I have my own theory of evolution that I will explain here, I don't know how much it overlaps the "official evolution theory", and I don't really care, because I don't really trust academia that much, but I have formulated my own theory based on my own world-view and knowledge and experience.

Genesis

First of all we have random noise at the quantum level, which may not be random, it's just that it behaves randomly, like cryptographic hashing with nonce, just like you hash a "seed" with a nonce to create pseudo-random numbers in a computer, the universe may have a seed that is being "hashed" in order to generate randomness, which looks random to us, but it may very well be deterministic. So a God may have created the universe to behave like a blockchain, it's certainly plausible, I mean a cryptographic blockchain is a very good explanation for the Big-Bang.

Natural Selection

Out of this random noise, which may be predetermined to reach a certain destination or not, but at least it has a complex goal orientation mechanism built in it. The name of the game is to expand, and survive, that is the game of the universe.

How you play this game is tricky, in order to survive, you must adapt, and you must adapt in a very strategic way. If you adapt too fast, then you are susceptible to derailing from the goal and ultimately fail, if you adapt too slowly, then you risk extinction, because others will be better.

So you have the environment, and you adapt to it. But by adapting to the environment, you also shape it. So it's a hybrid system.

Evolution

So you have this random mutation + natural selection, (which may very well be just determined game-theory if the crypto-blockchain theory is correct) which governs the expansion of every life form in the universe.

Evolution in the micro-scale manifests itself as mutation, in an organism. Now that may be good mutation, for example humans developing certain extra organs. Or it may be bad mutation which manifest itself as cancer.

I believe there is a 50-50% chance, and suppressing cancer also suppresses mutation, which slows down evolution, therefore slowing down adaptation, therefore putting the human species at risk of extinction.

Cancer vs Violence

If you suppress mutation, you avoid cancer, but you also avoid legitimate evolution, which exposes your species to greater risk of extinction. So in some diabolic way, cancer is actually useful for the "greater good", but also having too much of it can also lead to extinction, so a balanced evolution is the key to a path forward.

This theory is also supported by the fact that according to several research, high testosterone levels sort of like "alpha male" aggressive people are less prone to cancer, while "beta male" people with more feminine traits are more susceptible. So testosterone is 1 variable.

• Increase testosterone, and you will be immune to cancer, but also you will increase the violence in society which exposed it to risk of extinction
• Decrease testosterone ,and you will be at risk of cancer, even though you will have a peaceful society, but you will be at risk of extinction due to genetic diseases and cancer

So you can't have utopia, one way or the other, the "karma of extinction" will haunt any species. Simply removing violence from society will just expose the society to other forms of danger. So in my opinion having a balance here is also crucial, to only have "defensive violence".

Centralization vs Decentralization

Another way to look at is is the centralization in society, which is exactly the same thing. You have society, which is like a 2nd layer extension of your body. If you have a centralized society, with a Government, that will result in a stable society, but it will be tyrannical,and it will never have any positive change since the central control will always suppress any change, because they don't know if the change will be good or not.

Sort of like the analogy of cancer. Government will suppress any change, like your body suppresses mutation, and that is very bad for a flexible survival mechanism.

If Government suppresses effective measures, due to being a perceived threat to society, that will deny actual progress from society. And this is proven, by just looking around you. Look how much mess Governments have created: wars, poverty, joblessness,etc...

If we have a decentralized society, that leaves more freedom to bad actors, the metaphorical "cancer", and cancer could take over society. But it would also leave more freedom to good people to achieve good progress.

So going with the thought process above, we need to achieve balance here too. Only have as much control to maintain a decent stability in society, but have a very flexible decision mechanism, and a lot of freedom for innovation.

Therefore I advocate from Direct Democracy with Free Market Capitalism as the obvious choice:

• https://steemit.com/freedom/@profitgenerator/voluntary-state-blueprint-for-a-free-society

---

So this is my theory, I have proven that too much Government is very counterproductive for evolution, because it blocks away legitimate solutions to real world problems with massive bureaucracy and regulations.

It is evolutionarily necessary for humanity to get to a voluntary system, or we are doomed to go extinct. This is not a joke, the next world war will be the end, if this is not fixed before it. So let's make freedom happen!

---

Sources:
https://pixabay.com

---

Upvote, ReSteem &