/lit/ - Literature

>>11260835
>>human nachurrrrr

>objective morality

>>11260835
What's the point of this thread?

>What's the point of this thread?

>humans evolved to do [present-day behavior] because in the stone age i am creating out of fantasy in my head, [behavior] helped them attract mates

>>11260835
>cultural marxism

>>11260835
>free will

>>11260987
I like the term 'cultural marxism' because it pisses off all the right people.

>>11260835
>>11260949
>>11260970
>>11260987
what happened to wojak

>truth

>>11260835
>[Foucault] struck my as completely amoral, said Chomsky.

>>11260835
>the human condition

>>11261041
I like the 'smearing myself with feces in the middle of the town square' because it pisses off all the right people.

>From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs

>>11261088
>There's no denying cultural marxists in the lgbtsjw community are hiding behind political correctness and victimhood in order to rape abuse and indoctrinate children in a systematic basis

>>11261044
redditors who missed the point entirely, same thing with the ebin tofu wojaks

>Revenge is a cycle that never ends

>alpha males
>beta males
>fuck her right in the pussy
>Life has a purpose and its XY
>Life has no purpose because XY
>I read books because of the story

>>11260835
>I'm not a poetry person

>find meaning in suffering

>clean your room

>>11261109
KEK. What the fuck is that... thing? Why would anyone expose little children to such a monstrosity?

>>11260970
lmao

>>11261254
I think it's about time to declare war on the so called lgbtsjw community, they can't keep getting away with it

>>11261082
I like this one, and I'm not sure what your image is trying to convey so I'm tentatively offended

>>11260835
>Human nature clearly doesn't exist guys, genes are a fascist social construct! Now let me go back to my failing crops

>>11261528
genes encode proteins, bud.
Do you ascribe your behavior to proteins? Which protein makes you intellectually lazy, for example?

>>11261561
>genes encode proteins, bud.
Are you implying that proteins can't have an impact on someone's psychology? Because unless you're a dualist or an idealist when it comes to the mind, you've just implied a really really dumb thing.
>Do you ascribe your behavior to proteins?
"I" ascribe a significant part of the differences in behavior and mental traits to differences in genetics. Except it's not me, it's almost 60 years of study on the subject.

>>11261561
where do you think the brain comes from m8?

>>11261561
I mean, now that I think about it, it's dumb even under idealism and mind-body dualism because in the former casec ideas and proteins are made of the same non-material thing, and mind-body dualism still concedes the existence of p-zombies, which means that "proteins" definitely impact behavior even under dualism.

You said a really, really dumb thing. And you tried to be sarcastic while doing it, which makes you look even worse.

>>11261041
I like denying its existence because it pisses off all the right people.

>>11261692
I want everyone to get as pissed off as possible, an army of good ol boys with pick up trucks to drive up to the bay area so we can beat you blue haired queers and effete neoliberal bugmen in a nice clean brawl. we'll plant a gadsen flahg on the rubble after all is done.

>>11261593
>>11261600
>>11261612
folks. yes, your brain is made out of proteins. so in that sense it "affects" your behavior. In the same way that the force of gravity "affects" the current meta of professional football technique.
In these 60 years of research they never found "the gay gene" or "the conservative gene" or "the neet gene". And they never will.

"human nature" is a fallacy because you're ascribing very high level phenomena like behavioral patterns to very very low level causes, i.e. proteins. The tower of causation between genes and behavior is incredibly tall, and incredibly chaotic. To pretend to know how genes affect behavior is laughably arrogant.
We share 50% of our DNA with Bananas. Does that give me a 50% likelihood of sharing political beliefs with bananas? What's the correlation between human and banana performances in the STEM fields?

>>11260835
>blenk shlate

>>11261715
yeah but dude literally where can that behavior come from if not from genes? The entire theory of evolution is that the genes make the animal develop a certain body and act a certain way

>>11261254
I don't know, why did we expose children to giant purple dinosaurs? or weird creatures with TV screens in their stomachs? Children love it when something is surreal enough to rival their imagination and lack of understanding

>>11261729
yeah, children just love the BDSM dogmen

>>11261737
Have you seen ren and stimpy? that shit is worse then anything gay people have ever done.

