Does charity and welfare slow down human evolution by hampering natural selection?

Question

The question is about evolutionary biology and how it applies to Homosapiens living in a society that advocates protecting the weakest. I realize that all social organisms such as ants and elephants protect the weakest among them to a certain extend, but these organisms cannot do it as effectively as modern human beings with all their technology.

Please limit your responses to relevant discussions about evolutionary biology. I would give a low rating to anyone advocating eugenics or suggesting that we stop helping the poor in order to improve human society.

Answer 1

No, if anything it speeds it up.  Fit does not equal rich.  Fit means able to pass along DNA.

Answer 2

no.

look at Stephen hawking, brilliant man, completely dependent on other people, without our "charity" he wouldn't have been able to tell us as much about the universe as he did. we humans are above "simple survival" we have to think farther ahead than "our next meal" or "our next lay"

Answer 3

The rich need tons of working poor to toil in their factories and buy their products. How else would the rich stay rich?

Answer 4

Well when Darwim made his theory of evolution he did not suggest nor intend to suggest it be applied to human beings.  Human beings have emotions and relationships for a reason.  Because of this it is in our instinct to help out others that are weaker.  We as a human race have survived all this time helping each other out so no one can say doing so will be our downfall because weaklings are surviving.  Perhaps this is why certain animal species have perished, because they didn't effectively help each other out...

Answer 5

Biological evolution is not stunted by sociological factors, it occurs through random mutation, environmental and lifestyle factors.  Bad diet and lack of exercise are having a much worse effect on human biology and will seriously stunt future generations if this is not corrected.