I feel this could've been a much longer presentation. Would love to see them back on, maybe having them talk about the slave and master dynamics as to what 'program' would be triggered for you to become a collectivist/statist or individualist/libertarian.
Wait, this video has come out in 2015? Steven Pinker's _The Blank Slate_ was published in 2002, saying the same thing better. Are you telling me that people (libertarians or otherwise) have been battling the feminist/progressive fringe for years without knowing these basic facts and how they apply to gender, etc.?
Ricardo Mena Cuevas Look up the definition of gender; this isnt a word game. For example, the Samoan have a third gender called Fa'afafine. A recognized identity/role since at least the early 20th century.
Leda Cosmides, es una psicóloga norteamericana, que junto a su esposo el antropólogo John Tooby, ayudó a desarrollar el campo de la psicología evolucionista. Cosmides originalmente estudió biología en la Universidad de Harvard, recibiendo su Bachelor of Arts en 1979.
Their position seems logically inconsistent to me. On the one hand, they argue that certain basic capacities and cognitive modes evolved during our hunter-gatherer past that influence how the mind works. On the other hand, they say that the human mind is extremely "flexible" and can adapt. In other words, we have certain limits, but can overcome them? So how are they limits? Furthermore, they create a caricature of the "blank slate" model, i.e. that it posits merely a passive response to the environment, which is ridiculously simplistic. The whole theory of neurosis indicates that it evolves into other spheres life, a kind of misapplied response to some early trauma. That is not passive, but dynamic and highly variable. I don't see why, except in the rarified turf battles between academic departments, these models are presumed mutually exclusive. It is evident we have certain characteristics bred into us, but it is equally clear that life experience changes us.
Our mind is both adapted from hunter gatherer experience AND is also subject to any new adaptive problems we might face in the future. That said, our psychology is meant to solve hunter gatherer problems (the reason why we are afraid of spiders is that we deemed them poisonous in the past and the reason why we get disgusted by something is to prevent any potential sickness) BUT it is also currently always evolving with every new thing the human population learns each day. I would argue that with enough time, homo sapiens would not have the same limits as we did in the past or today. It is all a matter of natural selection and how we solve problems to adapt and reproduce.
How are they limits? The same way you are limited to how much weight you can lift yet you overcome it by inventing or using a tool to lift extremely heavy objects.
All too typical psychologists who straw man the 'blank-slate' hypothesis of Aristotle. No one is suggesting we are passive downloaders of information. Our biological natures and our will power make us active. Kant's Critique suggested we fatally distort the world; is that true? Psychologists rarely have insight on epistemology, yet it so crucially pertains to their field.
***** Philosophy provides a basis for science. Do you think its an innocent remark when someone says that everything is a theory? Or when scientists say they can only find correlations, never causation? Or Kuhn's paradigms? These are the underlying problems that scientists take for granted (though usually they are just ignorant of them) and leave to philosophers.
They dont talk about Aristotle but about left wing political movement that wants to socially engineer whole society even tho their political ideals are inherently anti human as they deny human nature and psychological needs derived from it.
of course that is not true.... many, many, many people from the enlightenment to about 1950 argued for a blank slate - though their common sense may have been telling them something else.
"no one" "except someone". It's an extremely common position on the left. In fact, the position is so common that it basically acts as the prime bedrock for virtually all radical leftist and progressive proposals for societal change. If you take away the notion that people are just "reflections of their socio-economic circumstance" then a lot of left wing politics not only becomes futile and pointless, but also catastrophically dangerous.
it doesn't matter. I have tried to introduce a scientific worldview to people who have been fed the post modernist lies about the world and most people here (mostly women) react emotionally and start adding morals into the equation. dont they understand that evolution and for that matter, the universe is indifferent to whats PC or not?
Well good attributes for artificial intelligence. It's like turning on a light slow but the light represents what to do with its own self knowledge.. faster and faster
The left teaches victimhood and serfdom, it takes atrocities that happened to people's ancestors hundreds of years ago and makes them victims today! More blacks were married, more blacks had jobs and less were likely to go to prison before the New Deal, more welfare and the War on Drugs started! Not surprisingly all these programs were supposed to HELP black people but did exactly the opposite. When government tries to help it hurts. Black attendance at UCLA was higher before Affirmative Action. Native Tribes who don't receive crazy amounts of support for government are much better off than Native Americans who are receiving a lot. All these facts are from the Stossel show.
