Hulver's site || Homo Sapiens

Homo Sapiens

Displaced Homo Erectus in an African migration	1 vote - 11 %
Evolved regionally from Homo Erectus	0 votes - 0 %
Partially displaced and partially interbred with Homo Erectus	5 votes - 55 %
-	1 vote - 11 %
Race is a scientifically meaningful concept	2 votes - 22 %
Race is a scientifically meaningless concept	6 votes - 66 %
-	2 votes - 22 %
Evolutionary Psychology is a valid discipline sensationalized by the media	0 votes - 0 %
Evolutionary Psychology is generally valid but has some loose cannons	1 vote - 11 %
Evolutionary Psychology is a load of rubbish	2 votes - 22 %

9 Total Votes

Where Man Began | 14 comments (14 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback

Race by ucblockhead (4.00 / 2) #1 Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 01:48:21 PM EST

Looked at from a genetic perspective, certain traits are attached to geography and certain traits aren't. Usually you can find very clear-cut evolutionary reasons why those traits are linked to those geographical reasons. (For instance, skin color is very obviously linked to geography.)

Most other traits are not linked to large-scale geography at all. For instance, the tallest populations are the Scots and the Masai. We could just as well group them together form sharing that trait, but we don't because we traditionally group by geography.

The trouble is that when people think of "race", they assume wholesale differences, not variations in a very few set of specific traits. The general human population is mixed enough that most traits don't very by biology, so that from a strictly genetic standpoint, two people with ancestry on different sides of the earth could easily be more similar than two people with ancestry in the same geographic region. They'd just "look" more different as the geographically tied traits tend to be more externally visible, and also because we tend to fixate on them.
----
_{ウセーバラケダ}

So race is a social construct, unlike gender? by Dr H0ffm4n (4.00 / 1) #10 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 12:07:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Depends on what you mean by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #12 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 12:14:05 PM EST

Race is merely a bundle of certain traits. It's no more "socially constructed" than "height", "weight" or blood type. What *is* socially constructed is the importance we give it.
----
_{ウセーバラケダ}
[ Parent ]

: Except that by ambrosen (4.00 / 1) #13 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 04:54:50 PM EST

the bundling of those traits rather than another set may be socially constructed.
The question is whether a clustering algorithm would find e.g. pigmentation traits as significant in grouping people's origin as people do.

[ Parent ]

The standards for publishing... by Metatone (4.00 / 1) #2 Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 03:08:59 PM EST

in a bunch of the evo psych journals just aren't that high. I guess my vote would be:

It's a potentially valid subject, with some loose cannons, who unfortunately not only have tenure, but dominate the review process in some of the high profile journals.

As a result, the quality of published research is pretty variable.

Social psychology is borderline worse, but it doesn't get as much publicity (I'm not sure why). I guess that points up that the reporting is an issue, but more in an "oxygen of publicity" way than just shoddy reporting. I think Ben Goldacre's column sort of suggests that every field is pretty shoddily reported.

country quiz by garlic (4.00 / 1) #3 Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 03:32:24 PM EST

did relatively well -- as long as you could click the right country, distance didn't matter that much. Got tripped up in very hard capitals when I mixed up estonia and eratria in my head. Seemed to be a heavy focus on island nations.

failed geography test on lvl 10 -nt- by clover kicker (4.00 / 1) #4 Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 06:56:38 PM EST

The French don't trust each other? by DullTrev (4.00 / 1) #5 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 04:20:27 AM EST

No-one else trusts them either.

I had to say it.

--
DFJ?

Neanderthals/graves/flowers by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #6 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 06:12:39 AM EST

That's so lovely. What was the evidence? What was the problem with it?

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

The evidence was pollen by R Mutt (4.00 / 1) #7 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 06:29:45 AM EST

But when they could check the dates more accurately it turned out the pollen had just blown in much later.

However, the Neanderthals did bury their dead with stone tools sometimes, and piled slabs of rock on top of them. They just weren't necessarily stone-age hippies after all...

[ Parent ]

There's something about by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #8 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 06:34:11 AM EST

the image of an ogre-like Neaderthal clutching a flower with a tear on his cheek that appeals to my inner girl.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!
[ Parent ]

: Don't go the explosm doctor then by Imperial Mince (4.00 / 1) #14 Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 07:18:37 AM EST

http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Kris/wrong.png
--
This space reserved for whining like a little bitch and being sanctimonious.
[ Parent ]

Biological Anthropology by hulver (4.00 / 1) #9 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 11:56:23 AM EST

I'll have to get J to have a look at this diary.

She's doing archaeology at the moment, and bones is a particular interest of hers. As a result she's been going beyond archaeology into early humans. She's been doing a lot of study on Neanderthals as well, as one of her lecturers is a bloke called Paul Pettitt who's done a lot of Neanderthal research.

I'll see what she's got to say on the subject.
--
smart, pretty, sane. pick two - georgeha

: Hey! by DullTrev (4.00 / 3) #11 Tue Nov 27, 2007 at 12:09:22 PM EST

You can't get people who study a subject to comment on a website. It's against the whole ethos of the internet!

--
DFJ?
[ Parent ]

Where Man Began | 14 comments (14 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback


Make a new account
Username:
Password: