Survival Axe Elite Multi Tool Hayward California

The Outland Multi-mission Is A Multi-tool Survival Axe

Survival skills in Hayward are techniques that a person may use in order to sustain life in any type of natural environment or built environment. These techniques are meant to provide basic necessities for human life which include water, food, and shelter. The skills also support proper knowledge and interactions with animals and plants to promote the sustaining of life over a period of time. Practicing with a survival suit An immersion suit, or survival suit is a special type of waterproof dry suit that protects the wearer from hypothermia from immersion in cold water, after abandoning a sinking or capsized vessel, especially in the open ocean.

The Best Rules Of Survival In Alameda

Survival skills are often associated with the need to survive in a disaster situation in Hayward .

[1] Survival skills are often basic ideas and abilities that ancients invented and used themselves for thousands of years.

[2] Outdoor activities such as hiking, backpacking, horseback riding, fishing, and hunting all require basic wilderness survival skills, especially in handling emergency situations. Bush-craft and primitive living are most often self-implemented, but require many of the same skills.

Survival

All Ark Survival Admin Commands For Trophies Jump to navigation Jump to search Survival horror is a subgenre of video games inspired by horror fiction that focuses on survival of the character as the game tries to frighten players with either horror graphics or scary ambience. Although combat can be part of the gameplay, the player is made to feel less in control than in typical action games through limited ammunition, health, speed and vision, or through various obstructions of the player's interaction with the game mechanics. The player is also challenged to find items that unlock the path to new areas and solve puzzles to proceed in the game. Games make use of strong horror themes, like dark maze-like environments and unexpected attacks from enemies. The term "survival horror" was first used for the original Japanese release of Resident Evil in 1996, which was influenced by earlier games with a horror theme such as 1989's Sweet Home and 1992's Alone in the Dark. The name has been used since then for games with similar gameplay, and has been retroactively applied to earlier titles. Starting with the release of Resident Evil 4 in 2005, the genre began to incorporate more features from action games and more traditional first person and third-person shooter games. This has led game journalists to question whether long-standing survival horror franchises and more recent franchises have abandoned the genre and moved into a distinct genre often referred to as "action horror".[1][2][3][4] Resident Evil (1996) named and defined the survival horror genre. Survival horror refers to a subgenre of action-adventure video games.[5][6] The player character is vulnerable and under-armed,[7] which puts emphasis on puzzle-solving and evasion, rather than violence.[8] Games commonly challenge the player to manage their inventory[9] and ration scarce resources such as ammunition.[7][8] Another major theme throughout the genre is that of isolation. Typically, these games contain relatively few non-player characters and, as a result, frequently tell much of their story second-hand through the usage of journals, texts, or audio logs.[10] While many action games feature lone protagonists versus swarms of enemies in a suspenseful environment,[11] survival horror games are distinct from otherwise horror-themed action games.[12][13] They tend to de-emphasize combat in favor of challenges such as hiding or running from enemies and solving puzzles.[11] Still, it is not unusual for survival horror games to draw upon elements from first-person shooters, action-adventure games, or even role-playing games.[5] According to IGN, "Survival horror is different from typical game genres in that it is not defined strictly by specific mechanics, but subject matter, tone, pacing, and design philosophy."[10] Survival horror games are a subgenre of horror games,[6] where the player is unable to fully prepare or arm their avatar.[7] The player usually encounters several factors to make combat unattractive as a primary option, such as a limited number of weapons or invulnerable enemies,[14] if weapons are available, their ammunition is sparser than in other games,[15] and powerful weapons such as rocket launchers are rare, if even available at all.[7] Thus, players are more vulnerable than in action games,[7] and the hostility of the environment sets up a narrative where the odds are weighed decisively against the avatar.[5] This shifts gameplay away from direct combat, and players must learn to evade enemies or turn the environment against them.[11] Games try to enhance the experience of vulnerability by making the game single player rather than multiplayer,[14] and by giving the player an avatar who is more frail than the typical action game hero.[15] The survival horror genre is also known for other non-combat challenges, such as solving puzzles at certain locations in the game world,[11] and collecting and managing an inventory of items. Areas of the game world will be off limits until the player gains certain items. Occasionally, levels are designed with alternative routes.[9] Levels also challenge players with maze-like environments, which test the player's navigational skills.[11] Levels are often designed as dark and claustrophobic (often making use of dim or shadowy light conditions and camera angles and sightlines which restrict visibility) to challenge the player and provide suspense,[7][16] although games in the genre also make use of enormous spatial environments.[5] A survival horror storyline usually involves the investigation and confrontation of horrific forces,[17] and thus many games transform common elements from horror fiction into gameplay challenges.[7] Early releases used camera angles seen in horror films, which allowed enemies to lurk in areas that are concealed from the player's view.