A recent perspective by Elad Noor and Ron Milo highlights two studies in Science that identify and quantify evolutionary trade-offs. Here is a quick excerpt that describes evolutionary trade-offs:
Cheetahs are the fastest land animals on Earth. But why aren’t they even faster? And how did leopards, which live in the same habitat but run only half as fast, survive the competition? Obviously, other conflicting evolutionary factors exist besides speed. Cheetahs are worse tree-climbers than leopards, probably due to their semiretractable claws that are a disadvantage in climbing but an advantage in running.
We all know someone who believes he can do everything and be the best at everything he does. Metaphorically speaking, he thinks he can have the speed of a cheetah and the climbing ability of a leopard. Biology teaches us that as cool as that would be, trade-offs exist. I’m not trying to rain on your optimistic parade, but don’t deceive yourself; you can’t do and be everything.
In evolutionary biology the only measure of life success is reproduction; thus evolutionary trade-offs are only relevant as they impact reproductive success. In contrast, if you ask people to define success in life, few will cite maximizing their number of offspring. We as humans have redefined what it means to have a successful life, although we are not immune to the evolutionary consequences of such a decision.
Putting evolutionary consequences aside, if we as humans can choose how to define success, why do we often let others define success for us? I think this is especially foolish when common-held definitions of success do not result in happiness. Thinking of the end of life is a useful way to focus on a personally meaningful definition of success. If today was your last day to live, what would you regret? What would you wish you did more or less?
Living a fulfilling life begins with a personally meaningful definition of success.