@@cydneychappelle9012 It's small, but noticeable. The female seems engaged and looking directly at the old man when he talks. Then, when the female talks, the old man seems to be tuned out and disconnected. The interviewer seems to interrupt the female and doesn't usually interrupt the old man. The interviewer also maintains a hunched over posture which makes it look like he's looking down and leaning which doesn't help. That may just be due to editing cuts, but it comes across as sexist. I'm not even really a feminist and I can see it.
i dont understand how people dont get it, of course we have hardwired programs, in conjunction with the physics aspects of the brain.. evolved.. for survival... like everything else, the big picture is that aldo we have 3 brains, left and side part, etc the really is that it is flexible... to be wired as we use it... thats the big thing!!!
![Rick Roderick on Marcuse - One-Dimensional Man [full length]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/WNAKr1TQ0xc/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Limbus Company - Teaser] Season5 - Oblivion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8anKuEeZLeI/mqdefault.jpg)
when your professor is so well known in his field that all you do to study for finals is watch his videos
he's your profesor!!!??! He's quoted on most books i have to study
Wow
This was a fascinating interview and a topic I would love to hear more about.
The best book on the subject is The Moral Animal by Robert Wright.
I feel this could've been a much longer presentation. Would love to see them back on, maybe having them talk about the slave and master dynamics as to what 'program' would be triggered for you to become a collectivist/statist or individualist/libertarian.
everything is predetermined, predetermined to be able to change
sorry no.
some things are fixed just that.
@@m.s.r.s-9495such what
Wait, this video has come out in 2015? Steven Pinker's _The Blank Slate_ was published in 2002, saying the same thing better. Are you telling me that people (libertarians or otherwise) have been battling the feminist/progressive fringe for years without knowing these basic facts and how they apply to gender, etc.?
+Coolidge Dollar Cosmides and Tooby began it all back then in the 1980s.
See The Adapted Mind (Oxford University Press, 1995).
Ricardo Mena Cuevas I shall.
The definition of gender depends on culture. Gender and sex are not the same thing.
Gender is a Biological thing.
Culture Reinforces this Fact.
Ricardo Mena Cuevas Look up the definition of gender; this isnt a word game. For example, the Samoan have a third gender called Fa'afafine. A recognized identity/role since at least the early 20th century.
Leda Cosmides, es una psicóloga norteamericana, que junto a su esposo el antropólogo John Tooby, ayudó a desarrollar el campo de la psicología evolucionista. Cosmides originalmente estudió biología en la Universidad de Harvard, recibiendo su Bachelor of Arts en 1979.
This theory can’t explain human intuition.
Their position seems logically inconsistent to me. On the one hand, they argue that certain basic capacities and cognitive modes evolved during our hunter-gatherer past that influence how the mind works. On the other hand, they say that the human mind is extremely "flexible" and can adapt. In other words, we have certain limits, but can overcome them? So how are they limits?
Furthermore, they create a caricature of the "blank slate" model, i.e. that it posits merely a passive response to the environment, which is ridiculously simplistic. The whole theory of neurosis indicates that it evolves into other spheres life, a kind of misapplied response to some early trauma. That is not passive, but dynamic and highly variable.
I don't see why, except in the rarified turf battles between academic departments, these models are presumed mutually exclusive. It is evident we have certain characteristics bred into us, but it is equally clear that life experience changes us.
Our mind is both adapted from hunter gatherer experience AND is also subject to any new adaptive problems we might face in the future. That said, our psychology is meant to solve hunter gatherer problems (the reason why we are afraid of spiders is that we deemed them poisonous in the past and the reason why we get disgusted by something is to prevent any potential sickness) BUT it is also currently always evolving with every new thing the human population learns each day. I would argue that with enough time, homo sapiens would not have the same limits as we did in the past or today. It is all a matter of natural selection and how we solve problems to adapt and reproduce.
