We are still mutating from generation to generation, however because of our relative dominance over the environment and thus the selection pressures, there is much less pressures that would affect our ability to survive and thus much less room for survival of the fittest to work in.
I guess instead of looking at favourable genes as you would in a hospitable environment, because of our level of control over the environment you would need to consider detrimental genes instead. Those leading to impotence would gradually be selected against for instance, because that is a guaranteed way to prevent the passing on of genes, other traits that severely impede our ability to mate, like insanity, recklessness (leading to early death) and ugliness.
There aren't many selection pressures favouring traits any more, and there is no link between intelligence and survivability so there is no selection pressure that favours intelligence. Organisms don't evolve towards some goal, but against the risks of fatality. Those with mutations that aid in survival (and the populations that propagate those genes) are more likely to survive a given selection pressure than those without said genes.
The impending climate change may lead to a selection pressure against heat tolerance, I think the situation in Russia with people dying from heat stroke could be indicative of the potential for this selection pressure to impact us greatly - In that scenario there would be a massive advantage in being heat tolerant, and the genetic factor involved here would be wide open to selection.
Disease resistance is another always looming selection pressure, but our breakthroughs in disease treatment and prevention are even lessening the selection pressure of this phenomenon.
Since intelligence and it's benefits can be shared amongst those without the traits, I don't see higher intelligence as being anything to be selected against any more, as sad as that may seem to those with ideas of looming human perfection, there is simply no advantage of intelligence in terms of our ability to mate better than other humans, where in the past tactics and intelligence could be the difference between populations of hunter gatherers and farmers.
I guess instead of looking at favourable genes as you would in a hospitable environment, because of our level of control over the environment you would need to consider detrimental genes instead. Those leading to impotence would gradually be selected against for instance, because that is a guaranteed way to prevent the passing on of genes, other traits that severely impede our ability to mate, like insanity, recklessness (leading to early death) and ugliness.
There aren't many selection pressures favouring traits any more, and there is no link between intelligence and survivability so there is no selection pressure that favours intelligence. Organisms don't evolve towards some goal, but against the risks of fatality. Those with mutations that aid in survival (and the populations that propagate those genes) are more likely to survive a given selection pressure than those without said genes.
The impending climate change may lead to a selection pressure against heat tolerance, I think the situation in Russia with people dying from heat stroke could be indicative of the potential for this selection pressure to impact us greatly - In that scenario there would be a massive advantage in being heat tolerant, and the genetic factor involved here would be wide open to selection.
Disease resistance is another always looming selection pressure, but our breakthroughs in disease treatment and prevention are even lessening the selection pressure of this phenomenon.
Since intelligence and it's benefits can be shared amongst those without the traits, I don't see higher intelligence as being anything to be selected against any more, as sad as that may seem to those with ideas of looming human perfection, there is simply no advantage of intelligence in terms of our ability to mate better than other humans, where in the past tactics and intelligence could be the difference between populations of hunter gatherers and farmers.
.