[18] Also, many survival horror games make use of off-screen sound or other warning cues to notify the player of impending danger. This feedback assists the player, but also creates feelings of anxiety and uncertainty.[17] Games typically feature a variety of monsters with unique behavior patterns.[9] Enemies can appear unexpectedly or suddenly,[7] and levels are often designed with scripted sequences where enemies drop from the ceiling or crash through windows.[16] Survival horror games, like many action-adventure games, are structured around the boss encounter where the player must confront a formidable opponent in order to advance to the next area. These boss encounters draw elements from antagonists seen in classic horror stories, and defeating the boss will advance the story of the game.[5] The origins of the survival horror game can be traced back to earlier horror fiction. Archetypes have been linked to the books of H. P. Lovecraft, which include investigative narratives, or journeys through the depths. Comparisons have been made between Lovecraft's Great Old Ones and the boss encounters seen in many survival horror games. Themes of survival have also been traced to the slasher film subgenre, where the protagonist endures a confrontation with the ultimate antagonist.[5] Another major influence on the genre is Japanese horror, including classical Noh theatre, the books of Edogawa Rampo,[19] and Japanese cinema.[20] The survival horror genre largely draws from both Western (mainly American) and Asian (mainly Japanese) traditions,[20] with the Western approach to horror generally favouring action-oriented visceral horror while the Japanese approach tends to favour psychological horror.[11] Nostromo was a survival horror game developed by Akira Takiguchi, a Tokyo University student and Taito contractor, for the PET 2001. It was ported to the PC-6001 by Masakuni Mitsuhashi (also known as Hiromi Ohba, later joined Game Arts), and published by ASCII in 1981, exclusively for Japan. Inspired by the 1980 stealth game Manibiki Shoujo and the 1979 sci-fi horror film Alien, the gameplay of Nostromo involved a player attempting to escape a spaceship while avoiding the sight of an invisible alien, which only becomes visible when appearing in front of the player. The gameplay also involved limited resources, where the player needs to collect certain items in order to escape the ship, and if certain required items are not available in the warehouse, the player is unable to escape and eventually has no choice but be killed getting caught by the alien.[21] Another early example is the 1982 Atari 2600 game Haunted House. Gameplay is typical of future survival horror titles, as it emphasizes puzzle-solving and evasive action, rather than violence.[8] The game uses monsters commonly featured in horror fiction, such as bats and ghosts, each of which has unique behaviors. Gameplay also incorporates item collection and inventory management, along with areas that are inaccessible until the appropriate item is found. Because it has several features that have been seen in later survival horror games, some reviewers have retroactively classified this game as the first in the genre.[9] Malcolm Evans' 3D Monster Maze, released for the Sinclair ZX81 in 1982,[22] is a first-person game without a weapon; the player cannot fight the enemy, a Tyrannosaurus Rex, so must escape by finding the exit before the monster finds him. The game states its distance and awareness of the player, further raising tension. Edge stated it was about "fear, panic, terror and facing an implacable, relentless foe who’s going to get you in the end" and considers it "the original survival horror game".[23] Retro Gamer stated, "Survival horror may have been a phrase first coined by Resident Evil, but it could’ve easily applied to Malcolm Evans’ massive hit."[24] 1982 saw the release of another early horror game, Bandai's Terror House,[25] based on traditional Japanese horror,[26] released as a Bandai LCD Solarpower handheld game. It was a solar-powered game with two LCD panels on top of each other to enable impressive scene changes and early pseudo-3D effects.[27] The amount of ambient light the game received also had an effect on the gaming experience.[28] Another early example of a horror game released that year was Sega's arcade game Monster Bash, which introduced classic horror-movie monsters, including the likes of Dracula, the Frankenstein monster, and werewolves, helping to lay the foundations for future survival horror games.[29] Its 1986 remake Ghost House had gameplay specifically designed around the horror theme, featuring haunted house stages full of traps and secrets, and enemies that were fast, powerful, and intimidating, forcing players to learn the intricacies of the house and rely on their wits.[10] Another game that has been cited as one of the first horror-themed games is Quicksilva's 1983 maze game Ant Attack.[30] The latter half of the 1980s saw the release of several other horror-themed games, including Konami's Castlevania in 1986, and Sega's Kenseiden and Namco's Splatterhouse in 1988, though despite the macabre imagery of these games, their gameplay did not diverge much from other action games at the time.[10] Splatterhouse in particular is notable for its large amount of bloodshed and terror, despite being an arcade beat 'em up with very little emphasis on survival.[31] Shiryou Sensen: War of the Dead, a 1987 title developed by Fun Factory and published by Victor Music Industries for the MSX2, PC-88 and PC Engine platforms,[32] is considered the first true survival horror game by Kevin Gifford (of GamePro and 1UP)[33] and John Szczepaniak (of Retro Gamer and The Escapist).[32] Designed by Katsuya Iwamoto, the game was a horror action RPG revolving around a female SWAT member Lila rescuing survivors in an isolated monster-infested town and bringing them to safety in a church. It has open environments like Dragon Quest and real-time side-view battles like Zelda II, though War of the Dead departed from other RPGs with its dark and creepy atmosphere expressed through the storytelling, graphics, and music.