How are they limits? The same way you are limited to how much weight you can lift yet you overcome it by inventing or using a tool to lift extremely heavy objects.
Truly pathetic. Buzzwords and catchphrases trying to describe what they're talking about who they are. And, they're wrong.
that's it, there are wrong. I think you have to do better than that
hahaha moron
All too typical psychologists who straw man the 'blank-slate' hypothesis of Aristotle. No one is suggesting we are passive downloaders of information. Our biological natures and our will power make us active. Kant's Critique suggested we fatally distort the world; is that true? Psychologists rarely have insight on epistemology, yet it so crucially pertains to their field.
*****
Philosophy provides a basis for science. Do you think its an innocent remark when someone says that everything is a theory? Or when scientists say they can only find correlations, never causation? Or Kuhn's paradigms? These are the underlying problems that scientists take for granted (though usually they are just ignorant of them) and leave to philosophers.
+AndrewTheRed human brains evolved. What reason is there to believe that the human brain has no innate average nature.
They dont talk about Aristotle but about left wing political movement that wants to socially engineer whole society even tho their political ideals are inherently anti human as they deny human nature and psychological needs derived from it.
Kant did not suggest we "fatally distort the world". A fundamental misunderstanding of Kant.
Powerful straw man. No one has ever said the mind was a blank slate, except for maybe John Locke.
of course that is not true.... many, many, many people from the enlightenment to about 1950 argued for a blank slate - though their common sense may have been telling them something else.
"no one" "except someone".
It's an extremely common position on the left. In fact, the position is so common that it basically acts as the prime bedrock for virtually all radical leftist and progressive proposals for societal change.
If you take away the notion that people are just "reflections of their socio-economic circumstance" then a lot of left wing politics not only becomes futile and pointless, but also catastrophically dangerous.
Once again evolutionists confirm what we already know from the Bible.
NICK! stop cutting people off to get to your next question.
Psychology + computer programming + anthropology + history/archaeology?
Trying to blame racism on evolutionary psychology is bizarre, it would be like blaming nuclear bombs on physics.
it doesn't matter. I have tried to introduce a scientific worldview to people who have been fed the post modernist lies about the world and most people here (mostly women) react emotionally and start adding morals into the equation. dont they understand that evolution and for that matter, the universe is indifferent to whats PC or not?
freeshaable
People are more concerned with what feels comforting than what is true.
Don't worry. Racism doesn't exist anymore. The left defined and re-defined it out of existence.
Well good attributes for artificial intelligence. It's like turning on a light slow but the light represents what to do with its own self knowledge.. faster and faster
The left teaches victimhood and serfdom, it takes atrocities that happened to people's ancestors hundreds of years ago and makes them victims today! More blacks were married, more blacks had jobs and less were likely to go to prison before the New Deal, more welfare and the War on Drugs started! Not surprisingly all these programs were supposed to HELP black people but did exactly the opposite. When government tries to help it hurts. Black attendance at UCLA was higher before Affirmative Action. Native Tribes who don't receive crazy amounts of support for government are much better off than Native Americans who are receiving a lot. All these facts are from the Stossel show.
The body language in this video I found very sexist.
Why
@@cydneychappelle9012 It's small, but noticeable. The female seems engaged and looking directly at the old man when he talks. Then, when the female talks, the old man seems to be tuned out and disconnected. The interviewer seems to interrupt the female and doesn't usually interrupt the old man. The interviewer also maintains a hunched over posture which makes it look like he's looking down and leaning which doesn't help. That may just be due to editing cuts, but it comes across as sexist. I'm not even really a feminist and I can see it.
And in other news, water is wet.
Diaper Dude Are you sure water is wet?
i dont understand how people dont get it, of course we have hardwired programs, in conjunction with the physics aspects of the brain.. evolved.. for survival... like everything else, the big picture is that aldo we have 3 brains, left and side part, etc the really is that it is flexible... to be wired as we use it... thats the big thing!!!
I didn't know David Koch had a doctorate in Psych. Good for him. I guess that is his daughter there, playing all smart-alecki & such.
It's been 7 years, but your comment finally got the like that it deserved. I hope you're still alive and doing well.