DISCLAIMER! now before you read the things on this site know this. I am not saying I hold these things to be fact or think we should all bow down and worship them as holy scripture, but just wondering that if these hold any merit they'd be fairly interesting and if anyone could find other information supporting or disproving these things that'd be neat click here
-
Interesting?
-
It's interesting, though I think it often draws a long bow. One sometimes suspects that if the opposite observation were made, an equally convincing explanation could be found. In some places there's a lot of speculation that has not been tested - experience suggests that when tested a lot of likely-sounding ideas are wrong.The arguments are from evolutionary pressure, and it has to be remembered that this is a force but not a mechanism. If no mechanism exists to achieve it, an evolutionary force will not cause movement. On the other hand, a mechanism may produce a result as a by-product of something else more important, even if the result is evolutionarily unfavourable. So study of mechanisms of action is at least as important as study of evolutionary pressures. (In chemical terms, you need to look at kinetics as well as thermodynamics.) This paper ignores mechanisms.For example, a possible reason why good-looking people produce more daughters is that good-looking people may have less testosterone. These effects may not be driven by evolution at all, but may be a by-product of the whole sexual chemistry situation.The "Most suicide bombers are Muslim" part is particularly silly. Before 1980 suicide bombers were rare, but practically all non-Muslim. The modern suicide bomber dates from two specific groups in the early 1980s who found the idea helpful in a guerrilla struggle against militarily superior forces. One, in Lebanon, was Muslim; the other, in Sri Lanka, was not. The Tamil Tigers became for a considerable time the major users of suicide bombers. The technique has of course now spread to some other Muslim groups in similar situations; but the 72 virgins idea may be a myth.Article on suicide bombersThe mid-life crisis bit is also silly, but I don't have the time to collect the data.
-
well it's true. Many would call much of what they said "politically incorrect" but it's still all true. We're just animals, and we do what's in our nature. we can't help it. humans evolved this way. There are no morals from an evolutionary perspective. Humans make up morals. But then, many morals, you can say, are evolutionary because our species benefits from us having morals. If we had no morals, if we didn't stop and help eachother, our species would have probably died out or we'd never have become civilized. does that make sense?
-
Originally Posted By: IneligibleThe "Most suicide bombers are Muslim" part is particularly silly. Before 1980 suicide bombers were rare, but practically all non-Muslim. The modern suicide bomber dates from two specific groups in the early 1980s who found the idea helpful in a guerrilla struggle against militarily superior forces. One, in Lebanon, was Muslim; the other, in Sri Lanka, was not. The Tamil Tigers became for a considerable time the major users of suicide bombers. The technique has of course now spread to some other Muslim groups in similar situations; but the 72 virgins idea may be a myth.Article on suicide bombersThe mid-life crisis bit is also silly, but I don't have the time to collect the data. Well, I partly agree with what they said on Muslim suicide bombers. I do think that the whole 72 virgins thing is part of their motivation.The mid-life crisis part I actually fully agreed with them on. It makes complete sense from an evolutionary perspective.
-
If men were so concerned about passing on their genes that they wanted to attract new women when their wives were too old to conceive, surely they wouldn't wear condoms?
In fact, conception has normally stopped long before menopause - husbands and wives agree to have no more children, the wife goes on the pill permanently, and that's that. According to the authors' theory mid-life crisis should start at that point.
-
I think the article has far more to do with convenient reasons that the author finds personally or politically expedient, than it has to do with actual scientific facts. A kernel of truth does not a field of reason make.
-
Here Here. I only scanned it as well. I get enough psycology lessons here at work, in the Neurobehavioral department.