|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 4:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Draz wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| IlIlNine wrote: |
A little OT but I always liked this quote/observation:
| Quote: |
| The evolution of the brain not only overshot the needs of prehistoric man, it is the only example of evolution providing a species with an organ which it does not know how to use |
|
(I get the joke but) How do you know primitive man didn't have the brain it roughly needed? Our brains seem to be one of the few things humans are still evolving. It's one of the few organs that still has real selective pressures. Better brains = more money = more likely you're to breed. |
Smart people are more restrained on the breeding. |
Really? Based on what evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tomato
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rteacher, what did you get out of that video clip?
The message which I got was that a teacher who is forced to teach Evolution is likely to misunderstand Evolution, and therefore is likely to misrepresent Evolution.
I think either you made a biased misinterpretation or I did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RACETRAITOR
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Draz wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| IlIlNine wrote: |
A little OT but I always liked this quote/observation:
| Quote: |
| The evolution of the brain not only overshot the needs of prehistoric man, it is the only example of evolution providing a species with an organ which it does not know how to use |
|
(I get the joke but) How do you know primitive man didn't have the brain it roughly needed? Our brains seem to be one of the few things humans are still evolving. It's one of the few organs that still has real selective pressures. Better brains = more money = more likely you're to breed. |
Smart people are more restrained on the breeding. |
Really? Based on what evidence? |
Birth rate statistics. I would add that smart, successful, intelligent people tend to die out not leaving spawn, while poor, uneducated religious people often have a dozen kids. This is my opinion of it based only on life experience, but dysgenics is a legitimate study.
All you really have to do is go to a meat market bar like the one wo buxihuan hanguoren is complaining about or where that new poster was jumped and see who's going home with someone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RACETRAITOR wrote: |
| Birth rate statistics. I would add that smart, successful, intelligent people tend to die out not leaving spawn, while poor, uneducated religious people often have a dozen kids. |
I'd love to see those birth rate stats. Bear in mind I'm not talking Stephen Hawking vs autoworkers. Any field these days, the smarter people tend to do better, make more money, and have more breeding opportunities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rapacious Mr. Batstove
Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Location: Central Areola
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| RACETRAITOR wrote: |
| Birth rate statistics. I would add that smart, successful, intelligent people tend to die out not leaving spawn, while poor, uneducated religious people often have a dozen kids. |
I'd love to see those birth rate stats. Bear in mind I'm not talking Stephen Hawking vs autoworkers. Any field these days, the smarter people tend to do better, make more money, and have more breeding opportunities. |
Could you elaborate on breeding opportunities.
The next question is: What train of thought leads you to presume that smarter people have more breeding opportunities that those of less intelligence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rapacious Mr. Batstove wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| RACETRAITOR wrote: |
| Birth rate statistics. I would add that smart, successful, intelligent people tend to die out not leaving spawn, while poor, uneducated religious people often have a dozen kids. |
I'd love to see those birth rate stats. Bear in mind I'm not talking Stephen Hawking vs autoworkers. Any field these days, the smarter people tend to do better, make more money, and have more breeding opportunities. |
Could you elaborate on breeding opportunities.
The next question is: What train of thought leads you to presume that smarter people have more breeding opportunities that those of less intelligence? |
Women clearly prefer men who have better earning potential. Being smarter in any field means, generally, higher earnings. (Smarter can be IQ, EQ, etc.) It seems rather clear these days one of the few characteristics being selected for is the ability to earn money. This is highly dependent on cognitive abilities. Again I'm not suggesting it's only Nobel prize winners pass on their DNA. Evolution doesn't work like that. It's small degrees over time. People on the right hand side of the distribution are more likely to pass on their genes. The degree doesn't matter, even if it is (statistically) greater by a small amount. This then sets up a new distribution a nudge to the right. So, it's a classic albeit slow Red Queen struggle, but not in the jungle for food but in the brain olympics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Rapacious Mr. Batstove wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| RACETRAITOR wrote: |
| Birth rate statistics. I would add that smart, successful, intelligent people tend to die out not leaving spawn, while poor, uneducated religious people often have a dozen kids. |
I'd love to see those birth rate stats. Bear in mind I'm not talking Stephen Hawking vs autoworkers. Any field these days, the smarter people tend to do better, make more money, and have more breeding opportunities. |
Could you elaborate on breeding opportunities.
The next question is: What train of thought leads you to presume that smarter people have more breeding opportunities that those of less intelligence? |
Women clearly prefer men who have better earning potential. Being smarter in any field means, generally, higher earnings. |
I disagree. First of al, its all relative. While a hot Manhattan socialite will most likely go for investment bankers and 5th Avenue executives, most women arent Manhattan socialites. I would venture a guess that most people are middle class or lower, and as such the standards they will have will vary. I would also venture a guess that your average fat chick from some hick town in Indiana wont really have much to choose from and it wont take a 6 figure income and a Lexus to impress her. A 7 year old Ford Escort and something other than minimum wage at Walmart will do.