[33] The player character has limited ammunition, though the player character can punch or use a knife if out of ammunition. The game also has a limited item inventory and crates to store items, and introduced a day-night cycle; the player can sleep to recover health, and a record is kept of how many days the player has survived.[32] In 1988, War of the Dead Part 2 for the MSX2 and PC-88 abandoned the RPG elements of its predecessor, such as random encounters, and instead adopted action-adventure elements from Metal Gear while retaining the horror atmosphere of its predecessor.[32] Sweet Home (1989), pictured above, was a role-playing video game often called the first survival horror and cited as the main inspiration for Resident Evil. However, the game often considered the first true survival horror, due to having the most influence on Resident Evil, was the 1989 release Sweet Home, for the Nintendo Entertainment System.[34] It was created by Tokuro Fujiwara, who would later go on to create Resident Evil.[35] Sweet Home's gameplay focused on solving a variety of puzzles using items stored in a limited inventory,[36] while battling or escaping from horrifying creatures, which could lead to permanent death for any of the characters, thus creating tension and an emphasis on survival.[36] It was also the first attempt at creating a scary and frightening storyline within a game, mainly told through scattered diary entries left behind fifty years before the events of the game.[37] Developed by Capcom, the game would become the main inspiration behind their later release Resident Evil.[34][36] Its horrific imagery prevented its release in the Western world, though its influence was felt through Resident Evil, which was originally intended to be a remake of the game.[38] Some consider Sweet Home to be the first true survival horror game.[39] In 1989, Electronic Arts published Project Firestart, developed by Dynamix. Unlike most other early games in the genre, it featured a science fiction setting inspired by the film Alien, but had gameplay that closely resembled later survival horror games in many ways. Fahs considers it the first to achieve "the kind of fully formed vision of survival horror as we know it today," citing its balance of action and adventure, limited ammunition, weak weaponry, vulnerable main character, feeling of isolation, storytelling through journals, graphic violence, and use of dynamically triggered music - all of which are characteristic elements of later games in the survival horror genre. Despite this, it is not likely a direct influence on later games in the genre and the similarities are largely an example of parallel thinking.[10] Alone in the Dark (1992) is considered a forefather of the survival horror genre, and is sometimes called a survival horror game in retrospect. In 1992, Infogrames released Alone in the Dark, which has been considered a forefather of the genre.[9][40][41] The game featured a lone protagonist against hordes of monsters, and made use of traditional adventure game challenges such as puzzle-solving and finding hidden keys to new areas. Graphically, Alone in the Dark uses static prerendered camera views that were cinematic in nature. Although players had the ability to fight monsters as in action games, players also had the option to evade or block them.[6] Many monsters could not be killed, and thus could only be dealt with using problem-solving abilities.[42] The game also used the mechanism of notes and books as expository devices.[8] Many of these elements were used in later survival horror games, and thus the game is credited with making the survival horror genre possible.[6] In 1994, Riverhillsoft released Doctor Hauzer for the 3DO. Both the player character and the environment are rendered in polygons. The player can switch between three different perspectives: third-person, first-person, and overhead. In a departure from most survival horror games, Doctor Hauzer lacks any enemies; the main threat is instead the sentient house that the game takes place in, with the player having to survive the house's traps and solve puzzles. The sound of the player character's echoing footsteps change depending on the surface.[43] In 1995, WARP's horror adventure game D featured a first-person perspective, CGI full-motion video, gameplay that consisted entirely of puzzle-solving, and taboo content such as cannibalism.[44][45] The same year, Human Entertainment's Clock Tower was a survival horror game that employed point-and-click graphic adventure gameplay and a deadly stalker known as Scissorman that chases players throughout the game.[46] The game introduced stealth game elements,[47] and was unique for its lack of combat, with the player only able to run away or outsmart Scissorman in order to survive. It features up to nine different possible endings.[48] The term "survival horror" was first used by Capcom to market their 1996 release, Resident Evil.[49][50] It began as a remake of Sweet Home,[38] borrowing various elements from the game, such as its mansion setting, puzzles, "opening door" load screen,[36][34] death animations, multiple endings depending on which characters survive,[37] dual character paths, individual character skills, limited item management, story told through diary entries and frescos, emphasis on atmosphere, and horrific imagery.[38] Resident Evil also adopted several features seen in Alone in the Dark, notably its cinematic fixed camera angles and pre-rendered backdrops.[51] The control scheme in Resident Evil also became a staple of the genre, and future titles imitated its challenge of rationing very limited resources and items.[8] The game's commercial success is credited with helping the PlayStation become the dominant game console,[6] and also led to a series of Resident Evil films.[5] Many games have tried to replicate the successful formula seen in Resident Evil, and every subsequent survival horror game has arguably taken a stance in relation to it.