>>11261737
this is absolutely normal you bigot

>>11261737
YAS KWEEN SLAY. SO DIVERSE AND PROGRESSIVE! Ah the Queers(tm), such noble and yet such pityful creatures, I would be ok with having those blue haired freaks come into our schools to educate our children on the wonders of 'fisting'.

>>11261749
GLOBOHOMO/ZOG controls the media and is pushing degeneracy on children what else is new? reminder these politically correct blue hair freaks have effectively taken control over all major corporations

>>11261715
>In these 60 years of research they never found "the gay gene" or "the conservative gene" or "the neet gene". And they never will.
Yes, because the idea that there is A gene for complex trait is something that only braindead morons like you, who keep talking about a subject you clearly know nothing about, think to be true. Howeder we do keep finding several snps for complex traits such as height, intelligence, several mental illnesses and so on.
>To pretend to know how genes affect behavior is laughably arrogant
Nobody said anything about knowing "how" genes affect behavior, because you don't need to know how they affect it to know that they do affect it or to know how much they affect it.
>We share 50% of our DNA with Bananas. Does that give me a 50% likelihood of sharing political beliefs with bananas?
No, that's not how anybody thinks this remotely works but I love that you keep burying yourself the more you talk, because people can have the definitive proof in front of their eyes that people who mock human nature don't actually have any substantial criticism or knowledge concerning the subject.

>>11261794
this post is pure ressentiment from the weak

>>11261800
methinks a wave of feral anti-science anti-civ anti-enlightenment direct action is in order, gotta stop the AI gene recombinator anti christ somehow.

>>11260835

People that often say that don't understand that what would be considered "human nature" is entirely dependent on the environment humans are in. Right now, we're in a cutthroat race to the top where if you don't have something then fuck you because I do haha fuck you. Thanks, capitalism. Very cool.

>>11261824
these chuds, amirite?

>>11261811
how does it feel to be a lapdog for transnational capital and managerial gynocracy? the myth of homosexual victimhood suits the system pretty well, as it justifies the indoctrination of children and the promotion of degenerate atomizing lifestyles.

>>11261835
(((chuds)))

>>11261834
Whether there is a misattribution of certain traits and preferences to human nature or not is irrelevant as to the existence of human nature.
People who mock the concept of human nature aren't just referring to the former, they're denying it wholesale. Out of ignorance, of course, as can be seen in this very thread.

>>11261794
I think it’s more that in the past being gay was funny, now it’s all about inclusivity and shit. I feel like the sexual part is unnecessary for children to know but the existence of same sex marriages should be there, because if Billy finds out that Tom has 2 moms or dads then Billy is going to bully the shit out of Tom unless he’s told that it’s okay for that to be a thing. The sex stuff should be when they’re in high school and where the can experiment with their sexuality among other things

>>11261881
>unless he’s told that it’s okay for that to be a thing.
But it's not, so why lie to children?

>>11261869
Peterson, Quillette, (((Lehmann))), (((Harris))) are obvious apologists for cultural boomerism, and israeli foreign policy though. the middle class republic is not manifest evopsych destiny but a historical anomaly. go back to your great grandparents, they lived through the coming of radio, electricity, world wars, the suburban world petersonites are nostalgic about came after the wars, you can't have a capitalist ethic without constant massive disruption. maybe it's not sjws or cultural marxists eroding 'traditional values' but new technologies of communication and surveillance.

>>11261254
Have you seen the shit kids watch these days?
https://youtu.be/acTcMUJ6qBI

>>11261891
Because what you’re saying is subjective and also because Timmy is a good little boy
He doesn’t deserve to be harassed for what his family does

>>11261881
it feels like a weird inverted version of christianity, all traditional standards of heroism and righteousness have gone of to the garbage heap, and the only thing we have now is this screeching mass of rainbow haired victim homos.

>>11261898
Did you reply to the wrong guy? Literally none of what you said has anything to do with my post.

>>11261908
purple haired lgbtsjw activists have been spotted distributing these disgusting propaganda comics outside schools and in children's playgrounds. am I supposed to be ok with it because diversity and cultural marxism?

