The entropic style of adaptation for any species of sociality is intrinsic to said species as continually adapting to the environment supporting its very existence. Without this fundamental connection, no organism could survive in its own environment without an ability to adapt to even the slightest change in the environment.
It is the environment that shapes the abilities and functions of all species dwelling within. Likewise, the composition of any environment is defined by all things contributing to said environment. No separation could be implied, for the existence of a plant is as critical a component of an environment as any animal species within the same environment — all are players.
Clearly, any species existing within an environment functions according to its needs as supported by said environment. No unwarranted ability could be developed by a species without a causal connection to needing said ability. To be clear, a species cannot develop an ability for which there is no use — it defies definition of an ability.
Likewise, the advanced [social] ability of any species of sociality — exists only as a survival response needing advanced social development. Only changes in an environment will pressure a species to develop a response in kind. Without the fundamental relationship of causation, no species could survive even the slightest change in environment without employing adaptation in response.
Change in environment is always followed by the entropic style of adaptation to said environment. This reveals adaptation as being developed the most efficient way possible (true to the laws of conservation of energy). Thus, if a species must feed on other animals to survive, it must develop methods in catching prey. Those who must feed on fruit in trees must develop methods in gathering fruit from trees. However, if a species’ prey develops a method to better avoid capture, the predator must adapt to this change — for the environment of the predator must now include this change.
Entropic Style: For whatever rate of change that occurs in the environment of a given species, the responding methods of adaptation are proportional to the biological attributes of said species as adapting at that rate. As a result, the larger, more biologically significant changes in a species are the result of constant pressure from the environment of said species. A giraffe did not suddenly grow a long neck one day, it adapted its physiology over a very long period — in response to its food source remaining consistently elevated.
To take the most efficient route in adapting to change reveals adaptation methods that take the least amount of time and energy. Adaptation comes not as the perfect solution at the very start, but from the successor of all possible methods. Of all possible responses, the most efficient response is the one that overcomes the challenge first. Once a capable response is developed, little if no environmental pressure remains to warrant development of an alternate response.
Likewise, rather than evolving longer legs or stronger muscles, a predator might sooner develop strategy through sociality in capturing prey more effectively. As a result, the growth of capability comes from growth in complex sociality: the members of a group work together in securing prey that might otherwise be impossible by a single member. To that, the need to run faster is no longer necessary, for a solution was developed using methods that evolved far easier — revealing a more efficient solution in adaptation.
For humans, increased complexity of sociality has proven to be the most efficient trait developed by our species. The rise in complexity of our sociality has brought a rise in our social intelligence. As a result, our advanced social intelligence has given us far greater methods in subsidizing our limited physical abilities. Developing a socially complex mind, we’ve developed tools through the use of these extended mental capabilities — negating the need of direct biological adaptation in solving many problems. The more problems we solve using this one capability, the more this capability will be developed in response.
Still, humans maintain adaptations from past environments (collecting genetic intelligence). As a result, the shape of our environment now changes according to a much larger definition of an environment. The more we grow our mental capability, the more our environment is defined as including mental function. All contributing features that define our new environment will influence our function as a result.
To look back at our earlier selves and point to a less evolved existence, is to point to a time when our environment was fundamentally different than now. The functions and abilities of humans from ten thousand years ago were that of an environment of ten thousand years ago. Without question, humans were a different species then, as was the environment that shaped who we were at that time.
True to the progression of our entropic style of adaptation, deprecated functions from past environments were applicable to those periods only, and by definition, inapplicable in our current environment. To enact the function of humans from a past environments would be to disregard all the adaptation we’ve accomplished since then.
To reintroduce or maintain a method of sociality from ten thousand years ago would be to suggest our current environment, much less ourselves, has not changed since. Given the shape of our past environments no longer exist, it would be impossible to claim those deprecated social functions as sustainable today — the two are fundamentally incompatible.
As a species of sociality, the progression of our social intelligence is critical for our continued survival, for we now completely depend upon the investment our species has placed in the development of social intelligence for so many thousands of years.
To maintain the social functions/values of previous environments is to obstruct correct function in the current environment (a violation of Universal Rights). While looking to the past may provide evidence of how humans once functioned, it can only be used as reference to a long extinct environment. We’ve since adapted in-step with the changes of our environment, and must continue to do so to ensure our continued survival.
Adopting social and cultural functions from an extinct environment is inherently unsustainable — ignorant of the inherent incompatibilities between these environments. To claim human social function of ten thousand years ago as ideal today, is to deny sustainable function not just for today, but tomorrow — as though wearing a parka in the middle of a summer heatwave is reasonable, based on incomplete evidence it was reasonable six months before (at least for Canadians). The restriction of sustainable adaptation of our sociality (the largest most heavily invested capability of our species), no sustainable function could be possible — resulting in our inevitable extinction.
Today, the growth of our sociality has spawned great capabilities in our environment, these include the formation of adaptive social constructs. True to the nature our species, these constructs must also adapt to changes in environment as we do. For if adaptation of social constructs are prevented, the dysfunction of social constructs will result in the unsustainable function of society — and the inevitable extinction of our species by the dysfunction of our prime survival trait: advanced sociality.
Do humans still abide by social methods from a long extinct environment? Do we hold deprecated social values and functions from hundreds or thousands of years ago — blind to the incompatible nature of those functions in our current social environment? If so, where is the supporting evidence to validate these deprecated social methods as not completely relegating humanity towards becoming yet another endangered species?
Without question, the primary motivator of our species is to expand potential (not “42”), and the prevention of entropic adaptation through the adherence of rigid and deprecated social constructs — threatens the potential our species holds critical of our very survival.