The struggle for existence

Thomas Malthus, 1766-1834.

I've been musing off and on here lately about Charles Darwin and the legacy of his thought. If you like that kind of thing, check out some of last week's posts.

As Darwin began to build his theory of evolution, he struggled for some time with finding the mechanism that might drive it. He found a clue in reading Thomas Malthus' An Essay on the Principle of Population, which incidentally became very popular amongst Victorian era reactionaries who opposed any improvement in the condition of the working classes.

Malthus' basic idea was that production of food and other necessities could only increase arithmetically (think 2+2+2...), whereas population tended to increase geometrically (think 2*2*2...). As he put it,

I think I may fairly make two postulata. First, That food is necessary to the existence of man. Secondly, That the passion between the sexes is necessary and will remain nearly in its present state. These two laws, ever since we have had any knowledge of mankind, appear to have been fixed laws of our nature, and, as we have not hitherto seen any alteration in them, we have no right to conclude that they will ever cease to be what they now are...

Assuming then my postulata as granted, I say, that the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man. Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio.

(Malthus' ideas caused all kinds of political mischief, but I'll leave that for another day.)

For Darwin, the basic dynamic Malthus discussed was useful in looking at the evolution of species. The tendency of plants and animals to produce more offspring than could possibly be supported led to a "struggle for existence" with which natural selection could work. Given that struggle, those organisms best adapted to environmental challenges would be more likely to live to maturity and produce offspring.

As the saying goes, even a wild hog can dig up something useful sometimes. More on Malthus to come.

INTOLERANCE. Here's a photo essay on intolerance in America by way of Time Magazine.

SOLAR ENERGY might be getting more affordable soon.

CRY, CRY, CRY. It seems to serve an evolutionary purpose.

MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL is the topic of this NY Times editorial. I don't think they're for it.

THE GROWING GAP. America's widening class divide is the subject of this Gazette rant.

GOAT ROPE ADVISORY LEVEL: ELEVATED

Sparring as a spiritual practice

As I mentioned yesterday, I think people who want to make the world a less nasty place could do worse things than study some martial arts, especially those that practice realistic sparring with skillful opponents.

After all, most efforts to change or preserve things involve some kind of struggle, however nonviolent, with powerful people and institutions who are not there to grant one's every wish.

One lesson I will always remember came early in my karate career. I had just found a new dojo after the one I started in closed. These people LOVED to spar, in class, in tournaments and elsewhere. While control was emphasized, it could get pretty rough as consenting adults moved up in rank and experience. And, although I didn't realize it at they time, their "rules" were pretty realistic.

This was the first time I did any serious sparring with a woman black belt. At the time, I was a green belt, which is to say someone who knows just enough to be a danger to himself.

I decided to dazzle her with high kicks, my speciality at the time. While my feet were flying around at head level, one of hers landed in my nether regions. This was the closest I ever came to qualifying for the Vienna Boy's Choir. I hit the ground like a ton of bricks, but must have gotten up at some point.

This is one of the invaluable lessons you learn by sparring with people who know how to fight: you learn to think defensively. Specifically, you make it a habit to always think what a good opponent could do to you if you did this or that technique.

That's one that carries over well into organizing. It is a good practice to always think what an intelligent opponent would be able to say or do in reaction to anything you say, do or write. I've often seen groups undertake actions that make it easy for opponents to attack or dismiss them.

I learned the hard way that if you present your opponent with an opening, you shouldn't be surprised if they take it. And I'm not above returning the favor.

THE BUTCHER'S BILL. Here's an estimate of the human cost of the Iraq war.

I MEANT TO BLOG THIS YESTERDAY. Here's Krugman on bailout blunders.

CULTURAL CHANGES accompany this recession, not all of which are bad.

THE DAY THE MUSIC DIED. "American Pie" songwriter Don McLean discusses Buddy Holly here. So that's what the song really was about. Kind of.

TEARS AND SUCH. Here's an item on how early experience shapes our views of crying.

GOAT ROPE ADVISORY LEVEL: ELEVATED