[5] The success of Resident Evil in 1996 was responsible for its template being used as the basis for a wave of successful survival horror games, many of which were referred to as "Resident Evil clones."[52] The golden age of survival horror started by Resident Evil reached its peak around the turn of the millennium with Silent Hill, followed by a general decline a few years later.[52] Among the Resident Evil clones at the time, there were several survival horror titles that stood out, such as Clock Tower (1996) and Clock Tower II: The Struggle Within (1998) for the PlayStation. These Clock Tower games proved to be hits, capitalizing on the success of Resident Evil while staying true to the graphic-adventure gameplay of the original Clock Tower rather than following the Resident Evil formula.[46] Another survival horror title that differentiated itself was Corpse Party (1996), an indie, psychological horror adventure game created using the RPG Maker engine. Much like Clock Tower and later Haunting Ground (2005), the player characters in Corpse Party lack any means of defending themselves; the game also featured up to 20 possible endings. However, the game would not be released in Western markets until 2011.[53] Another game similar to the Clock Tower series of games and Haunting Ground, which was also inspired by Resident Evil's success is the Korean game known as White Day: A Labyrinth Named School (2001), this game was reportedly so scary that the developers had to release several patches adding multiple difficulty options, the game was slated for localization in 2004 but was cancelled, building on its previous success in Korea and interest, a remake has been developed in 2015.[54][55] Riverhillsoft's Overblood, released in 1996, is considered the first survival horror game to make use of a fully three-dimensional virtual environment.[5] The Note in 1997 and Hellnight in 1998 experimented with using a real-time 3D first-person perspective rather than pre-rendered backgrounds like Resident Evil.[46] In 1998, Capcom released the successful sequel Resident Evil 2, which series creator Shinji Mikami intended to tap into the classic notion of horror as "the ordinary made strange," thus rather than setting the game in a creepy mansion no one would visit, he wanted to use familiar urban settings transformed by the chaos of a viral outbreak. The game sold over five million copies, proving the popularity of survival horror. That year saw the release of Square's Parasite Eve, which combined elements from Resident Evil with the RPG gameplay of Final Fantasy. It was followed by a more action-based sequel, Parasite Eve II, in 1999.[46] In 1998, Galerians discarded the use of guns in favour of psychic powers that make it difficult to fight more than one enemy at a time.[56] Also in 1998, Blue Stinger was a fully 3D survival horror for the Dreamcast incorporating action elements from beat 'em up and shooter games.[57][58] The Silent Hill series, pictured above, introduced a psychological horror style to the genre. The most renowned was Silent Hill 2 (2001), for its strong narrative. Konami's Silent Hill, released in 1999, drew heavily from Resident Evil while using realtime 3D environments in contrast to Resident Evil's pre-rendered graphics.[59] Silent Hill in particular was praised for moving away from B movie horror elements to the psychological style seen in art house or Japanese horror films,[5] due to the game's emphasis on a disturbing atmosphere rather than visceral horror.[60] The game also featured stealth elements, making use of the fog to dodge enemies or turning off the flashlight to avoid detection.[61] The original Silent Hill is considered one of the scariest games of all time,[62] and the strong narrative from Silent Hill 2 in 2001 has made the Silent Hill series one of the most influential in the genre.[8] According to IGN, the "golden age of survival horror came to a crescendo" with the release of Silent Hill.[46] Also in 1999, Capcom released the original Dino Crisis, which was noted for incorporating certain elements from survival horror games. It was followed by a more action-based sequel, Dino Crisis 2, in 2000. Fatal Frame from 2001 was a unique entry into the genre, as the player explores a mansion and takes photographs of ghosts in order to defeat them.[42][63] The Fatal Frame series has since gained a reputation as one of the most distinctive in the genre,[64] with the first game in the series credited as one of the best-written survival horror games ever made, by UGO Networks.[63] Meanwhile, Capcom incorporated shooter elements into several survival horror titles, such as 2000's Resident Evil Survivor which used both light gun shooter and first-person shooter elements, and 2003's Resident Evil: Dead Aim which used light gun and third-person shooter elements.[65] Western developers began to return to the survival horror formula.[8] The Thing from 2002 has been called a survival horror game, although it is distinct from other titles in the genre due to its emphasis on action, and the challenge of holding a team together.[66] The 2004 title Doom 3 is sometimes categorized as survival horror, although it is considered an Americanized take on the genre due to the player's ability to directly confront monsters with weaponry.[42] Thus, it is usually considered a first-person shooter with survival horror elements.[67] Regardless, the genre's increased popularity led Western developers to incorporate horror elements into action games, rather than follow the Japanese survival style.[8] Overall, the traditional survival horror genre continued to be dominated by Japanese designers and aesthetics.[8] 2002's Clock Tower 3 eschewed the graphic adventure game formula seen in the original Clock Tower, and embraced full 3D survival horror gameplay.[8][68] In 2003, Resident Evil Outbreak introduced a new gameplay element to the genre: online multiplayer and cooperative gameplay.[69][70] Sony employed Silent Hill director Keiichiro Toyama to develop Siren.[8] The game was released in 2004,[71] and added unprecedented challenge to the genre by making the player mostly defenseless, thus making it vital to learn the enemy's patrol routes and hide from them.