The first thing you need to know is that personality is mostly genetic. I recently watched this interview with Michael Woodley. I cannot verity the veracity of his claims, but they are interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOudO5EPI0M&t=1s There is a lot of controversy, in the study of evolution and society, about the term “group selection.” Mostly unfair. Here’s … Continue reading Smart, Religious, and Gay: Was there Group Selection?
I get jubilant whenever I discover an ideology I was previously unaware of, no matter how loony it is.
My hypothesis is that dogmas raised human IQs. To explain why, I'll begin here: One of the most powerful driving forces in evolution is called an evolutionary arms race.
If you have heard the “lover vs provider” dichotomy, I wish to elucidate its implications. Assuming that women’s sexual preferences are optimally adapted genetic success, there are exactly two distinct things that heterosexual woman will want romantically from a partner. First, a woman will desire a man with good genes, so that she may pass … Continue reading What women want
Have you ever wondered why there is still a royal family in the UK? One that doesn’t ostensibly holds no power, and “rules” over (several) otherwise democratic countries? Have you ever wondered about seemingly arbitrary cultural practices, like marriage? Why businessmen wear a suit and tie? These things seem normal because they are the way … Continue reading Traditions and Junk DNA
A biologist I admire, Bret Weinstein, employs a four-part test to determine whether a trait is the product of evolution. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtdOhBoZfNg Is it complex? Does it have a cost? Is there variation in the amount of cost that is spent? Does it persist over evolutionary time? If a trait has all of those characteristics, then … Continue reading The errors with Bret Weinstein’s four-part test of adaption