Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Gender divide with religious beliefs
Comments
-
-
-
-
Evolutionary psychology is currently the best model we have for understanding human behaviour, but you are free to propose an alternative, or falsify EP if you're so inclined.
Evolutionary psychology is not the best method we have for understanding human behaviour,
it can only tell us so much before it turns into a "just-so" story.
I think you must have meant sociobiology, but even then you can't get too far due to lack of proof.
It becomes internal logic & can be used to facilitate contradicting explanations as well.
Basically it can be used to explain nearly everything &, therefore, explains nearly nothing.
Psychology & sociology would be the areas that would have more concrete to say, I would think.
It's worth researching the counter-arguments to this young science.
Just as evolutionary psychology fails, so do psychology & sociology too when you try to tell somebody what
human nature is, or should be, and arguing that war, rape & tribal warfare are natural is not something I'd accept so easily.
Black people were naturally inferior 200 years ago, women were naturally inferior 60 years ago, and still are according to most atheists apparently :rolleyes::p,
so if you're trying to argue that rape, pillaging & murder are natural you've got to explain why over the last 500 years or so the levels of rape,
murder & pillaging have cut dramatically & continue to drop.
The very fact these things are dropping so dramatically, that people are communicating on a global scale etc...
would tend to indicate that we don't even know what our nature is or what we are capable of & a look at history would certainly confuse you more
if you looked at the root causes for most wars etc...
Unfortunately, in keeping with that trend of evolutionary psychology & sociobiology to make up "just-so" stories we're reading them
in this thread by the people arguing that rape is innate in us.
What is the actual argument?
The argument about rape & evolution being intertwined is that rape confers an evolutionary advantage to those who committed rape
in the past thereby passing their genes into the next generation.
Could someone please tell me how this indicates that it is innate in human nature?
The only way I can see this happening is if we use evolutionary psychology's foolish mode of inquiry in that we'll explain every single
characteristic of human nature with some million year process seeing as we've got so much time in the past & so little evidence.
It sound's plausible... But then we'd all be rapists because of the rape genes our ancestors bestowed onto us... :pac:
Referencing Steven Pinker as challenging the power theory of rape isn't enough because I can reference passages where he argues
from a 1990's modern American person's perspective & not a scientists when he argues in favour of prisons & sexism as necessary.
Even his debate with Elizabeth Spelke on why women are not in the top sciences is totally couched in modern cultural bias &
totally unfair by using male dominated history to advance his arguments.
I've already given studies showing no differences between male & female intellect in tests that matter
so it's most likely cultural bias that leads to the divide. Innate...?
That doesn't mean Steven Pinker is a misogynistic atheist hell bent on ruining women, he isn't.
If you read him you'll see that so I hope nobody comes away from this with that idea.
So, the argument about evolution and rape is really a trivial issue.
Rape does confer an evolutionary advantage if the rapist succeeds in getting his/her genes into the next generation
but that says absolutely nothing about it being innate or desirable.
From an evolutionary standpoint it's getting your genes into the next generation that matters most but
until someone can show me how that means we're all rapists at heart I'm stumped...
The only thing that makes rape natural, as opposed to be inbuilt into human nature, is that a subset of every species does it.
Still, that says zilch about it being inbuilt in human nature.
For all we know it's abnormally high levels of testosterone or something that leads some members of a particular species to actually commit rape.I can honestly say from a females perspective they do not make for pleasant reading.
I can honestly say that from a male's perspective I don't like people telling me that rape is somehow innate in me & is lurking just below the surface.
However, I don't fight the idea just because I don't like it, I think about it & don't let my fear about it get in the way of understanding it.
If it somehow turned out to be unequovically true, there's no point in denying it was a factor in the past but, simply by choice, it doesn't have to be now...
I think the idea of science, i.e. being objective, is scaring you because people may end up creating some ignorant bias against women.
Science is not about that & "taking sex differences seriously" is not something we can avoid doing because we just don't like it.
As far as I can see, it's science that has shown women are not naturally inferoir, black people are not inferior, minority groups etc...
in an intellectually satisfying way even though we have a history of some devious people attempting to castigate all these minority groups.
(Not to say anything about the social movements, I mean from a biological standpoint!).
I wouldn't worry about this because it's scientists honesty that has fleshed out all the BS and continues to do so.
That said, you have to give up this idea of popular discourse being out to get women.
It's science to publish these kinds of books & you've made no point except that you don't like it.
If you don't, this one minute video will tell you what you can do
I haven't seen any substantial malevolence against women or social castigation because of these books & even if it did occur that doesn't
make it right. It's not mine or the authors fault if people misunderstand the ideas/arguments and detrimentally use them.It enrages me when I see it taken as fact in popular discourse
...
...unfortunately these are not the ideas taken up by mainstream discourse.
Popular discourse, where would we be without it
0 -
Advertisement