Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:11 pm





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Evolution and baseball caps 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7042
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1072
Thanked: 2065 times in 1657 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
It seems natural enough if we reduce eevolutionary psychology to our selfish genes.


Because there is more to the picture than our genes, as I've already said.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
ant
Sat May 30, 2015 3:40 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
Compatablism?



Sat May 30, 2015 5:44 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7042
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1072
Thanked: 2065 times in 1657 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
Cultural evolution?


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
ant
Sat May 30, 2015 6:03 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
Interbane wrote:
Cultural evolution?



Hard to evidence and falsify without speaking of truisms.
Testability?



Last edited by ant on Sat May 30, 2015 7:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Sat May 30, 2015 7:28 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7042
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1072
Thanked: 2065 times in 1657 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
Testability?


Testability of what? That humans have culture? That said culture evolves? That this cultural evolution is partially responsible for the way you wear your baseball hat? I think the entire chain of reasoning is a truism, without need for testing or explanation. What part are you questioning?


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
ant
Sat May 30, 2015 8:12 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
The baseball cap example is about behavior and how evolution would attempt to explain a particular behavior scientifically.

You are being very general by saying cultural evolution explains it. Are you saying that saying cultural evolution explains this particular behavior is good enough? No hypotheses are needed to explain behavior within an evolutionary framework - its just cultural evolution and a truism is good enough?
I thought the answers I provided were at least plausible.

Yes, i know you have a prior theoretical commitment and that you must add the word evolution to every explanation. In this case its cultural evolution and thats it.
That's fine. I get it. But does that mean that there is no obligation to test any explanations that are related to evolution?


How would you test or falsify a hypothesis of evolutionary psychology, cause I honestly do not know.

(Its silly to think I was asking how youd test culture. You are playing word games now. Saying cultural evolution explains a specific behavior is like saying "evolution dun it - thats all I know!")



Last edited by ant on Sun May 31, 2015 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sun May 31, 2015 1:41 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4357
Location: NC
Thanks: 1848
Thanked: 1916 times in 1435 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
Ultimately there is a natural explanation as to why someone wears a hat backwards, although such explanations are likely to be speculative at this time. Ant has a tendency to mock any science in the formative stages (and just to be clear, I'm referring to evolutionary psychology). But consider this article that suggests that smoking cigarettes is a kind of social embellishment that mimics the peacock's tail in terms of advertising fitness. Please note that the title of the article is in the form of a question, which indicates to the alert reader that no firm conclusions are being drawn.

An excerpt:

Quote:
There is strong evidence that both men and women prefer brave and risk-taking individuals as partners and friends, with women showing a gradual increase in desirability with increasing risk (Bassett & Moss, 2004; Kelly & Dunbar, 2001). Only women expressed a preference for risk-takers in their long-term romantic partners. These results are partially congruent with predictions based on the perspective of evolutionary psychology, particularly the parental investment theory (Trivers, 1972) which states that the sex which bears the greatest cost of reproduction (women in the case of homo sapiens) will be the most selective when choosing a mate. There are at least two candidate explanations as to why ancestral women would have preferred mates who engaged in dangerous and potentially self-destructive behaviours: one states that such behaviours help acquire higher status and resources or demonstrate the abilities necessary for resource acquisition. The other explanation is that risk-taking might work as an honest cue or signal for “good genes”, just as it was proposed by Zahavi (1975), formalized by Grafen (1990) and Godfray (1991), and elaborated and popularized by Diamond (1992).


I would think that wearing a hat backwards is a superficial way of advertising fitness in the same way that smoking cigarettes does, although it's a pale imitation to be sure since there's no risk (except perhaps for the hat-wearer to be beaten up in the parking lot after the game). That any woman would fall for a backwards-hat-wearing dude shows that there truly is a woman for every man. :-D

http://www.academia.edu/6397654/Can_cig ... r_to_women


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


The following user would like to thank geo for this post:
ant
Sun May 31, 2015 8:54 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7042
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1072
Thanked: 2065 times in 1657 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
Yes, i know you have a prior theoretical commitment and that you must add the word evolution to every explanation. In this case its cultural evolution and thats it.


I don't have a theoretical commitment. I'm using the most accurate word in my arsenal. Does culture not evolve over time? Do you understand what this means? Is there a more accurate word to use? If so, let me have it. I'm not appealing to science when I say culture evolves. As you pointed out, it's a truism. There might be a scientific field that studies it... anthropology? Jared Diamond has written a few good books on the topic.

ant wrote:
How would you test or falsify a hypothesis of evolutionary psychology, cause I honestly do not know.


I'm sure there are a ton of ways, but I don't know them. Do a quick google search.

ant wrote:
(Its silly to think I was asking how youd test culture. You are playing word games now.


It's not silly because you aren't being clear. I say cultural evolution, and you reply with ..."testability"? Why is it silly to jump to a conclusion from your response? I'm not playing word games ant.

This conversation is like one with a mad hatter. I don't even know what your issue is about. Are you angry because I'm using the word evolution? Or do you honestly think it doesn't apply in this case? Or are you making a comment that I've used the word more than once? You may have an emotional distaste for the word, but when information undergoes incremental changes over long periods of time, the proper and most precise word is "evolve". You picked the topic.

ant wrote:
Saying cultural evolution explains a specific behavior is like saying "evolution dun it - thats all I know!"


Cultural evolution is completely different from biological evolution(the theory of evolution). You asked how the theory of evolution could explain your baseball hat wearing tendencies. I said it couldn't, at least not on it's own. Your hat wearing is a cultural thing. It is a truism, yes. It offers nothing helpful, except to point out that you're wrong when you think biological evolution should fully explain your hat wearing. That's my entire point, nothing more.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun May 31, 2015 10:34 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
Who's angry, you?

