|
|
#61
07-20-2004, 06:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10,000 Views!
[ QUOTE ]
You really think they put that much thought into it? For one, they had no idea about genes or generations [/ QUOTE ] First of all, this is irrelevant. of course they didn't think about why they preferred something. Preferences can evolve without someone knowing exactly WHY the preference exists. For example, some scientists believe that men are attracted to "beautiful" women because beauty can be a good indicator of health (as opposed to someone who looks sickly)...however we dont have any idea why exactly we like beautiful women. Conscious understanding of a preference is unneccessary for such a preference to evolve. [ QUOTE ] The woman (if she really had a choice, and most didn't) put more enphasis on strength than intelligence. And if she didn't, the strong man slay the smart one. And one reason for wanting strength, and size, was so their children would be big and strong and survive. Smarts certainly helped, but a certain degree was all that was necessary. [/ QUOTE ] This may be true, but it may not be. Smarter individuals could have had a better ability to forge alliances with others or outsmart a stronger competitor. They might also use their intelligence to better obtain a mate. And as for, "a certain degree was all that was necessary," this seems hard to believe. For intelligence to evolve, by definition, increasing degrees of intelligence would lead to better reproductive fitness than lesser degrees. After the agricultural revolution, when men could actually hord "wealth" by hording food supplies, the best mate a women could have is the one at the top of the wealth/power hierarchy. 
|
|
#62
07-20-2004, 06:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Height....
"So the question then is what is the value of height for women..."
The average human height in the world has basically been increasing for the past 30,000 years or so. Its correlation is simple the improvment of diet. Its a small jump to figure that women who happend to perfer height would be picking mates in better health, better able to provide, ect. It was a much more "honest" representation of health, much higher than sklansky telling cavewoman about the physics behind rubbing two sticks together to get fire... which holds her attention untill highschool football quaterback grog just happens to lurch by.
|
|
#64
07-20-2004, 07:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10,000 Views!
[ QUOTE ]
For intelligence to evolve, by definition, increasing degrees of intelligence would lead to better reproductive fitness than lesser degrees. [/ QUOTE ] Reproductive fitness? That would be a physical thing, no? [ QUOTE ] best mate a women could have is the one at the top of the wealth/power hierarchy. [/ QUOTE ] A certainly will agree that many woman think that way! But intelligence frequently has no say in those qualities. Look at our President for starters. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#66
07-20-2004, 07:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10,000 Views!
[ QUOTE ]
Reproductive fitness? That would be a physical thing, no? [/ QUOTE ] Reproductive fitness is basically just related to the amount of kids someone is able to have in his life, both physical and nonphysical factors can contribute to it. [ QUOTE ] A certainly will agree that many woman think that way! But intelligence frequently has no say in those qualities. Look at our President for starters. [/ QUOTE ] True. However, might intelligence be a good indicator of a persons future wealth/power? If you meet 2 middle-class 14 year olds, one is smarter, one not very smart, who would you guess will grow up to have more wealth/power. Obviously there are other factors, but I do think there would be a correlation, no?
|
|
#67
07-20-2004, 08:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10,000 Views!
[ QUOTE ]
How many of you were aware that Marilyn Monroe sought out and had sex with Albert Einstein? [/ QUOTE ] In the version of the story I heard, she wanted to have sex with him, but before she could get him into bed she was killed by a lethal combination of Coca-Cola and Pop Rocks... -- M. Ruff
|
|
#68
07-20-2004, 08:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10,000 Views!
[ QUOTE ]
Or that social evolutionary theory postualtes that most young women get PHYSICALLY aroused in the presence of intelligent men. I'm not talking money hungry here. It is rather a physical manifestation due to the awareness that the fellow in question will be a good provider for children. Those women who did not have this physical reaction were likely to have died off as their dumb mates couldn't protect their offspring. Thus the majority of those left, inherited an almost insatiable desire to make love to men who demonstrated knowledge in fields like logic or probability. [/ QUOTE ] Unfortunately, anyone who believes in social evolution theory is unlikely to benefit from the opposite sex being attracted to intelligence, because social evolution is the most moronic disciplilne this side of phrenology.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