>>11261908
If he has two faggot parents I guarantee that he will be messed enough to be bullied for other reasons, too.

>>11261926
what the fuck did I just read. The internet should be abolished.

>>11261909
I mean action shows are still a thing so heroism and bravery still exist, but now it shows that women can do all the chivalry stuff too

>>11261926
whens the last time you've seen a kid read something they've been given and not be forced to read it? kids don't give a shit about social politics

>>11261952
>i m-mean, m-maybe most kids won't r-read it
is this your defense of this disgusting behavior?

>>11261944
it's all about homo cultural marxism, planet transgender it's what they want, nothing but politically correct focus group ZOG approved dreck on tv and you can't criticise it without being branded a bigot. I am honestly incapable of thinking of lgbt 'people' as human, to me you are an indistinct mass of malevolent goblin-like entities conspiring against everything i hold dear

>>11261972
I don't know, it's not like anything is stopping you from handing out bibles in the playground. hell i can go to a playground right now and give people the unibomber's manifesto because freedom

>>11261726
circumstances. You witness something, the memory of that event informs your decisions for the rest of your life. Here, the computer analogy is helpful, brain is the hardware, thoughts are software.

>>11261800
>something that only braindead morons like you, (...) think to be true.
is this some fresh new rhetorical device where you accuse the opponent of believing the idea he just criticized?
>complex traits
>such
>as
>HEIGHT.
whoa.
> you don't need to know how they affect it to know that they do affect it
so they do affect it. Is that your entire fucking point? I said as much.
My point is that human nature can't be invoked to explain away things like "why capitalism is the only alternative" because, as you've conceded, we don't know HOW genes affect behavior.

I'm saying "human nature" is primarily used as a fallacy. That there is some underlying nature to our behavior, sure. But it is so sooo much broader than we can even fathom. Think of the sheer breadth of variety in human cultures throughout history. Think of what's to come in the next 1000 years if we don't covfefe ourselves. And then some pasty ancap who's never even left his home country ( why am I trying to be neutral? never left the United States of America) thinks he's got a handle on "human nature". This is the arrogance I'm talking about.

>>11261973
well i'm not gay, also cultural marxism is a lie

>SCIENCE

>we need more proof for climate change
>1 study about rats in a cage with a lot of food is representative for all of humanity

>>11260983
>humans can be whatever they want only society stops them :(

this thread makes me angry.

congratulations?

>>11261088
wow youre pissed off, would u look at that

also sage

>>11261692
wow ur also pissed off. startin to see a trend here hmmmmmm

>>11260983
You do realize this way of thinking is also a product of evolution? Not only that, but our repeated patterns of behavior and even emotions have resulted in many self-defeating errands humans stick with. If society didn't change, or didn't exist, many of these traits would be beneficial.
For example: abortion and infanticide. They give no biological benefit these days, but they did back in the days before society.

>>11264167
>>11264175
>haha look at me I like to piss people off with fascist ideas I am very intelligent
Sage

>>11264206
>For example: abortion and infanticide. They give no biological benefit these days, but they did back in the days before society.

Fuck off with that shit.
Abortion disappropiately affects black people.
For example, in 2017, 7% of mothers in Kansas were black but 22% of mothers who had abortions were black. Also affects liberals and poor the most, and that's a good thing; being against abortion is being pro-white genocide.

>>11261881
That's retarded, from birth i have been told about and exposed to people with lots of different hair colours, i still bullied gingers though.

>natural law

>>11264283
I can prove natural law in person through a little empirical test.

I'm not owned your owned

>>11260983

You're right. You can give up breathing, drinking, eating, as in the cases of holding one's breath, or fasting.

Human beings are infinitely malleable and can't be pinned down in any way whatever. Because if any sort of definite characteristics could be attributed to them at all, then such could be called X, where X is: human nature, that which it is in the nature of humans to do, need, be. And since of course human beings are infinitely malleable and always wholly unpredictable tabulae rasae, human nature in any form doesn't really exist, is always down to culture, and can't be appealed to as a general framework for common understanding of human behavior.

You're right.

>>11264323
What if I told you everything governing human behavior and interaction is simply just an aspect of the souls in motion?

