Last edited by Strewth; 01-07-2009 at 11:48 AM..
Reason: Unfortunately, it's the only active thread right now, and I'm too lazy to find something worthwhile.
If you are going to respond selfishly to other posts, that is to take offense and assume unjust intent, then that's all your going to see, a useless thread.
__________________ "Belief is an obligatory position" - AronRa
New research into the prescripted nature of gender-identity reveals a complex interplay between genetics and environment resulting in structural differences in the brains of human adults. These structural differences may result from learned patterns of behaviour.
Result 'from' or result 'in'?
edit - I didn't find the above claim anywhere in the paper you cited, which is why I'm asking. Regardless of whether you meant to say 'from' or 'in', it doesn't seem like a very sound claim, given what we know about inherited traits.
__________________ ^ live one
Last edited by ColdLogic; 01-08-2009 at 04:48 PM..
edit - I didn't find the above claim anywhere in the paper you cited, which is why I'm asking. Regardless of whether you meant to say 'from' or 'in', it doesn't seem like a very sound claim, given what we know about inherited traits.
Structural changes occur in the brains of all animals. Approximated at 100 billion weight adjustments per day.
I had an article that discussed the role of androgens and experience in structural changes in different sexes. But I can't find it now
http://www.pnas.org/content/97/8/4398.full
__________________ "Belief is an obligatory position" - AronRa
Structural changes occur in the brains of all animals. Approximated at 100 billion weight adjustments per day.
I had an article that discussed the role of androgens and experience in structural changes in different sexes. But I can't find it now
http://www.pnas.org/content/97/8/4398.full
I don't doubt it. I'm trying to connect the dots between that and the interplay between genetics and environment, which I took to be a reference to natural selection.
I don't doubt it. I'm trying to connect the dots between that and the interplay between genetics and environment, which I took to be a reference to natural selection.
Ho, no! That's not what I meant. I just meant that what we consider to be "Womanish" or "Manish" is part genetic predisposition, but also a huge part social norms.
The more a guy is encouraged to rough-house as a child, the more natural the behaviour becomes as his brain is plastic and wired to such behaviour. The same can apply to traditionally female patterns of behaviour.
__________________ "Belief is an obligatory position" - AronRa
Meh maybe. On the one hand, I don't think that's saying much, certainly nothing that could be described as cutting edge in the world of genetics or pop psychology. And on the other hand, I'm more inclined to say that it is all genetic predisposition, and the effects of encouragement/discouragement of that kind of behavior are largely illusionary.
Meh maybe. On the one hand, I don't think that's saying much, certainly nothing that could be described as cutting edge in the world of genetics or pop psychology. And on the other hand, I'm more inclined to say that it is all genetic predisposition, and the effects of encouragement/discouragement of that kind of behavior are largely illusionary.
Illusory? They have been demonstrated in controlled testing.
Stereotype Threat itself is a determinant of behavior and in the particular test scenario, Asian Women performed above or below average as a result of different stereotype primers. Observer Expectancy effect/Pygmallion effect/Rosenthal effect is pretty solid science. So is Pavlovian Conditioning, Hebb's Law and the neuroscientific equivelent Long-Term Potentiation.
__________________ "Belief is an obligatory position" - AronRa
Illusory? They have been demonstrated in controlled testing.
Stereotype Threat itself is a determinant of behavior and in the particular test scenario, Asian Women performed above or below average as a result of different stereotype primers. Observer Expectancy effect/Pygmallion effect/Rosenthal effect is pretty solid science. So is Pavlovian Conditioning, Hebb's Law and the neuroscientific equivelent Long-Term Potentiation.
Eh I think we're largely in agreement and might be talking past each other. My last line was admittedly an over-zealous use of 'illusory' to emphasize that the dichotomy of genes or memes might be a false one. I had to look up Rosenthal, but from my understanding of stereotype threat and observer-expectation bias I don't think they refute a gene-centered view of sexual behavior. It's not entirely clear to me that such behavior is meme-driven. That memes can spread (by whatever means) is tempting and probably true, but their influence over behavior still must reduce to the genetic policies encoded in our brain.
Eh I think we're largely in agreement and might be talking past each other. My last line was admittedly an over-zealous use of 'illusory' to emphasize that the dichotomy of genes or memes might be a false one. I had to look up Rosenthal, but from my understanding of stereotype threat and observer-expectation bias I don't think they refute a gene-centered view of sexual behavior. It's not entirely clear to me that such behavior is meme-driven. That memes can spread (by whatever means) is tempting and probably true, but their influence over behavior still must reduce to the genetic policies encoded in our brain.
Well, I'm not going to defend memes in regards to gender-typing. I'm much more attuned to Ecological Systems Theory.
Quote:
Ecological Systems Theory, also called "Development in Context" or "Human Ecology" theory, specifies four types of nested environmental systems, with bi-directional influences within and between the systems. The theory was developed by Urie Bronfenbrenner, generally regarded as one of the world's leading scholars in the field of developmental psychology.
The four systems:
Microsystem: Immediate environments (family, school, peer group, neighborhood, and childcare environments)
Mesosystem: A system comprising connections between immediate environments (i.e., a child’s home and school)
Exosystem: External environmental settings which only indirectly affect development (such as parent's workplace)
Macrosystem: The larger cultural context (Eastern vs. Western culture, national economy, political culture, subculture)
Later, a fifth system was added:
Chronosystem: The patterning of environmental events and transitions over the course of life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_systems_theory
I think it is probably the case that the genetics determine some basic behavioural propensities. Inclinations to perform sexual behaviour and to whatever extent we are each equipped with certain receptors. But I don't know that structural differences are actually the result of raw genetics. For example they say that the splenium (corpus callosum) is larger in women. But this could just as easily be due to a lifetime of living in dichotomous society. These genetics propensities would create an almost ubiquitous dichotomy across the planet, such that in general females would be submissive, nurturing, etc... but I also think that the reason cultures differ in this respect so much is the sheer adaptability of the brain. It would also explain the differences within sexes and would be a cost-effective solution for evolution. The brain itself is not that cose-effective. Other species have different gender roles, lions as an example. We share a common ancestry with two living species, Chimpanzees and Bonobos. The social dynamics, gender-roles and mating habits of these two species are drastically different. Males dominate chimpanzees, but females pack together and dominate in bonobo societies. A female bonobo will murder a male bonobo for avoiding sex. So it is difficult to draw a strict paradigm simply from our evolutionary ancestry.
__________________ "Belief is an obligatory position" - AronRa
Strewth is gone, and that's unsettling.
I found the few posts of hers that I had read to be quite capable. Sarcasm doesn't warrant a global ignore imo.
Strewth is gone, and that's unsettling.
I found the few posts of hers that I had read to be quite capable. Sarcasm doesn't warrant a global ignore imo.
I don't get it.
TBH few people said anything here that makes sense to me.
__________________ "Belief is an obligatory position" - AronRa
now that got my attention, that's some good readings and for some reason i feel like a pancake rack em up and a sip the maple syrup
'cause i'm a lumberjack and...
__________________ Time is still the infinite jest.
