[ExI] IQ and beauty

Dan TheBookMan danust2012 at gmail.com
Sun Oct 18 23:27:07 UTC 2015

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki <
rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 12:47 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Please read the books and find you own page numbers.
> ### If you say it's in the bible, it's your job to quote chapter and
verse. Also, I already
> provided links to articles arguing against your position. The ball is in
your court.

My reaction too. My recollection of the works John cited here too was more
that they provided illustrative examples and general principles. The issue
here would be do these apply and how to the specific case. But the onus is
on the person making the claim here. (I, too, provided links on the
peafowl, which seemed to have been ignored.)

>>> anthropomorphic psychologizing has no part in figuring out how
evolution works.
>> Why not?
> ### Because off-the-cuff anthropomorphic psychologizing doesn't
rigorously (i.e.
> mathematically) tackle the stuff of evolution (mutation frequency,
fitness payoff,
> heritability, etc.).

I'm not against "off the cuff" reasoning or speculation as a starting
point, but then one does have to see how this stands against more rigorous
reasoning and empirical studies (where applicable). One can merely say
"sexual selection" (or pick a pet theory) as if this is an incantation that
dispels all doubts.


  Sample my Kindle books via:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20151018/f6ea4294/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list