Post-election special: the evolutionary psychologist knows why you vote — and shop, and tip at restaurants

_{News
November 5, 2014

Culture, Darwinism

1}_{Categories
Culture
Darwinism}

Share: Facebook; Twitter/X; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Science writer Hank Campbell offers a suggestion as to why the nonsense, both high and popular, goes largely unchallenged: “Scientists are inclined to give it a break because they cleverly use the word ‘evolutionary’ in the name.” If it sounds plausible, that is evidence that it is true. But if it doesn’t sound plausible, that just shows how counterintuitive real science can be.

A number of voices of reason have been heard over the years. The best-known dissent is not religious, incidentally. More.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

Closing time.News_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
04:28 PM
4
04
28
PM
PDT}

That picture is graphic nude images, so stuff it. I didn't post any porn. You are deluded, dishonest or ignorant.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
04:24 PM
4
04
24
PM
PDT}

Joe She did on her blog. No she didn't Joe. She posted a picture of Michelangelo's David, one of the most famous sculptures in the world. You posted just some nasty shock porn.Adapa_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
04:22 PM
4
04
22
PM
PDT}

And thanks to keith s (67) for helping me make my point.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
04:20 PM
4
04
20
PM
PDT}

5for:
Joe talks about himself like he is an automaton who has no control over his actions.
If that is what you think then I see the problem.
t’s not his fault that he is rude, it is the fault of the person who provoked him.
LoL! How can I be rude to the people who are antagonizing me? Please, do tell.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
04:19 PM
4
04
19
PM
PDT}

LH:
Lizzie did not post graphic nude images on your blog.
She did on her blog.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
04:14 PM
4
04
14
PM
PDT}

LH. more turnabout. Please read the just above and ponder what you are beginning to sound like. KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
02:55 PM
2
02
55
PM
PDT}

Adapa, Please, read carefully. I have never endorsed Joe in misbehaviour but have indicated he has had serious provocation which we should understand. Have you ever had someone accuse you to your boss to try to rob you unjustly of employment, or play at locking you out, or threaten you or family? Have you ever faced for instance racial discrimination and accusation -- this is getting too close to that for any reasonable person to be comfortable; that's like how Southern US soldiers in England during the '40's thought they could push West Indian soldiers and airmen around as they were used to doing with intimidated Southern Blacks back home -- they learned a few very hard lessons. I don't agree with what bullied or attacked West Indian soldiers did in retaliation, but I can understand that the black soldiers were provoked. It therefore seems to me that something is very wrong here with your response, wrong in a way that looks all too familiar with those who refused to see racial provocation. Please, think again. And yes, this situation is taking on the tone of too many ill-bred objectors to design thought imagining they have a right to be bullies and worse. Do you really want to enable those who are going down that kind of road? When I see signs of willingness to acknowledge grievous and even habitual wrongdoing by far too many objectors to design thought, or anything that reminds them of God, and to correct that wrong-doing, I will take concerns more seriously. Meanwhile, it should be quite clear to the reasonable onlooker that so soon as the troll vaults were opened there was a wave of abusive commentary at UD that has begun to echo a penumbra of sites whose level of behaviour has gone well beyond the pale of decency. That misbehaviour has to be addressed, and it is obvious from the thread owner's comments that it is addressing abuse on both sides of the issue. Let the onlooker also notice that all of this is on side tracks from the pivotal issues. That is no coincidence. KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
02:51 PM
2
02
51
PM
PDT}

LH: Pardon but that’s the turnabout form, no concession tactic. I see. However, if you find the suggestion that standards should be mutual discomforting, you may find it profitable to reflect on the reason for that feeling. That said, please do better, etc., etc., etc., bydand.Learned Hand_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
02:32 PM
2
02
32
PM
PDT}

Aleta, while offline it suddenly dawned on me I tried a coinage one letter away from a word I did not at all wish to suggest. That, I won't use again. KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
02:24 PM
2
02
24
PM
PDT}

5for Joe talks about himself like he is an automaton who has no control over his actions. It’s not his fault that he is rude, it is the fault of the person who provoked him. This is a very childlike attitude. And you endorse this KF by saying he is the way he is “for cause”. A lot of people here need to learn the Nelson Mandela way of being. Joe's excuse is exactly the same one you hear from wife/girlfriend beaters: "It's not my fault honey, why do you make me hit you?"Adapa_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
01:02 PM
1
01
02
PM
PDT}

Mapou, You had better behave, or Denyse will write a note to you. LOL.keith s_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:41 AM
11
11
41
AM
PDT}

People who represent UD's side in the design debate, take note: We are giving you a chance to reform. The others are not really our problem, are they?News_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:40 AM
11
11
40
AM
PDT}

There is some interesting psychology going on in this discussion. DavidD, what is the relevance of Thorton's behaviour to Joe? You seem to be saying it's ok for Joe to behave the way he does because some other person behaves badly. That is fallacious. It is also contrary to what Jesus taught which I thought was something a lot of people here followed. Joe talks about himself like he is an automaton who has no control over his actions. It's not his fault that he is rude, it is the fault of the person who provoked him. This is a very childlike attitude. And you endorse this KF by saying he is the way he is "for cause". A lot of people here need to learn the Nelson Mandela way of being.5for_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:37 AM
11
11
37
AM
PDT}