Conversely, an exec with a 6 figure salary wont be out looking for trailer trash in Alabama. They MIGHT for a quick shag but certainly not for breeding opportunities. Men with money and power though THEORETICALLY may have many more breeding opportunities will self-impose limits on who they want to have kids with. It will either be hot chicks, hot and successful chicks, hot/successful chicks or any combination involving hot and successful. Poor men will not be so choosy and the exciting world of ugly fatsoes working for minimum wage at Walmart will be wide open. These chicks will most likely take whats given to them as a chance to land Mr. 35-grand-a-year with his 7 year old Ford Escort wont come along too often. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| I disagree. First of al, its all relative. While a hot Manhattan socialite will most likely go for investment bankers and 5th Avenue executives, most women arent Manhattan socialites. I would venture a guess that most people are middle class or lower, and as such the standards they will have will vary. I would also venture a guess that your average fat chick from some hick town in Indiana wont really have much to choose from and it wont take a 6 figure income and a Lexus to impress her. A 7 year old Ford Escort and something other than minimum wage at Walmart will do. |
You can disagree with anecdotes but the data clearly show that in mate selection earning potential is an important factor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| I disagree. First of al, its all relative. While a hot Manhattan socialite will most likely go for investment bankers and 5th Avenue executives, most women arent Manhattan socialites. I would venture a guess that most people are middle class or lower, and as such the standards they will have will vary. I would also venture a guess that your average fat chick from some hick town in Indiana wont really have much to choose from and it wont take a 6 figure income and a Lexus to impress her. A 7 year old Ford Escort and something other than minimum wage at Walmart will do. |
You can disagree with anecdotes but the data clearly show that in mate selection earning potential is an important factor. |
In animals yes, because animals dont discriminate. If you try to tell me a rich guy will happily MATE (not shag or pay for a night of sex) with some trailer trash hippo from Arkansas then Im sorry, but you are just off the mark. People don't take advantage of every mating opportunity that presents itself the way animals do. Theres a reason why money attract money, people of a certain socio-economic level mate with each other. Rich with the rich, poor with the poor. Trailer trash with the trailer trash. The only real wildcard is hotness in women. If a chick from Hickstown, Alabama is hot enough she can score some rich guy. Although she would still be at a disadvantage against some hot chick from Harvard. Hotness in men means squat all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| If you try to tell me a rich guy will happily MATE (not shag or pay for a night of sex) with some trailer trash hippo from Arkansas then Im sorry, but you are just off the mark. |
I don't think you read what I wrote about small degrees. You're giving an extreme example. A woman who dates blue collar men will, all things being equal, prefer the blue collar man with the higher income. The blue collar man gets the higher income because he's smarter than those competing for raises/promotions. In times past it was because he was stronger (the "high priced man" who could move more pig iron). Now with computers, complex tools, etc. it's because he's smarter, a quicker learner, etc.
There is great, great variation, of course, but as I said, if males to the right of the bell curve are selected even only a bit more than men to the left, as long as it is statistically significant, over time we're nudging the median to the right of the curve.
Further, it's not about who men select but who women select.
Anyway, there is scientific evidence the human brain is still evolving. The question is, why? If evolution is true, it is because of selection pressures. What selection pressures exist in our modern world? Mate selection seems to be the only one. Tigers aren't thinning our herd anymore.
Last edited by mindmetoo on Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:48 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
I don't think you read what I wrote about small degrees. You're giving an extreme example. A woman who dates blue collar men will, all things being equal, prefer the blue collar man with the higher income. |
She may but in such cases income variation isnt really all that much. I mean seriously, a woman wont really base her decision on 5 grand a year difference. OTHER factors will come in to play, and many of them.
| Quote: |
| Further, it's not about who men select but who women select. |
You are joking, right? In highschool, maybe. The fact is though, MEN make the money and you will find that once highschool is over, the power is more and more in men's hands. be it the successful 5th avenue exec, the investman banker, the doctor, the lawyer, the manager or even the simple blue collar worker, ultimately it is women competing for a man, NOT the other way around. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bramble
Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Location: National treasures need homes
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| If you try to tell me a rich guy will happily MATE (not shag or pay for a night of sex) with some trailer trash hippo from Arkansas then Im sorry, but you are just off the mark. |
I don't think you read what I wrote about small degrees. You're giving an extreme example. A woman who dates blue collar men will, all things being equal, prefer the blue collar man with the higher income. The blue collar man gets the higher income because he's smarter than those competing for raises/promotions. There is great, great variation, of course, but as I said, if males to the right of the bell curve are selected even only a bit more than men to the left, as long as it is statistically significant, over time we're nudging the median to the right of the curve.
Further, it's not about who men select but who women select.
Anyway, there is scientific evidence the human brain is still evolving. The question is, why? If evolution is true, it is because of selection pressures. What selection pressures exist in our modern world? Mate selection seems to be the only one. Tigers aren't thinning our herd anymore. |
What about all the statistics showing that birth rates decline when societies become better educated and more affluent? What about all the statistics showing that educated women are more likely to delay childbearing or not have children at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| You are joking, right? In highschool, maybe. The fact is though, MEN make the money and you will find that once highschool is over, the power is more and more in men's hands. be it the successful 5th avenue exec, the investman banker, the doctor, the lawyer, the manager or even the simple blue collar worker, ultimately it is women competing for a man, NOT the other way around. |
We're saying the same thing. A woman competing for a man is a woman trying to select her mate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bramble wrote: |
| What about all the statistics showing that birth rates decline when societies become better educated and more affluent? What about all the statistics showing that educated women are more likely to delay childbearing or not have children at all? |
How does that change anything? It seems to me that just creates higher expectations in lower economic stratas, increasing the drive of a woman to select a mate with the best possible income potential. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| You are joking, right? In highschool, maybe. The fact is though, MEN make the money and you will find that once highschool is over, the power is more and more in men's hands. be it the successful 5th avenue exec, the investman banker, the doctor, the lawyer, the manager or even the simple blue collar worker, ultimately it is women competing for a man, NOT the other way around. |
We're saying the same thing. A woman competing for a man is a woman trying to select her mate. |
No, because a woman isnt doing the selcting, the man is. As much as women think they are in control when the man gets down on his knee and pops The Big One, in the end men select their mates in our species as we hold all the power. In highschool it may not be so but once a woman hits her mid 20s the power is in men's hands. After 30 a woman is past her Best Before date and men hold all the cards. A rare successful business woman may buck this trend but once her hormones start singing, she will follow along. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