That what you look like is how you act? That this is your soul trying to make a statement on reality?

>>11264333
>soul
god cucks can fuck off

>>11264339
Atheshits can cuck off, fag

>>11264345
I'm not atheist because it is also a religious position just like Satanism is.

>>11261715
holy shit this is the most intellectually dishonest thing ive ever read
you
fucking
dipshit

>, bud
>folks,
god dude shut the fuck up
the terms in contention here arent even well defined enough to make your post anything but vague gibberish, the part about gene resemblance to bananas has literally fuck all to do w/ the point at hand (okay? so some genes are more vital than others in determining difference? what does that have to do with any variation of a human nature argument?), and so on

>>11261989
>My point is that human nature can't be invoked to explain away things like "why capitalism is the only alternative" because, as you've conceded, we don't know HOW genes affect behavior.
what if the causal reason for capitalisms inevitability lies elsewhere (say, in the we're wired to desire dopamine & serotonin)? what about not knowing how genes affect behavior (to what extent? we certainly know to some extent how *emergent patterns of genes* cause changes in patterns of behavior, those emergent patterns necessarily finding their root at the level of individual genes or their interactions, thru empirical studies. your entire point rests on not realizing this, and the obfuscation youve created to deny any observable relationship between anything thats composed of what at its root is genes / their interactions (although we may not know THAT relationship; what makes it its root) and human behavior) removes credency from any assertion of human behavior? does a universally true assertion about human nature (one that works in favor of or confirms capitalism inevitability, for example) have to prove that it knowns the connections between genes and human behavior? clearly fucking not. ubiquitously true assertions can even be literary, unscientific, or informal, and still true.

>I'm saying "human nature" is primarily used as a fallacy. That there is some underlying nature to our behavior, sure. But it is so sooo much broader than we can even fathom. Think of the sheer breadth of variety in human cultures throughout history. Think of what's to come in the next 1000 years if we don't covfefe ourselves. And then some pasty ancap who's never even left his home country ( why am I trying to be neutral? never left the United States of America) thinks he's got a handle on "human nature". This is the arrogance I'm talking about.
cool internet pseudo-sociology dude. youre really clueless. god your posts are this fucking shit amalgamation of smug e-science and e-sociology, resting on nothing. go call ppl chuds elsewhere

>>11264220
epic satire dude
>HAHA I AM SILLY AND A FAILSON AND THE PEROSN WHOS QUOTING ME IS SMARTER

>>11261926
I hate this cartoon, but do you actually have proof that people handed this out to kids without anyone stopping them?

>>11261082
That is actually the name of a very good book by pic related.

>>11261989
human culture has been so vast maan... 100000 years of variations on fuedal monarchist heirarchical bureaucracies, and then with the advent of industry and scalable markets english liberalism / neoliberalism making its way into every crevice of the globe, overturning every commune or socialistic experiment. like, uh, so vast. human nature is defintely infinitely malleable and the New Communist Man will usher once i stop listening to podcasts and do revolution. i'm a fucking clown

UUUUURRRRRRRRRRR

>>11264351
>ubiquitously true assertions can even be literary, unscientific, or informal, and still true.
I should add, so can their PROOFS. its as simple as not being able to provide counterexamples that cant be explained away within the bounds of the assertion. how much of a fucking tool do u have to be to grant to your side that human nature is superborad b/c, um, "diverse human communites" (lol study history shitbird), but demand investigation into the connections between genes and their behavioral affects before any slimming of the conception of human nature is conceded?

>>11264351
>>11264351
>ubiquitously true assertions can even be literary, unscientific, or informal, and still true.
I should add, so can their PROOFS. its as simple as not being able to provide counterexamples that cant be explained away within the bounds of the assertion. how much of a fucking tool do u have to be to grant to your side that human nature is superbroad b/c, um, "diverse human communites" (lol study history shitbird), but demand investigation into the connections between genes and their behavioral affects before any slimming of the conception of human nature is conceded?
still amazed by the intellectual dishonesty at play. u and ur ilk (those that use this argument) r fucking trash

neoliberalism won and mark fisher is dead lol

>>11261041
shitting from my mouth to trigger the libs

>>11261136
I mean that's true though
Past injustices are always used as a pretense to commit future injustices

>>11261737
most of human's 200,000 years of existence was tiny hierarchies of gang rapists

>>11261220
is that a penis or a jelly fish i can never tell

>>11264553
that's because your gay lol

>>11264541
epic twitter joke haha
fuck chuds. fuck failsons. fuck racism.

