Echidne, Amanda Marcotte, Laelaps and Larry Moran beautifully destroy the "Ten Politically Incorrect Truths About Human Nature" article from the recent issue of 'Psychology Today', the latest garbage from the Evolutionary Psychology crowd. Much fun was had by all....
Search
Profile
My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com
Buy the 2009 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:
Recent Posts
- News from PLoS ONE
- Crowdsourcing Honesty and Trust
- Clock Quotes
- Four things everyone needs to know about sharks (video)
- ScienceOnline2010: Talks Between Generations (video) - Part 6
- Clock Quotes
- ScienceOnline2010: Talks Between Generations (video) - Part 5
- Today's carnivals
- New and Exciting in PLoS ONE
- Clock Quotes
Recent Comments
- KRISTY CHINN on Doesn't reading about this make you salivate?
- R. Schauer on Crowdsourcing Honesty and Trust
- CitizenWill on Crowdsourcing Honesty and Trust
- want freedom on ACTION: let's kill this anti-OA bill before it's even born!
- Victor Antonio on Ants Vs Crabs (video)
- Coturnix on Science Journalism must-reads of the day
- Mr.Mom on Ants Vs Crabs (video)
- Maurizio Morabito on Science Journalism must-reads of the day
- Coturnix on Science Journalism must-reads of the day
- Maurizio Morabito on Science Journalism must-reads of the day
Archives
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
Blogroll
Find me on...
Make Me Happy
Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!
Make Me Solvent
I Support
Bloggie Stuff
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
« Clock Tutorial #4: On Methodology | Main | Now You Can (and Should) rate papers on PLoS ONE! »
How NOT to think about human behavior
Category: Pseudoscience • Psychology
Posted on: July 12, 2007 9:56 AM, by Coturnix
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/45396
Comments
As regards to the blue-eyed blonde as the best looking woman, statistically this is horse pucky.
Take the billion females in the world who are neither too young nor too old, and of them take the best-looking thousandth fraction. Of the million best-looking females left, take the best-looking thousandth of them, leaving a thousand real lookers. Virtually all of them will be dark-haired, dark-eyed, and dark enough complected to qualify as having a complexion rather the absence of one.
Face it, brunettes rule the world of beauty.
Posted by: CRM-114 | July 12, 2007 11:04 AM
i agree about brunettes, but that's not what the article says. it's not that blondes are more attractive; rather, that youthful women are, and blond hair is a better indicator of youth
Blond hair is unique in that it changes dramatically with age. Typically, young girls with light blond hair become women with brown hair. Thus, men who prefer to mate with blond women are unconsciously attempting to mate with younger (and hence, on average, healthier and more fecund) women. It is no coincidence that blond hair evolved in Scandinavia and northern Europe, probably as an alternative means for women to advertise their youth, as their bodies were concealed under heavy clothing.
Posted by: skyotter | July 12, 2007 1:09 PM
I know this is a fun barstool chatter, but please read the linked articles - those are serious criticism of the entire endeavor.
Posted by: coturnix | July 12, 2007 1:11 PM
Thanks for passing this along!
Posted by: Kate | July 12, 2007 2:08 PM
Do you think that Trivers-Willard is garbage?
Posted by: Colugo | July 12, 2007 6:29 PM
I read all of the posts that you link to and none of them "destroy" the referenced article. Only one or two of the "facts" actually get challenged, the rest of the commentary only looks at the hypothetical explanations. Many of the objections claim that the article contradicts itself, but what they point to do not necessarily conflict.
None of the critiques offer any evidence that counters the claims made in the article. One reference to an MIT study, intended to counter the article actually ends up supporting it's claim. The examples offered alongside the MIT study (actually published on Alternet, hmm.) do not seem analogous phenomenon. The closest example, Kamikaze, actually support the reasoning presented in "Ten Politically..." as the social conditions reflect each other.
Further, each of the critiques do not take early human society or primate groups as their frame of reference. The original article may or may not have factual support; none of the linked to critiques present reasons to disregard the claims.
Posted by: ragabr | July 12, 2007 7:23 PM
I want Zuska's take on number 10 from the article.
Posted by: Jeb, FCD | July 12, 2007 8:26 PM
Rule of thumb: anytime you see something claiming to be "politically incorrect" you are about to see BS.
Posted by: QrazyQat | July 15, 2007 3:04 PM