The fault, dear Darwin, lies not in our ancestors, but in ourselves
I of course blame mempunk for a complete failure of adult leadership, since it clearly was someone's fault that concerns about the entropic issues associated with information have been complicating discussions about how to address the pattern recognition in neural networkinng so that SkyNet can provide the next generations of HK's that will keep us safe from them.
But then again, maybe it was God's Divine Will that I listen to a totally FRIGHTENING effort to ride actual science stuff on the back of the current Jack Black HORROR MOVIE ( goggle around for Year One - at present I am not sure I need to see the film.... ) year one. I probably should note that the marketting part worked, since I pulled up the Why do we rape... article, while checking for the radio show... and found this little gem in it
Over the years these arguments have attracted legions of critics who thought the science was weak and the message (what philosopher David Buller of Northern Illinois University called "a get-out-of-jail-free card" for heinous behavior) pernicious. But the reaction to the rape book was of a whole different order. Biologist Joan Roughgarden of Stanford University called it "the latest 'evolution made me do it' excuse for criminal behavior from evolutionary psychologists." Feminists, sex-crime prosecutors and social scientists denounced it at rallies, on television and in the press.What if the core part of staying up to 3am has nothing to do about replication? Hence one is willing to debate the various true questions about the nature of knowledge and when and where are adaptive behaviors derivable from co-operations, rather than from the ridge reactionary revisionist doggerele imposed upon scientific like activities....
Yet evo psych remains hugely popular in the media and on college campuses, for obvious reasons. It addresses "these very sexy topics," says Hill. "It's all about sex and violence," and has what he calls "an obsession with Pleistocene just-so stories." And few people—few scientists—know about the empirical data and theoretical arguments that undercut it. "Most scientists are too busy to read studies outside their own narrow field," he says.
Far from ceding anything, evolutionary psychologists have moved the battle from science, where they are on shaky ground, to ideology, where bluster and name-calling can be quite successful. UNM's Miller, for instance, complains that critics "have convinced a substantial portion of the educated public that evolutionary psychology is a pernicious right-wing conspiracy," and complains that believing in evolutionary psychology is seen "as an indicator of conservatism, disagreeableness and selfishness." That, sadly, is how much too much of the debate has gone. "Critics have been told that they're just Marxists motivated by a hatred of evolutionary psychology," says Buller. "That's one reason I'm not following the field anymore: the way science is being conducted is more like a political campaign."
( op cit - why do we rape )
What if the 'intelligence revolution' is a deeper problem than merely forcing folks to do their own sourcing of information, their own vetting of information, and God Forbid, their own analysis of Information.... And that we have been in this space for a lot longer than most of us would like to talk about.
What if we are going to have to move on from evoPsych into Behavioral ecology?