60
Why aren't we evolved to eat grass?
(literature.cafe)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2026
60 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
53902 readers
414 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
That random mutation didn't happen, basically.
Evolution is a purely subtractive process. It doesn't design things in, it just removes poorly-designed creatures (and all hypothetical offspring) until only things equipped to survive are left. And obviously, there are things to eat that aren't grass.
Edit: Herbivores can be smart, even the grazers. Look at elephants.
I can't believe how many other replies heap that fallacy on top of teleological evolution. Apes are mostly herbivorous anyway, WTF.
Evolution is not subtractive. Bacteria didn't evolve from humans
In the sense humans are "better" or "greater" or something? Well, consider the global biomass of bacteria compared to humans - they seem to be doing okay. Or that there's more bacterial cells in you than human cells. Single-celled yeast evolved from mushrooms, barnacles evolved from something like shrimp or crabs, and there are eukaryotes that lost eukaryotic features like mitochondria because they didn't need them to survive.
Buuut that's besides the point. I'm not sure how to make it more clear, but I meant subtractive as in selection is just about who dies. Random mutation is what adds features and new species.