Mapou, sigh. Language. Think, broken window theory, please. A broken window not repaired invites a down spiral. KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:26 AM
11
11
26
AM
PDT}

LH: Pardon but that's the turnabout form, no concession tactic. All you have to do is show the issues on logic and actual observational facts and I will accept a point; as I have any number of times from any number of people. These days, much from my son, a budding philosopher in his own right. Try this one: FSCO/I is real, is observable and on now trillions of examples, is reliably seen to result from the causal process, intelligently designed contingency or configuration, AKA design. Similarly, on a needle in haystack analysis, it is maximally unlikely to be formed by blind chance and/or mechanical necessity (with particular reference to Darwin's little pond or the like OOL context). Next, on inference to best current explanation -- a form of inductive logic -- I hold that FSCO/I is therefore a reliable sign of design and inter alia points to design of cell based life. As with any inductive, scientific inference, this is open to correction on empirical counter-example and/or logical-mathematical analysis that shows otherwise. but until such appears I and others have a perfect epistemic, inductive logic, scientific right to this view. This is the core and main argument I have made here at UD for years, and I dare say it is not closed to correction. Can you provide the relevant correction if you believe that such exists? Indeed, there has been for two years an open offer from me to host such here at UD as a headlined post, in the particular context of Darwin's Tree of Life from the root up, cf. here just yesterday. Which BTW, if done, would devastate the design theory school of thought. I suggest, you do not have a good counter to this. I point out that he sort of rhetorical gamesmanship and worse, much worse from too many objectors, are to be understood as in the teeth of this status. So, sorry, I do not buy your turnabout insinuation that I am being closed minded on the matter. If you want to compose a feature article length response -- I gave 6,000 words as a reasonable readability target two years ago -- feel free to contact me through the web page in my always linked. Failing such, I think you may need to do some serious rethinking. KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:23 AM
11
11
23
AM
PDT}

Adapa "Joe you have a decade long history all over the web of being vile and insulting no matter how others are speaking to you. Your “I only retaliate” is so much self-serving BS to cover for your aggressive and obnoxious behavior." Double standard and extreme hypocrisy. Yes Joe is known for much of those things as even he himself will admit and of course anyone can read the proof of this in many of the places he's posted, but I highly doubt you have ever once chastised a single one of the knuckle dragging cave people over at the septic zone or after the bath house closes. Why truthfully, Joe pales in comparison to Thorton who is also fluent in three languages. English, Sarcasm and Profanity.DavidD_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:10 AM
11
11
10
AM
PDT}

Adapa:
Joe you have a decade long history all over the web of being vile and insulting no matter how others are speaking to you. Your “I only retaliate” is so much self-serving BS to cover for your aggressive and obnoxious behavior.
I commented on Joe's behavior on another thread:
Andre, If you’ve got the idea that Joe doesn’t lash out except when provoked, guess again. Here’s how he “introduced” himself to Jerry Coyne. Spend some time at Joey’s website and you’ll get a feel for his true character.
Here is Joe's "defense":
LoL! Coyne has been attacking ID and IDists for years. He has proven that he is a wind-bag- just like you. Coyne has provoked IDists for years. keith s is an imbecile.
keith s_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:09 AM
11
11
09
AM
PDT}

Keith:
In other words, we will be hundreds of times more lenient with an ID supporter than with a critic, but if we get called on it, we will suddenly start talking about “limits”.
You are not a critic. You are a chicken shit troll. So are 99% of Darwinists/materialists who comment of intelligent design sites. You should be vilified, discredited and unceremoniously kicked out. That's what I would do if I were in charge. LOL. I agree with Joe's position 100%. I say, "Kick them when they're up and kick them when they're down." There's an ideological war going on. Telling it like I see it.Mapou_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:08 AM
11
11
08
AM
PDT}

Joe, Aleta, I was taught to stand up to wrong-doers and stand up for myself and others unwilling or unable to do so. I was also taught to treat people the way they treat others. Lizzie did not post graphic nude images on your blog. You did that to her voluntarily, willfully, gleefully. It was indefensible.Learned Hand_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:06 AM
11
11
06
AM
PDT}