>>11261836
>lapdog critiquing a lapdog as he downplays his own sources of cultural perfusion

>>11261834
Humans are generally cutthroat everywhere everytime, it just that nomadic foragers are the least individualized (they have the strongest in-group-out-group mentalities) and the greatest degree of cultural and economic exchange ever that characterizes globalization has led to the greatest thinning of the borders between clans, tribes, nations, peoples.

>>11261926
Lmao, no source
I think you just hate gays

>>11265262
Wtf is a failson

>>11261254
because post modernism tells us that science is fake so you can have 36 genders and this is normal healthy behavior.

IF YOU CHECK THE PICTURE you see the dude has tattoos, probably fucking prison tattoos at that.

>>11261898
>maybe it's not sjws or cultural marxists eroding 'traditional values' but new technologies of communication and surveillance.
These aren't at all mutually exclusive. If anything they have a symbiotic relationship.

>>11261989
>whoa.
Height is a complex trait, you moron. Do you know what "complex trait" means? And I love how you skipped the other ones, I wonder why.
>so they do affect it. Is that your entire fucking point?
No, my point is that they affect it A LOT, which makes a) blank-slate theories false and b) extremely difficult to create new socialist men or whatever else.
>My point is that human nature can't be invoked to explain away things like "why capitalism is the only alternative"
Of course it isn't, and?

>>11261082
How are there still cerebral folds if it's being stretched out from within?

>>11260987
>tfw know cultural marxism is bullshit but still use it
Who else /honestfraud/ here?

>>11261254
umm sorry sweaty but that's just how some people are, ok? It's 2018, time to get with the times.

Slippery slope don't real. First you let fags marry, then you get Slaanesh to teach your kids.

>Material conditions dictate human society

>>11260987
Is that a tangerine?

I could grow wings at will if oppressive capitalist ideology didn't alienate me.

>>11264323
>human nature is not adapting and developing mind by learning

>>11260983
>genetics and psychology are just spooks
>it's normal for a 2 year old to be transgender
>please ignore their 45% suicide rates
>please don't read the social conquest of earth it's just rightwing propaganda

>>11266309
Preach sister

>>11261561
>>11261715
This is actually really embarrassing. At least read the academic work you're attempting to critique.

>humans are not biological creatures programmed to engage in behavior that is conducive to reproduction

>>11261715
>To pretend to know how genes affect behavior is laughably arrogant.
That's fundamentally distinct from saying that genes don't affect behavior at all. And if genes don't affect behavior in any meaningful way whatsoever, why do other species (even non social ones who can't "learn" from example) know how to behave in order to survive and propagate itself?

>>11268144
>/mu/ tripfag
Holy shit what the fuck are you doing here.

>>11261989
>he's a blank slatist

>knowledge is possible

>we all equal n shieet

>>11268192
doesn't mean we shouldn't all be treated an equal amount of respect as a standard

>>11268216
>muh morals
strong do what they will; weak suffer what they must

>>11268216
Obviously. It's just that when you start from the axiomatic belief that people are congenitally equal in terms of ability, you're going to blame any achievement discrepancy between people on oppression

>>11268231
The weak are strong when unionized. The strong will always be few, so they need the consent of the many if they want the society they live in to function.

>>11268241
the masses rarely band together
to this day the masses are tricked into culling each other in the name of nation, religion and morality

>>11268254
and yet the strong are still hung, guillotined, or any other form of execution when it happens

>>11268254
Extreme inequality often breeds a despair that leads to higher rates of crime (look at the relationship between the GINI index and crime rates), so even if the weak never organize it's in the interest of the strong to keep things from getting too oppressive if they want the societies they live in to function.