[72] However, reviewers eventually criticized the traditional Japanese survival horror formula for becoming stagnant.[8] As the console market drifted towards Western-style action games,[11] players became impatient with the limited resources and cumbersome controls seen in Japanese titles such as Resident Evil Code: Veronica and Silent Hill 4: The Room.[8] In recent years, developers have combined traditional survival horror gameplay with other concepts. Left 4 Dead (2008) fused survival horror with cooperative multiplayer and action. In 2005, Resident Evil 4 attempted to redefine the genre by emphasizing reflexes and precision aiming,[73] broadening the gameplay with elements from the wider action genre.[74] Its ambitions paid off, earning the title several Game of the Year awards for 2005,[75][76] and the top rank on IGN's Readers' Picks Top 99 Games list.[77] However, this also led some reviewers to suggest that the Resident Evil series had abandoned the survival horror genre,[40][78] by demolishing the genre conventions that it had established.[8] Other major survival horror series followed suit by developing their combat systems to feature more action, such as Silent Hill Homecoming,[40] and the 2008 version of Alone in the Dark.[79] These changes were part of an overall trend among console games to shift towards visceral action gameplay.[11] These changes in gameplay have led some purists to suggest that the genre has deteriorated into the conventions of other action games.[11][40] Jim Sterling suggests that the genre lost its core gameplay when it improved the combat interface, thus shifting the gameplay away from hiding and running towards direct combat.[40] Leigh Alexander argues that this represents a shift towards more Western horror aesthetics, which emphasize action and gore rather than the psychological experience of Japanese horror.[11] The original genre has persisted in one form or another. The 2005 release of F.E.A.R. was praised for both its atmospheric tension and fast action,[42] successfully combining Japanese horror with cinematic action,[80] while Dead Space from 2008 brought survival horror to a science fiction setting.[81] However, critics argue that these titles represent the continuing trend away from pure survival horror and towards general action.[40][82] The release of Left 4 Dead in 2008 helped popularize cooperative multiplayer among survival horror games,[83] although it is mostly a first person shooter at its core.[84] Meanwhile, the Fatal Frame series has remained true to the roots of the genre,[40] even as Fatal Frame IV transitioned from the use of fixed cameras to an over-the-shoulder viewpoint.[85][86][87] Also in 2009, Silent Hill made a transition to an over-the-shoulder viewpoint in Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. This Wii effort was, however, considered by most reviewers as a return to form for the series due to several developmental decisions taken by Climax Studios.[88] This included the decision to openly break the fourth wall by psychologically profiling the player, and the decision to remove any weapons from the game, forcing the player to run whenever they see an enemy. Examples of independent survival horror games are the Penumbra series and Amnesia: The Dark Descent by Frictional Games, Nightfall: Escape by Zeenoh, Cry of Fear by Team Psykskallar and Slender: The Eight Pages, all of which were praised for creating a horrific setting and atmosphere without the overuse of violence or gore.[89][90] In 2010, the cult game Deadly Premonition by Access Games was notable for introducing open world nonlinear gameplay and a comedy horror theme to the genre.[91] Overall, game developers have continued to make and release survival horror games, and the genre continues to grow among independent video game developers.[18] The Last of Us, released in 2013 by Naughty Dog, incorporated many horror elements into a third-person action game. Set twenty years after a pandemic plague, the player must use scarce ammo and distraction tactics to evade or kill malformed humans infected by a brain parasite, as well as dangerous survivalists. Shinji Mikami, the creator of the Resident Evil franchise, released his new survival horror game The Evil Within, in 2014. Mikami stated that his goal was to bring survival horror back to its roots (even though this is his last directorial work), as he was disappointed by recent survival horror games for having too much action.[92] Sources: Grocery Store Survival Foods With Long Shelf Life

Progression-free survival

This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 16 August 2018. Jump to navigation Jump to search Herbert Spencer coined the phrase "survival of the fittest". "Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that originated from Darwinian evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations." Herbert Spencer first used the phrase, after reading Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, in his Principles of Biology (1864), in which he drew parallels between his own economic theories and Darwin's biological ones: "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life."[1] Darwin responded positively to Alfred Russel Wallace's suggestion of using Spencer's new phrase "survival of the fittest" as an alternative to "natural selection", and adopted the phrase in The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication published in 1868.[1][2] In On the Origin of Species, he introduced the phrase in the fifth edition published in 1869,[3][4] intending it to mean "better designed for an immediate, local environment".[5][6] Herbert Spencer first used the phrase – after reading Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species – in his Principles of Biology of 1864[7] in which he drew parallels between his economic theories and Darwin's biological, evolutionary ones, writing, "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life."