That there is a Pacu, a fish that specializes in eating people’s testicals.
roadtrippers.com/stories/testic … ican-lakes
Now… I also know Canadians, especially in Midwestern areas like where Gib lives, love to eat balls, and Canadians have very similar looking teeth. They call these balls “Prairie Oysters”.
Notice the aquatic reference, despite the fact they come from inland cattle, and not seafood at all.
So we here have a case of convergent evolution:
Two unrelated species converging upon parallel forms. Both specialize in seafood that really isn’t seafood, but rather, are male reproductive organs.
Its reminiscent of the twentieth century fixation in philosophy on Thanatos and Eros, but it combines the two into one, singular act. Both the Canadian, and the ball biting fish, live and kill simultaneously potentiality in life… the very capacity to generation, in destroying what is masculine, for their own immediate pleasure.
Can they live off other sources of food? Yes… both species can eat walnuts and if provided for, even cheeseburgers, but they prefer festive testicals.
So this has lead me to question just what is the Teleology of Convergent Evolution, as far as adaptation to ecological forces are concerned.
The ancient Greeks had Menaeus. Here are two relevant quotes from fragments:
demonax.info/doku.php?id=text:musaeus_fragments
There is a natural selective teleology to nature, known through the pleasure and discomfort of observation of natural phenomena, and it seemingly moves in a great circle of selectivity. It is not survival of the fittest, but aesthetics, which rules natural selection, for life and death must balance itself out in a way most pleasing to the poet, not the scientist, for it is not in axiomatic theories, but in the life force of creatures that evolution takes place. For every birth, there is a place, for every death, there is a grave. This is the natural refutation to John Ruskin’s Pathetic Fallacy:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathetic_fallacy
If life force exists only in science, and not in nature, then it is not real, either subject or objectivity can stand on it’s own leg. Concepts like Ecology, and Circles of Life, loses meaning. For generation to take place in counterbalance to death, the forces have to reside in nature itself, not just biological, but in all organic processes. We can only observe the beauty that is life, through the pursuit of the underlining extraction of minerals and vitamins for reproduction. From this, beauty gives us meaning… we look out one idealic vision of a lush, primordial valley, we see life at it’s cusp, advancing and digesting… growing. As predators, we find it inviting, and desire to eat it all, and find comfort in its avaability, it’s lushness. We want nude women dancing naked around in their reproductive prime so we can make many strong and healthy babies.
Canadians don’t desire this though, especially in the Midwest. Their population isn’t naturally sustainable save through immigration, they live in fridgid cold places with mountains and glacuers, or in dry, dying deserts, and people in log cabins without toilets speak French, and pretend not to know English. They only desire to eat festivals, the very means of generating new life. They seemingly found a niche in the ecology, but this niche is naturally at odds against St the ecology in it’s intentions, it shows they wish to live outside of the insights of Museaus, beyond the dualistic confines of birth and death, living and thriving, beauty and ugliness, and want to instead eat the system itself, to become the ultimate predator to life, outside of life, making the universe sterile.
But why the aquatic aspect? What is the teleogy outside of time?
I am reminded of the fish that would reside under the tree roots in the watery Mesopotamian underworld, and the sea creatures governing life and death in it’s southern ocean.
Perhaps Telelogy itself has a Teleology, and it’s convergent itself to the needs of archetypal representation.
Only question is, are these fish becoming Canadian like, or are Canadians becoming fish like?
Or is it something else altogether coming, outside of evolution, evolving independently of natural selection… a unnatural, thanatic selection, trying to destroy the world of possibilities, of differentiated life, or ecosystems?
This is some deep shit.