Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • For example, as in the well-known example of domestication of foxes, just select

    For example, as in the well-known example of domestication of foxes, just selecting for testosterone levels (one change) will produce domestication. In humans it’s the same basic developmental difference: 1) neoteny and 2) selection pressure: class size.
    Vast racial differences.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-21 21:45:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285692370726551555

    Reply addressees: @aptest_eve @JadeBai85455803 @SPQRIUS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285691888415145984


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @aptest_eve @JadeBai85455803 @SPQRIUS This fallacy is so well known in science that it has a name: Lewontin’s fallacy. It takes advantage of human ignorance of the size and functional composition of our genes, few of which are declarative and most of which are regulatory. In other words, tiny variation = huge effect.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1285691888415145984

  • Russia had about the same # people, more resources, but Russian people are low t

    Russia had about the same # people, more resources, but Russian people are low trust, lazy, production quality was trash, and (STILL) can’t form large organizations because of low trust. (same as Muslims). Russians used cheap(forced) labor, US/CN used credit. Incentives mattered.

    Reply addressees: @PunishedSkelet4

  • Russia had about the same # people, more resources, but Russian people are low t

    Russia had about the same # people, more resources, but Russian people are low trust, lazy, production quality was trash, and (STILL) can’t form large organizations because of low trust. (same as Muslims). Russians used cheap(forced) labor, US/CN used credit. Incentives mattered.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-21 19:11:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285653540682321920

    Reply addressees: @PunishedSkelet4

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285652681542053890

  • What is it that you think accounts for the vast difference in group intelligence

    What is it that you think accounts for the vast difference in group intelligence and neoteny? It’s eugenics.

    Manorialism under farming in particular.

    Reply addressees: @aptest_eve @JadeBai85455803 @SPQRIUS

  • What is it that you think accounts for the vast difference in group intelligence

    What is it that you think accounts for the vast difference in group intelligence and neoteny? It’s eugenics.

    Manorialism under farming in particular.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-21 16:45:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285616845471518720

    Reply addressees: @aptest_eve @JadeBai85455803 @SPQRIUS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285615132689784832

  • Every creature on this earth practices it – many of them by eating their young o

    Every creature on this earth practices it – many of them by eating their young or stealing food from the weakest of children, or seeking to deprive the weak and unfit from reproduction.

    Europeans and east Asians practiced it most which is why we had the only advanced civs.

    Reply addressees: @aptest_eve @JadeBai85455803 @SPQRIUS

  • Every creature on this earth practices it – many of them by eating their young o

    Every creature on this earth practices it – many of them by eating their young or stealing food from the weakest of children, or seeking to deprive the weak and unfit from reproduction.

    Europeans and east Asians practiced it most which is why we had the only advanced civs.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-21 16:44:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285616710624718851

    Reply addressees: @aptest_eve @JadeBai85455803 @SPQRIUS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285615132689784832

  • EUGENICS SUCCEEDS – EVEN PLATO DISCUSSED IT Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek

    EUGENICS SUCCEEDS – EVEN PLATO DISCUSSED IT

    Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek εὐ- “good” and γενής “come into being, growing”) is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population,[3][4] historically by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior.[5]

    HISTORY

    The concept predates the term; Plato suggested applying the principles of selective breeding to humans around 400 BC. Early advocates of eugenics in the 19th century regarded it as a way of improving groups of people. In contemporary usage, the term eugenics is closely associated with scientific racism and white supremacism.[2] Modern bioethicists who advocate new eugenics characterise it as a way of enhancing individual traits, regardless of group membership.

    PRE-WAR SUCCESSES

    While eugenic principles have been practiced as early as ancient Greece, the contemporary history of eugenics began in the early 20th century, when a popular eugenics movement emerged in the United Kingdom,[6] and then spread to many countries, including the United States, Canada,[7] and most European countries. In this period, people from across the political spectrum espoused eugenic ideas. Consequently, many countries adopted eugenic policies, intended to improve the quality of their populations’ genetic stock. Such programs included both positive measures, such as encouraging individuals deemed particularly “fit” to reproduce, and negative measures, such as marriage prohibitions and forced sterilization of people deemed unfit for reproduction. Those deemed “unfit to reproduce” often included people with mental or physical disabilities, people who scored in the low ranges on different IQ tests, criminals and “deviants,” and members of disfavored minority groups.

    DOWNFALL

    The eugenics movement became associated with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust when the defense of many of the defendants at the Nuremberg trials of 1945 to 1946 attempted to justify their human-rights abuses by claiming there was little difference between the Nazi eugenics programs and the U.S. eugenics programs.[8] In the decades following World War II, with more emphasis on human rights, many countries began to abandon eugenics policies, although some Western countries (the United States, Canada, and Sweden among them) continued to carry out forced sterilizations.

    REVIVAL

    Since the 1980s and 1990s, with new assisted reproductive technology procedures available, such as gestational surrogacy (available since 1985), preimplantation genetic diagnosis (available since 1989), and cytoplasmic transfer (first performed in 1996), concern has grown about the possible revival of a more potent form of eugenics after decades of promoting human rights.

    CRITICISM

    A criticism of eugenics policies is that, regardless of whether negative or positive policies are used, they are susceptible to abuse because the genetic selection criteria are determined by whichever group has political power at the time.[9] Furthermore, many criticize negative eugenics in particular as a violation of basic human rights, seen since 1968’s Proclamation of Tehran[10] as including the right to reproduce. Another criticism is that eugenics policies eventually lead to a loss of genetic diversity, thereby resulting in inbreeding depression due to a loss of genetic variation.[11] Yet another criticism of contemporary eugenics policies is that they propose to permanently and artificially disrupt millions of years of evolution, and that attempting to create genetic lines “clean” of “disorders” can have far-reaching ancillary downstream effects in the genetic ecology, including negative effects on immunity and on species resilience.[12]

    (via wikipedia)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-21 12:56:00 UTC

  • Soft Eugenics (limit reproduction of the underclasses) vs Hard Eugenics (action

    Soft Eugenics (limit reproduction of the underclasses) vs Hard Eugenics (action against those unfit who are born.)

    The reason for east and west’s success is more attributable to eugenics than any other factor.

    Manorialism all but eliminated the european underclasses.

    Reply addressees: @Coronakrise5 @mpigliucci @aptest_eve

  • Soft Eugenics (limit reproduction of the underclasses) vs Hard Eugenics (action

    Soft Eugenics (limit reproduction of the underclasses) vs Hard Eugenics (action against those unfit who are born.)

    The reason for east and west’s success is more attributable to eugenics than any other factor.

    Manorialism all but eliminated the european underclasses.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-20 12:26:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285189303560212480

    Reply addressees: @Coronakrise5 @mpigliucci @aptest_eve

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1284919580293582855