[1] In July 1866 Alfred Russel Wallace wrote to Darwin about readers thinking that the phrase "natural selection" personified nature as "selecting", and said this misconception could be avoided "by adopting Spencer's term" Survival of the fittest. Darwin promptly replied that Wallace's letter was "as clear as daylight. I fully agree with all that you say on the advantages of H. Spencer's excellent expression of 'the survival of the fittest'. This however had not occurred to me till reading your letter. It is, however, a great objection to this term that it cannot be used as a substantive governing a verb". Had he received the letter two months earlier, he would have worked the phrase into the fourth edition of the Origin which was then being printed, and he would use it in his "next book on Domestic Animals etc.".[1] Darwin wrote on page 6 of The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication published in 1868, "This preservation, during the battle for life, of varieties which possess any advantage in structure, constitution, or instinct, I have called Natural Selection; and Mr. Herbert Spencer has well expressed the same idea by the Survival of the Fittest. The term "natural selection" is in some respects a bad one, as it seems to imply conscious choice; but this will be disregarded after a little familiarity". He defended his analogy as similar to language used in chemistry, and to astronomers depicting the "attraction of gravity as ruling the movements of the planets", or the way in which "agriculturists speak of man making domestic races by his power of selection". He had "often personified the word Nature; for I have found it difficult to avoid this ambiguity; but I mean by nature only the aggregate action and product of many natural laws,—and by laws only the ascertained sequence of events."[2] In the first four editions of On the Origin of Species, Darwin had used the phrase "natural selection".[8] In Chapter 4 of the 5th edition of The Origin published in 1869,[3] Darwin implies again the synonym: "Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest".[4] By "fittest" Darwin meant "better adapted for the immediate, local environment", not the common modern meaning of "in the best physical shape" (think of a puzzle piece, not an athlete).[5] In the introduction he gave full credit to Spencer, writing "I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection. But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer of the Survival of the Fittest is more accurate, and is sometimes equally convenient."[9] In The Man Versus The State, Spencer used the phrase in a postscript to justify a plausible explanation of how his theories would not be adopted by "societies of militant type". He uses the term in the context of societies at war, and the form of his reference suggests that he is applying a general principle.[10] "Thus by survival of the fittest, the militant type of society becomes characterized by profound confidence in the governing power, joined with a loyalty causing submission to it in all matters whatever".[11] Though Spencer’s conception of organic evolution is commonly interpreted as a form of Lamarckism,[a] Herbert Spencer is sometimes credited with inaugurating Social Darwinism. The phrase "survival of the fittest" has become widely used in popular literature as a catchphrase for any topic related or analogous to evolution and natural selection. It has thus been applied to principles of unrestrained competition, and it has been used extensively by both proponents and opponents of Social Darwinism.[citation needed] Evolutionary biologists criticise the manner in which the term is used by non-scientists and the connotations that have grown around the term in popular culture. The phrase also does not help in conveying the complex nature of natural selection, so modern biologists prefer and almost exclusively use the term natural selection. The biological concept of fitness refers to reproductive success, as opposed to survival, and is not explicit in the specific ways in which organisms can be more "fit" (increase reproductive success) as having phenotypic characteristics that enhance survival and reproduction (which was the meaning that Spencer had in mind).[citation needed] While the phrase "survival of the fittest” is often used to refer to “natural selection”, it is avoided by modern biologists, because the phrase can be misleading. For example, “survival” is only one aspect of selection, and not always the most important. Another problem is that the word “fit” is frequently confused with a state of physical fitness. In the evolutionary meaning “fitness” is the rate of reproductive output among a class of genetic variants.[13] The phrase can also be interpreted to express a theory or hypothesis: that "fit" as opposed to "unfit" individuals or species, in some sense of "fit", will survive some test. Interpretations of the phrase as expressing a theory are in danger of being tautological, meaning roughly "those with a propensity to survive have a propensity to survive"; to have content the theory must use a concept of fitness that is independent of that of survival.[5][14] Interpreted as a theory of species survival, the theory that the fittest species survive is undermined by evidence that while direct competition is observed between individuals, populations and species, there is little evidence that competition has been the driving force in the evolution of large groups such as, for example, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. Instead, these groups have evolved by expanding into empty ecological niches.[15] In the punctuated equilibrium model of environmental and biological change, the factor determining survival is often not superiority over another in competition but ability to survive dramatic changes in environmental conditions, such as after a meteor impact energetic enough to greatly change the environment globally. The main land dwelling animals to survive the K-Pg impact 66 million years ago had the ability to live in underground tunnels, for example. In 2010 Sahney et al. argued that there is little evidence that intrinsic, biological factors such as competition have been the driving force in the evolution of large groups. Instead, they cited extrinsic, abiotic factors such as expansion as the driving factor on a large evolutionary scale. The rise of dominant groups such as amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds occurred by opportunistic expansion into empty ecological niches and the extinction of groups happened due to large shifts in the abiotic environment.