>>11261254
>>11265346
>>11266000
Praise Kek fellow redditors

Oh hey buddy-folks. I thought this thread was dead
>>11264351
you're a tough one. Those nested parenthesis are a real chore to parse. Also you accuse me of stating things "resting on nothing" yet, aside from name-calling, your post rests on:
>thru (sic) empirical studies
and this is simply a weasel term. I'd unironically love to read academic papers about how certain genes make people do specific things. please send the links.

>>11264391
you're actually using your ignorance of the diversity of human cultures as an argument! holy shit! screenshotted.

>>11265872
height may be more difficult to glean from the genome compared to things you can observe directly in the biochemistry of the body, but still, to put it side-by-side with intelligence is really weird.
I didn't mention the others because you were off-topic. Intelligence (as in raw brain capacity) and several mental illnesses are essentially structural / chemical. nowhere near the complexity of behavior.
> they affect it A LOT
how? fucking how? that's what I've been saying. If you don't understand the mechanism you don't know shit. If your only argument is "well, what else could it be??" I've already answered this elsewhere, I'll copy-paste it:
>circumstances. You witness something, the memory of that event informs your decisions for the rest of your life. Here, the computer analogy is helpful, brain is the hardware, thoughts are software.
> a) blank-slate theories false
you only disprove blank-slate with a COMPLETE alternative theory.
Also, I'll clarify that I don't believe in complete blank-slate. If I had to peg it on a number I'd say behavior is somewhere around 5% innate. If I'm wrong it's because I'm over-estimating.
Crack whores give their kids up for adoption, if they're raised by good middle class parents the kid will grow up to be a a good middle class citizen. Chinese baby raised in France is a french person, etc, etc.
> b) extremely difficult to create new socialist men or whatever else.
don't know what that fuck this is even supposed to mean.

>Of course it isn't, and?
you're asking "and?", but in that sentence I explained that was basically my entire point. and nothing, that's my point. I suppose we're in agreement.

>>11268151
oh, I didn't catch yours.
I mostly replied to what you're saying >>11269354 here as well.
I never declared "I am a blank-slateist" or "genes don't affect behavior in any way whatsoever"
The thing is, and I know this first hand, even behaviors that feel instinctual or habits you've kept your whole life can be changed. If our behavior was dictated by genes this wouldn't be possible.
Think about how much we've altered our behavior since pre-history. We're sitting here, in different parts of the globe, tapping our fingertips on this strange artifact. We don't use our brains for any of the same things our ancestors used them for. These were all "software" changes. Our brains didn't evolve to use laptops.
I guess people are pretty jaded to these kinds of observations. well, whatever.

>>11268064
>suicide is a bad thing
>actually being this scared of death
kek
lifecuck detected

>>11269468
Maybe you guys are arguing past each other with regards to what instinctual behavior means? People who refer to human nature typically don't mean "human beings will act this way no matter what," what they usually mean is something like "human beings are predisposed to act this way, and while they can suppress their instincts and start to act in other ways, those instincts still influence their desires to some extent."

Human possibility is like a continent. Human nature is like the paved roads. You can technically veer off the roads, but those roads offer the path of least resistance.

>>11269468
overriding instincts is a genetically determined behavior

>>11269510
Sure. I'm don't think I have misrepresented their arguments so badly like
>human beings will act this way no matter what
My biggest point is that, to use your metaphor, the road of least resistance is 45 lanes wide, and we haven't even seen half of those lanes yet.

>>11269519
laughed out loud here. This is either the highest quality trolling I've seen in a while or you're gonna have to elaborate a bit.

>>11269531
you override you sex drive when you decide not to rape some bitch with a fat ass walking down the street

>>11269531
>the road of least resistance is 45 lanes wide, and we haven't even seen half of those lanes yet.
Seems unreasonably optimistic to me. There's no reason to believe that history and anthropology don't give us a good picture as to the extent of human nature. If something is ubiquitous across time and cultures, then chances are that it's inherent.

>>11269560
ok, which one's the rape-suppression gene?

