By some estimates, more than half of all genes express themselves in the brain: that is, more than ten thousand genes. This means that genetic variation for mental and behavioral traits should be especially extensive and fine-grained in our species--contra decades of social science dogma.
Data: Which explains American social mobility better? Sociology or biology?
I remember the first department party I attended as a PhD student in sociology. I joined a conversation between a young faculty member who ...
-
In the comments in the last post , some readers contended that Jews are not ethnocentric. Using the same question I used in the comments se... -
Which factor reduces family size the most? Below are the standardized OLS regression coefficients for a sample of whites ages 40-59: Stand...
-
Via a reader at iSteve, it looks like this might be the vocabulary test used by the General Social Survey. (Someone please tell me if I'...
Trivers' book is largely a reaction to the paper "The Evolution of Eusociality" which he condemned. Trivers also condemned Hamilton's "Innate Social Aptitudes of Man", calling it "fascist". In both cases I believe he was attempting to avoid light being thrown on the dysgenics of civilization and the eugenics of natural environments. Hamilton's ISAOM, in particular, was "evil" because he talked explicitly about how civilization "probably" slowly decreases cultural creativity at the genetic level.
ReplyDeleteTrivers' emphasis on deception as the origin of intelligence is perfectly aligned with his identification with civilization, promoting it as eugenic. Deception, you see, is the "fair contest", the winners of which are the vanguard of creative evolution.
What is Trivers' ethnic background?
What is Trivers' ethnic background?
ReplyDeleteTrivers is Jewish. Why?
Malte Andersson's paper came out in 1984. How long as Trivers been writing this book?
ReplyDeleteI like this blog too. Please consider participation in my study.
ReplyDelete