[15] It has been claimed that "the survival of the fittest" theory in biology was interpreted by late 19th century capitalists as "an ethical precept that sanctioned cut-throat economic competition" and led to the advent of the theory of "social Darwinism" which was used to justify laissez-faire economics, war and racism. However, these ideas predate and commonly contradict Darwin's ideas, and indeed their proponents rarely invoked Darwin in support.[citation needed] The term "social Darwinism" referring to capitalist ideologies was introduced as a term of abuse by Richard Hofstadter's Social Darwinism in American Thought published in 1944.[16][17] Critics of theories of evolution have argued that "survival of the fittest" provides a justification for behaviour that undermines moral standards by letting the strong set standards of justice to the detriment of the weak.[18] However, any use of evolutionary descriptions to set moral standards would be a naturalistic fallacy (or more specifically the is–ought problem), as prescriptive moral statements cannot be derived from purely descriptive premises. Describing how things are does not imply that things ought to be that way. It is also suggested that "survival of the fittest" implies treating the weak badly, even though in some cases of good social behaviour – co-operating with others and treating them well – might improve evolutionary fitness.[16][19] Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin viewed the concept of "survival of the fittest" as supporting co-operation rather than competition. In his book Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution he set out his analysis leading to the conclusion that the fittest was not necessarily the best at competing individually, but often the community made up of those best at working together. He concluded that In the animal world we have seen that the vast majority of species live in societies, and that they find in association the best arms for the struggle for life: understood, of course, in its wide Darwinian sense — not as a struggle for the sheer means of existence, but as a struggle against all natural conditions unfavourable to the species. The animal species, in which individual struggle has been reduced to its narrowest limits, and the practice of mutual aid has attained the greatest development, are invariably the most numerous, the most prosperous, and the most open to further progress. Applying this concept to human society, Kropotkin presented mutual aid as one of the dominant factors of evolution, the other being self-assertion, and concluded that In the practice of mutual aid, which we can retrace to the earliest beginnings of evolution, we thus find the positive and undoubted origin of our ethical conceptions; and we can affirm that in the ethical progress of man, mutual support not mutual struggle – has had the leading part. In its wide extension, even at the present time, we also see the best guarantee of a still loftier evolution of our race. "Survival of the fittest" is sometimes claimed to be a tautology.[20] The reasoning is that if one takes the term "fit" to mean "endowed with phenotypic characteristics which improve chances of survival and reproduction" (which is roughly how Spencer understood it), then "survival of the fittest" can simply be rewritten as "survival of those who are better equipped for surviving". Furthermore, the expression does become a tautology if one uses the most widely accepted definition of "fitness" in modern biology, namely reproductive success itself (rather than any set of characters conducive to this reproductive success). This reasoning is sometimes used to claim that Darwin's entire theory of evolution by natural selection is fundamentally tautological, and therefore devoid of any explanatory power.[20] However, the expression "survival of the fittest" (taken on its own and out of context) gives a very incomplete account of the mechanism of natural selection. The reason is that it does not mention a key requirement for natural selection, namely the requirement of heritability. It is true that the phrase "survival of the fittest", in and by itself, is a tautology if fitness is defined by survival and reproduction. Natural selection is the portion of variation in reproductive success that is caused by heritable characters (see the article on natural selection).[20] If certain heritable characters increase or decrease the chances of survival and reproduction of their bearers, then it follows mechanically (by definition of "heritable") that those characters that improve survival and reproduction will increase in frequency over generations. This is precisely what is called "evolution by natural selection." On the other hand, if the characters which lead to differential reproductive success are not heritable, then no meaningful evolution will occur, "survival of the fittest" or not: if improvement in reproductive success is caused by traits that are not heritable, then there is no reason why these traits should increase in frequency over generations. In other words, natural selection does not simply state that "survivors survive" or "reproducers reproduce"; rather, it states that "survivors survive, reproduce and therefore propagate any heritable characters which have affected their survival and reproductive success". This statement is not tautological: it hinges on the testable hypothesis that such fitness-impacting heritable variations actually exist (a hypothesis that has been amply confirmed.)