Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I don't think the environment itself would have to be capable of planning.
An example that doesn't involve intelligence, but does show how an environment can require planning is ancient Egypt. Dealing with the irrigation systems related to the flooding of the Nile produced an early civilization. Or so I've read.
If a protein-rich diet leads to a bigger brain, then the cat family would have bigger brains than ours imo.
Informative article!
The discovery of fire wouldn't have brought an end to natural selection imo.
So... natural selection affects everything that is the product of genetics, doesn't it?Your phrasing very much made it sound like you were saying that it was the environment that was capable of planning.
And it's not just th eating of proteins, it's the way the proteins are used in brain development.
I never said it would. Natural selection is a continuous process, as long as there is an environment and beings in that environment to act on.
So... natural selection affects everything that is the product of genetics, doesn't it?
And isn't the size and complexity of the brain a product of genetics?
And does it not follow that people living in different parts of the world would be naturally selected to have different brain size, levels of complexity, or different areas of complexity in their brains? Even if those differences cannot be measured today?Yes... and?
And does it not follow that people living in different parts of the world would be naturally selected to have different brain size, levels of complexity, or different areas of complexity in their brains? Even if those differences cannot be measured today?
Why would complexities in different areas of the brain not be selected?No, not in the slightest. Because that is racist. Like... the sort of racism that people in the Victorian period would have supported.
Why would complexities in different areas of the brain not be selected?
Do you agree that there are differences within the same genus?Because that's not how human evolution worked. All humans present in the world are the same genus, Homo Sapiens. If we still had remnants of the other Homo genera, Homo Erectus, Homo Neanderthalensis, etc, which showed that a marked difference in brain capacity compared to Homo Sapiens, then maybe you'd have something.
But all humans are the same genus, so that question falls flat worse than a Scots poet drunk on Burn's Night.
Do you agree that there are differences within the same genus?
I see that you talk about a marked difference.
I agree there is no marked difference. I don't think it follows that there is no difference of any kind.
Not at all. I read it carefully, that's how I spotted the use of Marked difference. I agree there isn't a marked difference.I think you really just ignored what I wrote.
Not at all. I read it carefully, that's how I spotted the use of Marked difference. I agree there isn't a marked difference.
Do you agree that there are at least some general characteristics that vary among humans, all of the same genus, from different parts of the world?
Yes. Was not the implication was that there is no marked physical or cranial difference within homo sapiens?If you had read what I said, you'd know that I said there was a marked difference between Homo Sapiens and the earlier genera of Humans, which was something that was both physical and cranial too.
I agree that we are all homo sapiens.Yes, characteristics do evolve in populations based on specific environmental necessities. Skin colour, wider noses, body size. But those physical differences do not mean that an African man is a different species to a European man. They are still Homo Sapiens.
Yes. Was not the implication was that there is no marked physical or cranial difference within homo sapiens?
Is there something wrong with the logic that I've presented?
I believe I've already implied that data would be difficult to collect. And I'll add that historical evidence will tend to be subjective.
It's nothing to with whether it is "racist". It's whether itNo, not in the slightest. Because that is racist. Like... the sort of racism that people in the Victorian period would have supported.
The more sapiens ones spell it properly.Yes. Was not the implication was that there is no marked physical or cranial difference within homo sapiens?
I agree that we are all homo sapiens.
"Sapient" -- not "sapiens."The more sapiens ones spell it properly.
How does " strongest" explain this?physical characteristics are the obvious and needed difference to sustain these environments. In both environments the strongest survive and their "strongness" is passed down to the next generation. Comparing the strongest in different environments to see who is superior may be too difficult to measure.
Pluralism encourages critical thinking over segregation regardless of environmental factors but pluralism also increases the gene pool since more intermarry.
So the act of pulling someone out of their environment both stimulates critical thinking and increases the gene pool of their off spring, the latter may make race superiority immeasurable. Comparing strickly while still in their environments also is not fair because of critical thinking differences which are environment fostered.
If there are differences today it certainly is not big enough to matter that races don't naturally intermarry within pluralistic environments. Even within x environment the rich and powerful tend to interbreed with the rich and powerful producing off spring that are rich and powerful. But there's no special ingredient in their DNA that make them rich and powerful and most of the advantage is an environment that fosters the right thinking to keep them rich and powerful. X race may adopt Y race babies and they grow up as intelligent as as their adopted race is.
Hypothetically there could be a difference but our modern world is too pluralistic that the gene pool balances enough that the difference is not measurable. In fluid dynamics the process is called infusion and essentially it's the same thing happening with people. Over enough time it all balances out and there is no difference. Pluralism taken to the farest level will eliminate race all together and the other differences will be environmental.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?