kills a lot of people.

Suddenly there are serrious disruptions in "normal."  Power may go out, food deliveries to stores may become sparse to stop altogether, gas is in short supply, ect.  

Then co-operation with ones neighbors, so you don't become annihilated becomes priority number one.

In our case we would supply our neighbors with meat rabbits so they could raise their own protien,  and a couple of doe goats, they could milk.

We'd teach them how to make their own biofuel (probably from potatoes since we live in potato country), and keep them mobile in their cars.  Our neighbors would have a vested interest in keeping us alive, because we would be able to provide such needed knowledge and no-how.

Unfortunatly with disaster, you also get the ones with the annihilation mentality.  No matter how much more valuable you might have been to them alive, they think only of the moment, and stealing what you have.  

The individual does not stand much of a chance...best to band together with other like minded folks.

~Garnet

Homesteading/Farming over 20 years

Answer 9

Depends who you are co-operating with or annihilating??

aliens or other earthlings??

there are simply too many people - so ya we kinda need to do something to control our own numbers dont ya think?