[20] Momme von Sydow suggested further definitions of 'survival of the fittest' that may yield a testable meaning in biology and also in other areas where Darwinian processes have been influential. However, much care would be needed to disentangle tautological from testable aspects. Moreover, an "implicit shifting between a testable and an untestable interpretation can be an illicit tactic to immunize natural selection [...] while conveying the impression that one is concerned with testable hypotheses."[14][21] Skeptic Society founder and Skeptic magazine publisher Michael Shermer addresses the tautology problem in his 1997 book, Why People Believe Weird Things, in which he points out that although tautologies are sometimes the beginning of science, they are never the end, and that scientific principles like natural selection are testable and falsifiable by virtue of their predictive power. Shermer points out, as an example, that population genetics accurately demonstrate when natural selection will and will not effect change on a population. Shermer hypothesizes that if hominid fossils were found in the same geological strata as trilobites, it would be evidence against natural selection.[22] ^ a b c d "Letter 5140 – Wallace, A. R. to Darwin, C. R., 2 July 1866". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 12 January 2010. "Letter 5145 – Darwin, C. R. to Wallace, A. R., 5 July (1866)". Darwin Correspondence Project. Retrieved 12 January 2010.  ^ "Herbert Spencer in his Principles of Biology of 1864, vol. 1, p. 444, wrote: 'This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called "natural selection", or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life.'" Maurice E. Stucke, Better Competition Advocacy, retrieved 29 August 2007 , citing HERBERT SPENCER, THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY 444 (Univ. Press of the Pac. 2002.) ^ a b "This preservation, during the battle for life, of varieties which possess any advantage in structure, constitution, or instinct, I have called Natural Selection; and Mr. Herbert Spencer has well expressed the same idea by the Survival of the Fittest. The term "natural selection" is in some respects a bad one, as it seems to imply conscious choice; but this will be disregarded after a little familiarity." Darwin, Charles (1868), The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication, 1 (1st ed.), London: John Murray, p. 6, retrieved 10 August 2015  ^ a b Freeman, R. B. (1977), "On the Origin of Species", The Works of Charles Darwin: An Annotated Bibliographical Handlist (2nd ed.), Cannon House, Folkestone, Kent, England: Wm Dawson & Sons Ltd  ^ a b "This preservation of favourable variations, and the destruction of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest." – Darwin, Charles (1869), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (5th ed.), London: John Murray, pp. 91–92, retrieved 22 February 2009  ^ a b c "Stephen Jay Gould, Darwin's Untimely Burial", 1976; from Philosophy of Biology:An Anthology, Alex Rosenberg, Robert Arp ed., John Wiley & Sons, May 2009, pp. 99–102. ^ "Evolutionary biologists customarily employ the metaphor 'survival of the fittest,' which has a precise meaning in the context of mathematical population genetics, as a shorthand expression when describing evolutionary processes." Chew, Matthew K.; Laubichler, Manfred D. (4 July 2003), "PERCEPTIONS OF SCIENCE: Natural Enemies — Metaphor or Misconception?", Science, 301 (5629): 52–53, doi:10.1126/science.1085274, PMID 12846231, retrieved 20 March 2008  ^ Vol. 1, p. 444 ^ U. Kutschera (14 March 2003), A Comparative Analysis of the Darwin-Wallace Papers and the Development of the Concept of Natural Selection (PDF), Institut für Biologie, Universität Kassel, Germany, archived from the original (PDF) on 14 April 2008, retrieved 20 March 2008  ^ Darwin, Charles (1869), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (5th ed.), London: John Murray, p. 72  ^ The principle of natural selection applied to groups of individual is known as Group selection. ^ Herbert Spencer; Truxton Beale (1916), The Man Versus the State: A Collection of Essays, M. Kennerley  (snippet) ^ Federico Morganti (May 26, 2013). "Adaptation and Progress: Spencer's Criticism of Lamarck". Evolution & Cognition.  External link in |publisher= (help) ^ Colby, Chris (1996–1997), Introduction to Evolutionary Biology, TalkOrigins Archive, retrieved 22 February 2009  ^ a b von Sydow, M. (2014). ‘Survival of the Fittest’ in Darwinian Metaphysics – Tautology or Testable Theory? Archived 3 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine. (pp. 199–222) In E. Voigts, B. Schaff & M. Pietrzak-Franger (Eds.). Reflecting on Darwin. Farnham, London: Ashgate. ^ a b Sahney, S., Benton, M.J. and Ferry, P.A. (2010), "Links between global taxonomic diversity, ecological diversity and the expansion of vertebrates on land" (PDF), Biology Letters, 6 (4): 544–547, doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.1024, PMC 2936204 , PMID 20106856. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link) ^ a b John S. Wilkins (1997), Evolution and Philosophy: Social Darwinism – Does evolution make might right?, TalkOrigins Archive, retrieved 21 November 2007  ^ Leonard, Thomas C. (2005), "Mistaking Eugenics for Social Darwinism: Why Eugenics is Missing from the History of American Economics" (PDF), History of Political Economy, 37 (supplement:): 200–233, doi:10.1215/00182702-37-Suppl_1-200  ^ Alan Keyes (7 July 2001), WorldNetDaily: Survival of the fittest?, WorldNetDaily, retrieved 19 November 2007  ^ Mark Isaak (2004), CA002: Survival of the fittest implies might makes right, TalkOrigins Archive, retrieved 19 November 2007  ^ a b c d Corey, Michael Anthony (1994), "Chapter 5. Natural Selection", Back to Darwin: the scientific case for Deistic evolution, Rowman and Littlefield, p. 147, ISBN 978-0-8191-9307-0  ^ Cf. von Sydow, M. (2012). From Darwinian Metaphysics towards Understanding the Evolution of Evolutionary Mechanisms. A Historical and Philosophical Analysis of Gene-Darwinism and Universal Darwinism. Universitätsverlag Göttingen. ^ Shermer, Michael; Why People Believe Weird Things; 1997; Pages 143–144

http://freebreathmatters.pro/alameda/

Survival Tips for Rules Of Survival