About the bug of the theory of evolution
There is this question brought up on the internet：
Why bacteria have better adaptability to survive than human and other species while human and other species are lately evolved？
Bacteria have lived on earth for 31.9 billion years， much longer than a lot of other later evolved species like dinosaurs （lived on earth for 1.6 billion years） and a lot of different types of mammals， this fact isnt making much sense considering the idea of evolving to adopt change， if later species were evolved to adopt changes to survive， they would have much better adaptability to survive than bacteria， but thats not the case of reality now why is that？
Actually Nietzsche has already answered this question back in 19th century， with his “will to power“， you see， human wasnt evolving for surviving， human was evolving for power， for dominance. Thats why we are now dominating all the other species on earth.
But animals are just like people， not all of them have will to power， some of them only want to survive， thats why bacteria still exist.
Havent dig much about biology， but I watched Jordan Petersons interview saying that human divulged from lobsters 350 million years ago， and we are now eating lobsters， so we can see the phenomenon that complex（ later evolved ） animals are eating， are dominating the less complex animals. （At least in our human case， and probably in other cases， the type of animals got eaten gotta arrive on earth before the type of animals eat them， cause what were they gonna eat if there were nothing to eat？ If they werent eating animal type A， they cant be called the dominating animal type B， A has to exist before B does， cause having A on earth is the condition for B to exist. The dominated group has to exist before the dominating group does， otherwise， the dominating group cant be called the dominating group. Only when there is A， dominance could happen.） And we can also see the phenomenon that phytoplankton is at the bottom of food chain， and they are the ones appeared on earth first.
So evolution is partially for the will to power， for dominance.
Arthur Schopenhauer wrote that there are conflicts between wills objectivations， and during the conflicts， the higher level of wills objectivatioins always win， for example， if we lift our arms， we would eventually put down our arms after a while for the feeling of comfort， that is because the feeling， the will of the organism as the higher level of wills objectivation， wins out the lower level of wills objectivation， the chemical reaction of arm lifting. The higher level of objectivations always win out the lower level of wills objectivations， thats why species always evolve to be more and more sophisticated， cause they would become the higher level of wills objectivation if they become more sophisticated， so they could win out， could dominate the lower level of wills objectivation.
I have thought about if species dominate other species for becoming the higher level of wills objectivation or they become higher level of wills objectivation to dominate other species， the answer is that species become more sophisticated to dominate other species， cause being more sophisticated is the condition to dominate， but dominance isnt the condition to become more sophisticated， species cant dominate for becoming more sophisticated， they cant dominate before they become more sophisticated.
Becoming the higher level of wills objectivations is the mean， dominance is the end.
Why becoming more sophisticated， becoming the higher level of wills objectivation cant be the goal of species evolving？ Cause species dont have to eat， to dominate other species to become more sophisticated， dominance is not the condition of being more sophisticated， becoming the higher level of wills objectivation， so species perform dominance means they want dominance.
【作者簡介】Zhangziqing（1999.11.22-）， male， Han， China， Camford royal school， high school student， Hebei province， Shijiazhuang.