Edit: Reading up on Social Darwinism on Wikipedia, Britannica and History.com, I guess not. Social Darwinism seems either not well-defined and/or assumes that the fitness functions that natural evolution worked out need to be taken nearly as it is. I am not saying the latter.
I am saying there needs to be more clearly defined fitness functions (call them performance criteria, KPIs, etc.), defined for the modern times, which then need to be more consistently followed. This isn't much different than using gradient descent algorithm where some weights are changed in accordance to their impact on the chosen loss function.
alok-g|7 months ago
Edit: Reading up on Social Darwinism on Wikipedia, Britannica and History.com, I guess not. Social Darwinism seems either not well-defined and/or assumes that the fitness functions that natural evolution worked out need to be taken nearly as it is. I am not saying the latter.
I am saying there needs to be more clearly defined fitness functions (call them performance criteria, KPIs, etc.), defined for the modern times, which then need to be more consistently followed. This isn't much different than using gradient descent algorithm where some weights are changed in accordance to their impact on the chosen loss function.
stock-parrot|7 months ago