>>11269562
couple problems here. First, basic scientific practice, you have to isolate your variables.
>If something is ubiquitous across time and cultures...
than we need to check out what material circumstances were also common to all of those cultures. And there's a lot of them! We all live on the same planet.
Except now we're drastically altering our material circumstances and guess what? We're adapting our behavior to match at speeds at which genetic mutation could not possibly accomplish the feat.
In case I'm being too subtle, I'm talking about historical materialism here.

>>11269594
dunno but there's probably a gene for it
or some overarching "dont act like a nigger" gene related to intelligence

>>11269594
I buy the materialist conception of history to an extent, but to deny the fact that environmental conditions affect not just how genes are expressed but which genes get to pass on and influence future behavior is absurd. We genetically adopted to the material circumstances all of those cultures shared.

>>11269604
we're right back to the beginning of the conversation here. Genes encode proteins. What proteins make you "not act like a..." or affect your behavior directly in anyway?
More importantly, What is the ~mechanism~ by which proteins can directly affect behavior?

>>11269614
can you clarify that last sentence?

>>11269628
>can you clarify that last sentence?
The people with the genes most conducive to sexual success in those material circumstances were more likely to pass on the genes that made them sexually successful.

>>11269643
ok. And sexual behavior (of the reproductive kind) falls within that 5% I talked about. Some of the vestigial innate behavior patterns.

>>11269659
Sexual and natural selection don't just select for certain sexual behavior, they select for all traits. Back at the start of the agricultural revolution when 17 women reproduced for every 1 man, the genes that made that one man so successful (usually an innate intelligence or perseverance that allowed him to become wealthy enough to be able to afford to take care of that many wives) pass on more than other genes.

>>11269681
> people become rich because of innate characteristics
let's not.

>>11264391
>, overturning every commune or socialistic experiment.
There are plenty of communal tribes out there right now bud. Just because you think human history is greek > rome > middle ages > now, doesn't mean it encompasses the whole of human experience.

>>11265346
Nigger all of his tattoos have different colors and well drawn lines, what kind of prison are you going to?

>>11269699
Sort of, yes. Less so since the advent of capitalism, but back when wealth was determined by an ability to grow more crops successfully than your neighbor could, innate ability certainly played a role.

>>11269699
You think intelligence doesn't play a large role in becoming rich?

>>11269740
no.
this is a pointless tangent. intelligence and other evolutionary advantages are only the platform upon which any supposed "human nature" would exist.

>rôle

>>11260835
>not wanting to be schizophrenic
>thinking that normality (AKA HOMOphrenia) is better than intellectual freedom of the truest kind

>>11261715
>folks
you need to go back.

>>11269761
>no.

>>11269790
as in "no, I don't think it doesn't".

>>11261834
holy shit you must get so much pussy you're so fucking enlightened

>>11269807
>>11261834
hmmmmmmm anon A sounds like a dick but Anon B is snarkily implying that if I agree I won't be able to reproduce. fuck white ppl

>>11261931
>homophobia

>>11264206
abortion and infanticide may give personal benefits but in order to appraise them as advantageous Darwinian behavior you need to also look at how they affect the people around you (including the baby) because whether the self survives or lives happily is unimportant compared to the proliferation of the self's genes which may exist in other related organisms

>>11269941
homophilia

>>11261109
>Today we have a special guest children! Everyone give a friendly welcome to gay Satan!
>the children look skeptical

>>11269941
>this is how being a proud fucking homophobe 2018 AD feels like

I unironically fucking HATE the lgbtsjwbbqwtfhiv/aids community and I am not afraid to show it.

>>11270011
In my head I classify homophobes into "how much homo-affection would it take to break them" categories.

you honestly sound like the mere scent of man, if it were just the right kind, might do it for you.

>>11261881
fact: most ''gays'' are actually just libtards doing it to virtue signal

Based thread, Nazi evolutionism is almost as evil as an employer and an employee agreeing on a wage they're both happy with.

>>11270011
See you at the pride parade you closeted faggot.

we are anynonous we're a le gion aspect us

>>11270048
new york times, gays, cnn, guardian, disney, google, cultural marxism, get that ZOG shit outta my face

>>11270048
sodomy is a cultural marxist religion: they have their own rituals (pride) their own symbols(rainbow), inquisition that persecutes heretics for blasphemy(''hate speech''). sodomy has effectively supplanted christianity as the official religon of the west.

