Re: [evol-psych] " Belief in Evolutionary Psychology May Be Hardwired, Study Says "
- ----- Original Message -----From: james kohlSent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:00 PMSubject: Re: [evol-psych] " Belief in Evolutionary Psychology May Be Hardwired, Study Says "It was posted under humor and stupidity. Did Maarten notice that? The Desmond Morris Syndrome (DMS) exemplifies the current state of EP belief that pendulous female breasts evolved to mimic the fleshy buttocks. The locus taedius experiment exemplifies EP beliefs that are more humorous, instead of just plainly stupid.
I did not take the time to determine whether this was a spoof on "Belief in God May Be Hardwired" but the notification by RKS on A hierarchical coherent-gene-group model for brain development indicates more interest about the adaptive evolution of whatever is "Hardwired" in the context of ecological, social, neurogenic, and socio-cognitive niche construction. At least there appears to be some content that might link the epigenetic tweaking of immense gene networks to brain development.
Let's hope that DMS is not hardwired so that some EPers may someday realize that pendulous female breasts are modified scent glands that help to ensure the mammalian mother-infant bond is associated with an appropriate source of nutrient chemicals via their association with species-specific pheromones (e.g., as they obviously are in my model for the adaptive evolution of our brain and behavior). If, however, DMS is hardwired, we should soon see results of comparisons made between our male ancestors who only approached females from behind, and those who only approached from the front (due to the pendulous breasts). If we find an ancestor with a 50 / 50 split in his approach we can predict that the evolutionary advent of human males who became primarily visual creatures was also due to the evolution of their preference for the visual appeal of the breasts and that human pheromones have nothing to do with anything from that point on.
Medical laboratory scientist (ASCP)
Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.RKS:
Approximately 40% of Bonobo mating are ventral-ventral, a higher proportion than chimpanzees but most probably comparable to early humans. No change in breast morphology is necessary for this mating strategy to evolve.Pheromones and other airborne scent chemicals can not explain the attraction that men have to photographs of naked breasts or, typically among tribal people where the breasts are not covered, to photographs of naked buttocks...There is next to no possibility that large breasts evolved to mimic the buttocks, but men's attraction to the large fluid filled vulva must have been displaced elsewhere when evolution took that female attribute away, possibly because those females that had smaller vulva during their fertile period were better able to keep up with a mobile population, especially if trekking across the savannah became a common behaviour.Robert
- In such case, let’s have a look at sexual immorality. How would you link it to empathy considering that immorality is that what is not moral?Anna
immorality (ˌɪməˈrælɪtɪ) — n , pl -ties the quality, character, or state of being immoral immoral behaviour, esp in sexual matters; licentiousness; profligacy or promiscuity an immoral actAnna writes: "Morality can be based on group’s interests which have nothing to do with empathy. "
What's best for the group might be better defined as an ideology rather than based on morality.Is it that the human sense of morality has been overtly domesticated or better yet indoctrinated by ideologies?Memetic transfusionBrad"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."-- George Orwell
From: Anna <pantheon@...>
Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [evol-psych] " Belief in Evolutionary Psychology May Be Hardwired, Study Says "No, this is typical ‘intentional reasoning’.Morality can be based on group’s interests which have nothing to do with empathy.Anyway, if animals had the same morality as humans, they would not survive one day in the wild.“Something like moral sense” is human interpretation of animal behavior.AnnaAnna writes: "but morality. Empathy and altruism are not the same as morality"
Empathy and Reciprocity are at the very foundation of morality. The behaviour is innate in all primates but we self proclaimed higher primates gave it a category and name.
What you sent is a montage of Postmodernist jargon that is laughable and debunked by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. http://www.amazon.com/Intellectual-Impostures-Alan-Sokal/dp/1861976313
I recall your originally citing Frans De Waal because you agreed with this work. He has altered his views as demonstrated in the video I posted.De Waal, a pioneer in the topic of animal empathy, said that this is just one example of mammals displaying something approaching a moral sense. He said that mammals frequently display empathy and reciprocity, crucial components of morality.De Waal : "I do think that human morality didn't start from scratch -- human morality started with the primate psychology which has all these tendencies of reciprocity and empathy and following social rules and so on...so we took that psychology and we turned it into a moral system," he said.
If you're not an animal then what are you?Brad"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."-- George Orwell
From: Anna <pantheon@...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: [evol-psych] " Belief in Evolutionary Psychology May Be Hardwired, Study Says "The example with the gorilla shows that gorillas are capable of altruism, what I have never denied.However, it is not what we are arguing, but morality. Empathy and altruism are not the same as morality. And they do not have to be a foundation of morals.I have send you the most common definition, but you still insist on defending your position, although it is a major reasoning error to derive such conclusion..Perhaps then you need to study the paper I am including below to understand how and why you did it.Anna<snip>