That’s a demonstration of female NAXALT / AXALT cognitive bias. Wherein males co

That’s a demonstration of female NAXALT / AXALT cognitive bias. Wherein males comprehend all statements refer to distributions and females, females comprehend inverse distributions. So where a man would say ‘yes that’s true’ (a distribution) a woman would say (but not all are like that). Or worse, personalize it (as you did) when the statement is impersonal description of a distribution. It is one of the most obvious sex differences in cognition.

What I find interesting is the cognitively feminine means of proving me correct with each retort and the persistent total inability to adapt one’s frame.

My principle concern is the tendency of women – especially those without at least two or three children – to support policy that they view as supportive but which instead infantilizes, by the failure to demand individual responsibility for the private and common, leading to the weakness of the group on one hand and exhaustive free riding, rent seeking, and corruption on the other.

BACKGROUND ON NAXALT / AXALT

Biological and Evolutionary Perspectives:
Group Cohesion: Historically, group cohesion has been crucial for survival. Recognizing and promoting the exceptions or unique traits within a group (NAXALT) could be an evolutionary trait aimed at maintaining group harmony and cooperation, which might be more pronounced in roles traditionally associated with nurturing or community building.
Protective Instincts: Your assumption about “instinctual sensitivity to being left behind” could align with evolutionary psychology where sensitivity to social exclusion or being underestimated might push individuals to correct or mitigate generalizations that could exclude or devalue members of their group.

Cognitive Biases:
Confirmation Bias: People might seek out or give more weight to information that confirms their worldview or group identity, leading to the NAXALT fallacy when defending against negative stereotypes or the AXALT when reinforcing positive ones about their group.
Cognitive Dissonance: When faced with information that contradicts one’s beliefs about their group, the NAXALT response might be a way to resolve the discomfort by highlighting exceptions rather than accepting the generalization.

Psychological and Identity Needs:
Identity Protection: Identifying with a group can lead to a protective stance where individuals are quick to refute generalizations (NAXALT) that threaten the positive aspects of that identity.
Need for Belonging: The desire to belong can drive cognitive biases where individuals might either exaggerate similarities (AXALT) within their group for unity or highlight individuality (NAXALT) to prevent exclusion.

Reply addressees: @traungena @gspeth @RichardDawkins