'Just being good may not be enough to survive'
A quotation from parent-blogger Billie Wright-Ericson, from seven years ago –
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change
I can see why this thought speaks to parents of disabled children. Its applicability to different ways of thinking and doing (such as Conductive Education) is also interesting.
Only a little before this László Szögeczki had quite independently blogged a compatible sentiment, from a Chinese source –
It is not possible to fight for something better on the basis of the value of its good use.
Seven years later the economic water holes are shrinking and CE's ecosphere experiences ever-greater stress.
- If Darwin was right, then strength and intelligence will not be enough for survival of ideas, services, institutions in the world as it is becoming.
- And if László's source was on to something, then just doing something worthwhile in itself will not help moving on to something better when here is need to.
Think of shrinking water holes:
- The animals around them have to adapt and change – and be selected – not just for their species to survive but for survivors to evolve to a new evolutionary stage. And in the often stressed world of Conductive Education, for ideas, services and institutions, being good (even very good) may not be the best survival strategy
- It will be those who prove adaptable who will win the battle for survival.
(By the way, Myself, I distrust such simple social Darwinism, too biological for my taste for human affaire. It seems to preclude roles for the human psyche and human society, for consciousness and the will to master nature, even our own. But perhaps it does still offer a schematic model, albeit one that is rather stiff and skeletal, to be fleshed out and transformed by higher-order factors – when we understand them better!)
Seven years ago:
Billie still blogs but László has had a busy few years and has let blogging go. Come back László with your sometimes highly pertinent and acerbic perspective.