KS: I do not want to get into the sort of spin to the gutter that was indulged last weekend by several objectors, but I suggest you read what I just noted to A. Joe DOES have special circumstances, for cause; though he plainly needs to get back up on the wagon (which is what I called for above). Of course, If I or others at UD did not do so, that would be pounced on. As for the alleged double standard, if there were a pattern of even reasonable effort to be reasonable and to get on the wagon on the part of objectors of a certain ilk, that would be one thing, but it is clear that too many wish to drag UD down into a gutter-level no holds barred verbal brawl of a type that looks like certain anti-design sites that turn the stomach of a decent person. Of course, one intended effect of such tactics is to intimidate, then to turn off visitors and onlookers -- to discourage, disgust and drive away the decent. I repeat, therefore: if your behaviour at and/or around UD is the verbal equivalent of letting your dog tear up and scatter garbage on a neighbour's lawn, and you refuse correction then your behaviour is patently inappropriate and unacceptable. When I see you acknowledging that principle and recognising where the bulk of the problem lies [with objectors], then I will take your talking points on such or on other matters more seriously instead of having to view them as turnabout accusation tactics. Now, I have here spoken for record, frankly on track record I fully expect you to play at zero concession tactics and continue as though there was not food for thought on your plate. Please try to appreciate the head-shaking sadness that I have when I find myself forced to say so much in such plain terms. Here is what I simply ask for: reasonable, reasonably civil discussion that recognises that some people have a problem and will reach out a hand to help back up on the wagon. Is that too much to ask for? Has our civilisation so far fallen into debased mind and behaviour? KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:03 AM
11
11
03
AM
PDT}

KF, There is a long track record of objectors to design theory who have a no concession to anything policy.... Do you make concessions in these discussions? Could you give an example? As I've said before, this all smacks of the biased punctuation of conflict.Learned Hand_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
11:01 AM
11
11
01
AM
PDT}

Joe writes, " I was also taught to treat people the way they treat others." Then we were taught differently.Aleta_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:57 AM
10
10
57
AM
PDT}

Aleta- I am not saying what I do is right. It is an effect. To stop an effect you stop the cause of the effect.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:54 AM
10
10
54
AM
PDT}

Adapa, I have been attacked for that entire period and nothing you can say will ever change that fact. Anyone and everyone who disagrees with evolutionism gets attacked by rabid evolutionists. So go whine some place else, you ain't fooling anyone here.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:52 AM
10
10
52
AM
PDT}

Joe you have a decade long history all over the web of being vile and insulting no matter how others are speaking to you. Your "I only retaliate" is so much self-serving BS to cover for your aggressive and obnoxious behavior.Adapa_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:50 AM
10
10
50
AM
PDT}

Jerry, why do you characterize essentially all anti-IDists as dishonest? I’m sorry if I didn’t parse your phrasing accurately enough, but perhaps you’d be willing to explain rather than waiting for just the right question.
I have already done this. See comment #37. If someone cannot answer the question, what am I to think of them if they criticize ID. The word "phony" comes to mind. One of the synonyms of phony is fraudulent. If someone criticizes something very forcibly without having a superior alternative that makes sense, then I would say the word "dishonest" applies. It is so easy to prove me wrong by answering the question or finding someone who can. But I have been looking for an answer for over 15 years and have not found one person who can answer the question. And that includes every anti-ID person I have seen. The one exception admitted a lot of what he believed was not supported but would eventually be proven out. He was an evolutionary biologist. He had hope but no conclusive evidence. He treated the ID people with respect but disagreed with them. That is more than acceptable. What is not acceptable are those who are unwilling/unable to support their own position while criticizing others.jerry_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:48 AM
10
10
48
AM
PDT}

Aleta, I was taught to stand up to wrong-doers and stand up for myself and others unwilling or unable to do so. I was also taught to treat people the way they treat others.Joe_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:42 AM
10
10
42
AM
PDT}

Aleta, you should look at context. There is a long track record of objectors to design theory who have a no concession to anything policy and who simply repeatedly drum out talking points regardless of cogent correction, play side track and evasion games and the like. If you wish, I can talk about the fallacy of the closed hostile mind joined to speaking with disregard to truth and fairness in hopes of profiting by what is said or suggested being taken as true or even outright agit-prop tactics made notorious by several late and utterly unlamented misleaders and movements you would find it deeply offensive for me to name. Pardon if my term offended you, but it is very mild and falls under fair and justified comment. These objectors just summarised are often effectively good cop enablers of much more abusive bad cop people, who use red herrings dragged across the track of sound discussion and led away to strawmen soaked in ad hominems and set alight to cloud, confuse, polarise and poison discussion. Such trollish, nihilistic attackers seemingly demand to have a "right" to smear, falsely accuse, try outing tactics, interfere with email, vandalise blogs, out and/or threaten innocent and uninvolved family including minor children, try to get people fired or locked out of employment -- that specifically happened to Joe and is a part of his special circumstances -- and worse. In recent days, one commenter even popped up here and abused the title of being a cleric in order to attack and smear -- he is on suspension pending following conflict resolution procedures in a Scripture he suggested that he supported . . . no sign of follow up on the proper way to date and don't hold your breath. Some of the abusive, took particular umbrage at support for anti-porn efforts. Real world photos have been abused, including of respectable Grandmothers. And on and on and on. KFkairosfocus_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:40 AM
10
10
40
AM
PDT}

Joe, I was taught the two wrongs don't make a right, that one should do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and that I should do the right thing even if others don't. Therefore, the fact that others may have made rude comments doesn't excuse your behavior. That is just a basic precept of manners/civility.Aleta_{November 6, 2014
November
11
Nov
6
06
2014
10:35 AM
10
10
35
AM
PDT}

1 2 3 Next