Survival of the Unfittest

Herbert Spencer used the term "Survival of the Fittest" to describe Darwin's theory or Darwinism or Darwin's Theory, a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others. It states that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.

Read the last few words again, "compete, survive, and reproduce". A logical interpretation is that it refers to the individuals ability to compete and survive against all species of organisms existing on this planet.  The question I have been pondering on is how do we define fittest. In my mind, this definition has had three broad phases and has undergone 2 major transformations.

1. Physical Strength: In their most primitive form, humans relied primarily on physical strength for survival in the wild. Fighting with wild animals, hunting for food, surviving in the open all called for high levels of physical strength. Simply put, if someone did not have the physical strength for tasks such as those mentioned above, they would NOT survive!

2. Mental Strength: As humans evolved and found smarter ways to survive, the focus shifted to mental strength although physical strength was still a prerequisite for survival. The smarter men started becoming the 'fittest' within the human race as humans started isolating themselves from all other species of organisms in the wild.

3. Monetary Strength: We have now reached a day and age, where all a human needs for survival is money! Ironically, physical strength is the least defining trait of survival in the modern world.

If we look closer at how our interaction with the surrounding species has evolved, we notice that in the good ol' days humans had to fight against all other forms of being for survival. As we started isolating ourselves from the wild, the scope of our survival changed to within our species. We created a boundary within which we survive, and the fight for survival within this boundary is against fellow human beings. By introducing laws against use of physical and mental strength (not completely!), the only differentiating factor among humans is monetary strength. Will we completely negate mental strength as well in the future and make monetary strength the supreme definition of survival?

Imagine a scenario where we have completely negated physical and mental strength as prerequisites for survival. Also imagine that the boundaries that we have created for ourselves to protect us from the wild, break. Are we humans fit to survive in an environment free of these boundaries? Do we have the necessary physical strength?

Humans are getting fitter to survive in an environment comprising of humans. But outside of this environment.....

So then, are we making the human race weaker by encouraging 'Survival of the Unfittest'?