|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 26, 2012 15:30:50 GMT 10
The co-evolution of dogs an humans is just something fun that I do on the side. I don't put in much serious time for it. I did present on the current research a few years ago. It is just a topic that is personally fascinating to me. I'm just back from shopping. In one aisle I noticed the cover story of the current National Geographic is about the DNA of dogs and the article has a page about our co-evolution. Imagine what RH & LB at 406 would have to say about that coincidence! My noticing it is more an instance of the attention arousing function of my reticular activating system at work than of some spooky synchronicity.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 26, 2012 15:36:18 GMT 10
Brother, I live in Texas. I have to, on occasion discuss evolution with folks that just have it wrong. This is common for people that have a little information and personal agenda to advance (usually a religious agenda). I suggest you not muddy general discussions about evolution with controversial references to EP.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 26, 2012 15:43:02 GMT 10
Certainly a tough question but it is one that we won't be able to ignore. I am not sure what is happening in Australia but in the United States the "gay marriage" issue is now a federal issue. The Supreme Court of the United States will eventually take up the question and have to render a decision. What is happening in Australia? Gay marriage is also a current issue here. It has a large majority of popular support but most politicians are wary. Even our atheist woman PM refuses to commit the federal government to the issue.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 26, 2012 15:49:42 GMT 10
Memes and genes. There has to be something that carries them and a memetic infection can certainly alter the EEA, much like the stone axe began to allow certain types to flourish while others did not do as well. "Memes and genes" - whatever. They ought not be dismissed that lightly. The distinction is the very nub of our discussion. While something is required to carry memes, that is about as meaningful as saying something is required on which to write (a tabula rasa comes to mind).
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Feb 26, 2012 19:11:38 GMT 10
Part of me hopes that homosexuality is genetic so that there is a stronger case to protect the rights of homosexuals in society. There are many of compatriots in the Western world that believe that it is a choice. www.queerbychoice.com/I think the queer by choice option can be more liberating. The alternative takes us back to the era when homosexuality was thought to be pathological. Something we would cure if we could. "If all persons with any trace of homosexual history, or those who were predominantly homosexual, were eliminated from the population today, there is no reason for believing that the incidence of the homosexual in the next generation would be materially reduced. The homosexual has been a significant part of human sexual activity since the dawn of history, primarily because it is an expression of capacities that are basic in the human animal." - Alfred C. Kinsey, Wardell P. Pomeroy, and Clyde E. Martin, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, 1948, p. 666.
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Feb 26, 2012 19:17:38 GMT 10
I became interested in eyewitness issues when I learned of the Innocence Project www.innocenceproject.org and I found that approximately 75% of those exonerated by DNA evidence had been convicted and incarcerated on eyewitness evidence alone. Why are eyewitnesses so inaccurate? I started a literature review about the topic to learn all that I could. Even without prompting eyewitnesses are bad. We can't rule out normative social influence because it does happen. Luckily many law enforcement agencies have taken note and they altered their procedures to try to mitigate the impact of the faulty eyewitness evidence. Yet eyewitness reports are the gold standard for proof of supernatural events.
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Feb 26, 2012 19:23:04 GMT 10
Grossman, Ph.D, LtCol US Army (ret) wrote a book called "On Killing" in which he mentioned that certain sociopaths would not only flourish in the military but could be a benefit to society within that structure. "If it's natural to kill, how come men have to go into training to learn how?" - Joan Baez
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Feb 27, 2012 4:18:42 GMT 10
They train in order to do it well.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 27, 2012 5:02:55 GMT 10
They train in order to do it well. Then we have to untrain them to fit back into society.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 27, 2012 5:08:25 GMT 10
Part of me hopes that homosexuality is genetic so that there is a stronger case to protect the rights of homosexuals in society. There are many of compatriots in the Western world that believe that it is a choice. That is a good reason to determine the factors that select one meme and not another to be perpetuated. Otherwise we are left with having to determine a genetic function. That would be difficult considering that most, I am guessing, homosexuals don't procreate. I would like to go on record saying that it doesn't matter, ethically, if homosexuality is genetic or memetic or choice and that people should be left to their own devices in their personal lives. It is a tough question for the social learning and the genetic behavioralist (whom I have had problems with). Our society certainly does not condone or teach homosexuality and it would be tough to find any genetic predisposition to homosexuality. There is no such thing as a homosexual or a heterosexual person. There are only homo- or heterosexual acts. Most people are a mixture of impulses if not practices
Gore Vidal
|
|