Does anybody happen to know?

Why there should be a evolutionary preference to a design which creates a blind spot and obstructs light is a very interesting question though.

Humans have a huge blind spot compared to a duck, which can see almost all the way around. But I don't guess ducks have depth perception.

Maybe technology interferes with natural selection. Maybe our genes to make fur are turned off, and they never turned back on because we started wearing animal furs.

We influence natural selection through our social sanctions.

I would also love to have a tail. I can see a billion dollar industry there: tail care.

But as far as I remember, the problem with depth perception, whether it be a duck or a human, stem from issues with focusing of the image on the retina.

I was thinking depth perception comes from focusing on a object with both eyes... two eyes produce two images that get "produced," (not with cakewalk,) into a single image with depth. Predators tend to have their eyes pointed in the same direction so they can catch the prey more easily. It's funny how we can talk about this as if there is some intelligence behind it, when we're imagining that it's all a matter of selection.

Yea, I guess I'm doing the questionable thing of talking about a culture as if it's a single living thing that reinforces its identity within itself through sanctions. Like: we cripple criminals, if we don't kill them. What are we trying to select out?

They say german shepherds are more aggressive than wolves because they've been bred for aggression. I've wondered if there are cultures that basically breed for aggression... or did in the past. So, just like a human with no fur who moves to Siberia, maybe I have to find someway to cope with having been bred for aggression when I don't need it. The contents of the local art museum might be the outcome? Or the latest violent movie?

But there are a lot more interesting and complex arguments as well, like irreducible complexity and even violations of fundamental principles in the second law of thermodynamics. So essentially, intelligence or not, it's there and dang it it is complex as heck.

On a hilarious side note, have you seen the Magaritaville episode on South Park? In the episode, everybody is spending frivolously as always, but the economy hits a snag and all of a sudden, everybody's money is gone and the economy is in shambles. Stan's dad leads this odd cult that basically attributes personhood to the economy by saying "you have angered the economy by spending wildly!!! This is the wrath you have incurred!" LOL! The crux of the story is that the economy is a composite of the population rather than a thing in itself. So beware of Stan's dad and don't buy the Margaritaville. I'm not quite sure what you are stating with crippling criminals and killing them though, you may have to elaborate more on that.

That some cultures breed for aggressive traits, I'm sure there are many. Assertiveness is usually something that many cultures consider a positive attribute. Unfortunately, that has been the source of some of the most divisive parts of civilization for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Take Phrenology for example. Phrenology is essentially measuring the size and shape of the brain in order to determine if particular personality traits and other factors are inherent in, say, the aggressive nature of given populations. It was actually all the rage back in the past twentieth century, as well as the ninetieth and earlier centuries. It was the cornerstone of scientific racism which spread from racial distinctions in the U.S. to the mass genocide of millions of innocent Jews, Gypsies, etc. during World War II.

The idea of natural selection permeates my thoughts to the point that I'd have to try to see things differently. Yet, I grew up in a rigid Christian framework. I think I'm like the little Irish lady who when asked if there are fairies, says.. of course not... but they're there. Could you explain irreducible complexity and violations of the second law of thermodynamics?

That's so human. I used to work with old computers... they caused me to become superstitious. To this day, I jokingly caution people not to say mean things about a computer when they're standing right in front of it. There's an irrational me down inside that's not joking. I hope Butters didn't buy into the mania. Did you see the one where Butters killed a bunch of people while tap dancing?

Humans have a huge blind spot compared to a duck, which can see almost all the way around. But I don't guess ducks have depth perception.

Maybe technology interferes with natural selection. Maybe our genes to make fur are turned off, and they never turned back on because we started wearing animal furs.

We influence natural selection through our social sanctions.

I would also love to have a tail. I can see a billion dollar industry there: tail care.

An interesting point could be that plastic surgery including dental work, is influencing our constructive evolution, those who wear braces have offspring who have straighter teeth and smaller noses etc.
Has this been proven anywhere?