Okay.. naturalism should be reducing behavior to lowest terms (material physiology) but you just keep saying its culture its culture.

In the end its a justso copout but I understand your struggle with science and story telling.

Thanks. :)



Sun May 31, 2015 11:02 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
geo wrote:
Ultimately there is a natural explanation as to why someone wears a hat backwards, although such explanations are likely to be speculative at this time. Ant has a tendency to mock any science in the formative stages (and just to be clear, I'm referring to evolutionary psychology). But consider this article that suggests that smoking cigarettes is a kind of social embellishment that mimics the peacock's tail in terms of advertising fitness. Please note that the title of the article is in the form of a question, which indicates to the alert reader that no firm conclusions are being drawn.

An excerpt:

Quote:
There is strong evidence that both men and women prefer brave and risk-taking individuals as partners and friends, with women showing a gradual increase in desirability with increasing risk (Bassett & Moss, 2004; Kelly & Dunbar, 2001). Only women expressed a preference for risk-takers in their long-term romantic partners. These results are partially congruent with predictions based on the perspective of evolutionary psychology, particularly the parental investment theory (Trivers, 1972) which states that the sex which bears the greatest cost of reproduction (women in the case of homo sapiens) will be the most selective when choosing a mate. There are at least two candidate explanations as to why ancestral women would have preferred mates who engaged in dangerous and potentially self-destructive behaviours: one states that such behaviours help acquire higher status and resources or demonstrate the abilities necessary for resource acquisition. The other explanation is that risk-taking might work as an honest cue or signal for “good genes”, just as it was proposed by Zahavi (1975), formalized by Grafen (1990) and Godfray (1991), and elaborated and popularized by Diamond (1992).


I would think that wearing a hat backwards is a superficial way of advertising fitness in the same way that smoking cigarettes does, although it's a pale imitation to be sure since there's no risk (except perhaps for the hat-wearer to be beaten up in the parking lot after the game). That any woman would fall for a backwards-hat-wearing dude shows that there truly is a woman for every man. :-D

http://www.academia.edu/6397654/Can_cig ... r_to_women



Those last comments were excellent and is the justso scientific explanation i am looking for.

Great!



Sun May 31, 2015 11:05 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7042
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1072
Thanked: 2065 times in 1657 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
Okay.. naturalism should be reducing behavior to lowest terms (material physiology) but you just keep saying its culture its culture.


No, naturalism doesn't simply reduce. Higher order patterns can't be explained by reducing them. They have to be explained at the same level they emerge. But that doesn't make them any less natural.

As far as saying it's culture... isn't it? At least in part? How could genes possibly dictate whether a backwards hat is fitter than a forwards hat? We have to identify this behavior with fitness somehow, and it is a memetic behavior. It is a product of cultural evolution.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
geo
Sun May 31, 2015 11:14 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4357
Location: NC
Thanks: 1848
Thanked: 1916 times in 1435 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
Those last comments were excellent and is the justso scientific explanation i am looking for.

Great!


Exactly! You are looking for a just-so explanation so you easily dismiss possible naturalistic explanations without having to put forth an actual argument or even think about it too much. This has been your agenda from the start. Thanks for being honest!

The article offers anything but a just-so explanation. It offers possible explanations based on the limited data we have. The author of the article makes it perfectly clear that the science is speculative. More data is needed. The definitive, reductive conclusions are merely your own strawman.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Sun May 31, 2015 11:43 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
geo wrote:
ant wrote:
Those last comments were excellent and is the justso scientific explanation i am looking for.

Great!


Exactly! You are looking for a just-so explanation so you easily dismiss possible naturalistic explanations without having to put forth an actual argument or even think about it too much. This has been your agenda from the start. Thanks for being honest!

The article offers anything but a just-so explanation. It offers possible explanations based on the limited data we have. The author of the article makes it perfectly clear that the science is speculative. More data is needed. The definitive, reductive conclusions are merely your own strawman.


Its not me thats looking for them Geo. Its specific fields of science that arouse controversy like evolutionary psychology that develops untestable , unfalsifiable explanations for behavior.
You seem to think that just because its not a supernatural answer anything else is a natural explanation therefore it must be the correct answer regardless if it is testable or not.

Those are called justso explanations if they can not be sugjected to methodological verification.

But you dont understand that and would rather rattle on about it being natural and all, while throwing empirical standards out the window.
And you enjoy thinking you administered a "ggotcha!" at me.

Do you understand how you too can make up a justso scientific explanation and not have to test it?

Let me know if you have any questions. Ill clarify further. Or if you like, just say "culture explains behavior scientifically" and be done with it.



Last edited by ant on Sun May 31, 2015 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sun May 31, 2015 2:37 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4357
Location: NC
Thanks: 1848
Thanked: 1916 times in 1435 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
Do you understand how you too can make up a justso scientific explanation and not have to test it?

Let me know if you have any questions. Ill clarify further. Or if you like, just say "culture explains behavior scientifically" and be done with it.


Who says you don't have to test it?

The problems with evolutionary psychology are inherent to the field and also widely acknowledged. These are plausible explanations that always contingent on the evidence. If you read the article I posted, you will see the language is very speculative.

So please come up with some specific examples of scientists trying to fly under the radar and avoid testing their hypotheses.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Sun May 31, 2015 3:25 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7042
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1072
Thanked: 2065 times in 1657 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evolution and baseball caps
ant wrote:
Or if you like, just say "culture explains behavior scientifically" and be done with it.


How does culture explain behavior scientifically?


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun May 31, 2015 4:02 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Announcements 

• Promote Your Fiction Book on BookTalk.org
Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:33 pm

• Promote Your Non-Fiction Book on BookTalk.org
Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:18 pm



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
How To Promote Your Book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2019. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank