4 Comments
User's avatar
Bruce's avatar
2hEdited

The process of animal domestication involves selection based on a range of criteria but in almost all cases one of those characteristics is selection for diminished aggression.

When selecting for diminished aggression the evidence seems to indicate the offspring tend towards more gracile and neotonous facial features and greater variability of hair coloring.

In comparing the level of aggression between typical human and chimp behavior, humans are clearly much less aggressive. This raises a question as to the extent human evolution has selected for characteristics resulting from the what might be described as self domestication.

Is it possible that different ecological environments may have encouraged or alternatively discouraged the self domestication of humans?

Could this shed some light on observed agregate differences between the races in characteristics such as facial gracility, hair color variation, IQ, academic achievement, criminality and levels of violence?

Hoping that's not enough to guarantee cancellation for life.

Expand full comment
Nathan Woodard's avatar

In your best estimation, what percentage of social science professors at elite American universities hold the view that the very concept of evolutionary behavioral biology is invalid?

Expand full comment
JamieHMiller's avatar

I grew up in multicultural Australia, when diversity actually meant unity.

Everyone had a different heritage to celebrate—and a shared commitment to common law democracy that bound us together.

We used to ask, “Where are you from?” because we were curious, not cruel.

Now we can’t.

Why not?

Celebrating our differences never divided us; pretending they don’t exist just might.

Expand full comment
DC's avatar

Does he think the Peruvian tridactyls are legitimate?

Expand full comment