I'm just here to save all these brainlet jpgs.

>>11270048
>See you at the pride parade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcqYHKV6-1Y

>>11270048
>arachnophobic?
>you must want to FUCK spiders

>>11270142
But there’s a difference in being uncomfortable with spiders and posting virulent anti-spider propaganda on internet meme boards, carefully saving all anti-spider news stories you come across, boasting about your vocal opposition to spiders and so on.

>>11270170
I do that though.

>>11270170
oh please, anyone with half a brain can tell what these freaks are REALLY after.

>>11270170
Spider detected.
Fuck off you eight legged creep, your kind isn't welcome here.

>>11269354
>is really weird.
It's not really weird, it's a complex trait like the others.
>how? fucking how? that's what I've been saying. If you don't understand the mechanism you don't know shit.
Wow, you literally have never read one page on the subject of behavioral genetics.
Here's a couple articles on the genetics of intelligence:
https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2014105, https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg.2017.104
You don't need to know "how" chocolate produces the specific taste it does to know that chocolate is responsible for a great deal of of the difference in taste between chocolate cake and lemon cake.
You guys are all identical: never read anything on the subject yet to feel entitled to keep talking about with your basic bitch-tier objections.
>nowhere near the complexity of behavior.
Is drug use behavior? Because there's plenty of studies on the genetics of that too, including specific snps for it.

>>11269802
Except that if you take a child at 12 with an IQ that is two standard deviation higher than normal, he's quite likely to become successfull and well off later in life, even if he comes from a below average household in terms of SES.
Denying that intelligence is a factor in economic success is one of the reasons why people laugh at leftists.

>>11270560
your link redirects to to nature.com for me.
>You don't need to know "how" chocolate...
you've all bombarded me with reductionist analogies for why not comprehending the mechanism is good enough. It's not the same. Human behavior is orders of magnitude more complex than fucking taste sensation.

Also no one on this damn thread has even acknowledged that life experiences could also play a large role, allowing me to get further into it, which is the real meat of the argument.

>>11270567
Jesus.
fucking.
Christ.
Ok, full sentence reply:
>You think intelligence doesn't play a large role in becoming rich?
No I do not think intelligence doesn't play a large role in becoming rich.
OR yes, I do think intelligence plays a role in becoming rich.
FFS
> he's quite likely to become successfull
He's also quite likely to be hit by a bus or die of peanut allergies. Believing the bootstraps myth is why people laugh at capitalists.

>>11261711
Come back please! I loved last time the basement dwellers came to Berkeley, was good fun seeing you all beaten to a pulp and running to the cops

>>11261800
Imagine being this pissed off...

>>11270602
>Believing the bootstraps myth is why people laugh at capitalists.
A conception of success as one that requires innate ability over everything else is the opposite of the bootstrap myth. It's replacing one form of luck (being born into the right family), with another (being born with a high IQ).

>>11270602
>your link redirects to to nature.com for me.
Then feel free to read "Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings" and "The new genetics of intelligence".
>Human behavior is orders of magnitude more complex than fucking taste sensation.
That doesn't change the fact that you can control for the confounding factors in multiple ways thus letting you roughly quantify which proportion of the variance in that trait is determined by genetic variation.
>Also no one on this damn thread has even acknowledged that life experiences could also play a large role
Because it's such an uncontroversial thing that you don't need to aknowledge it every single time you talk about the subject, especially if the disagreement is cenetered around genetics.

Again, is drug use/addiction behavior? Because if it is...see my previous point.

>>11270602
>He's also quite likely to be hit by a bus or die of peanut allergies.
He's far more likely to become successful than to be hit by a bus or die of peantu allergies.
He's far more likely to be come successful than someone with the same SES but lower cognitive abilities.
He's also generally more likely to become successful than someone with greater SES but lower cognitive abilities, with the exclusion of extreme differences in SES.

>>11261715
hahaha fuck me, I can't even get through this dog shit. Let me just say though, if you change the genetically encoded structure in someone's brain you could make them such a radically different person with the most minor of changes

>>11261180
Recognizing honestly this requires a certain amount of intellect.