Evolutionary Psychology

Page 2 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by xenosimiana on Tue Sep 26, 2017 7:07 pm

I'm not surprised. You hurt her feelings and she wasn't expecting someone to have a problem with the course. Being confronted the response ends up being childish in a way calling the person a liar and ignoring.

xenosimiana

Posts : 302
Join date : 2016-11-12
Location : Detroit, MI

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Tue Sep 26, 2017 7:21 pm

Did I hurt her feelings? Probably. Guess I thought hurt feelings was synonymous with evo psych already anyway.

Well anywho, I would think that she'd be aware to some degree that evo psych was controversial and historically full of BS. And I kept that in mind when writing.

There are a couple approvers and higher-ups actually that I'm going to try next. With a different approach. I think at least one of them is aware of what the course is and might engage in discussion.

(You know, I COULD actually impersonate someone if I wanted to. It's very easy to send emails that look like they came from someone elses email lol. Imagine sending the rant from one of the approvers email. It's a cruel but funny thought and I'm obviously not going to do it)
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Thu Sep 28, 2017 4:53 pm

What's super weird is when people try to defend evolutionary psychology under false assumptions. Like the textbook, initially tried to counterargue dissenters, but it wasn't very thorough. I think this site is a better example for what I'm trying to say

http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/projects/human/epfaq/hate.html

"Why do some people hate evolutionary psychology?"
because as they put it
"I [the critic] want political change. Political change requires changing people. Evolutionary psychologists argue that people have innate and unchangeable natures."

But...it doesn't. That's not what evo psych is and not even what we're talking about. A better description of evolutionary psychology, as what I have read in this book is. "Evolutionary psychology argues that the most comprehensive way to look at someones psychology is to instead look at a completely different person who supposedly lived millions of years ago and is distantly related to you."

Here's a skit. "Oh yeah, well I think the best way to understand your issues with your children is to instead look at this guy over here, Mark."
"But what's Mark got to do with this"
"He's you're distant ancestor from millions of years ago"
"Oh ok, everything makes sense now."
"mhm"
"So what do we know about Mark"
"Well we know where he died, how much of him is preserved and we have some stick figure drawings near where he died, so naturally from this we can deduce that Mark himself also had issues with his children and he probably had 2 wives and one husband. Jay, Miles and Pep."
"Are you just making this up"
"NOooooo think about it. If Mark had one boyfriend and TWO girlfriends back then, think of the conflict that would cause especially with the kids. I wrote a whole romantic dram- iiii mean a scientific journal about it. I call it the 2 females 1 male relationship ratio consistency, see back then that sort of ratio was preferable."
"Why"
"Because everyone had them. If you think about it, we did a poll and found that on average heterosexual males prefer 1 male to every 2 females in a group. Naturally this proves my point."
"Oh I'm convinced now."
"So since Mark had to deal with bi-inter-sexual conflict we can deduce that your problems with your children have something to do with this relationship dynamic"
"I see"

To better say my point. Evo psych do not argue that things don't change. Just that the only people capable of determining behaviour are people from millions of years ago, who for the most part are fictitious caricatures they make up with "educated guesses". And that strangely all our problems are actually their problems while their problems are......their problems.

Also all their problems are about either sexuality and survival, that's generally all evo psych's focus on, because evolution. So yeah it's basically a field about dealing with your ancestors sexual ghosts.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:48 pm

Alright NOW I'm getting some red flags, and I must be a bull because I'm getting slightly ticked off.

I did send my initial complain to SEVERAL people, none of whom responded. And I stand by THOSE 100% because in those I did NOT come up aggressively in them and was fairly polite. 

And today I contacted one of the approvers (Specifically one who approved it saying it would be "an important addition to the school") and mellowed it down, asking if we could meet. And I get this in response.

You already sent me your thoughts on the class during the approval process (as well as to quite a few other people), despite the fact that we didn’t ask for public comment regarding course offerings. You’ve had your say; I’m really not interested in discussing it further.

Luckily the next guy I haven't contacted at all yet, in addition he's a higher up.
But how did he know I emailed several people? What aren't they saying?
And "we didn’t ask for public comment regarding course offerings." indeed, oh that line is full of it.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:49 pm

Help, help. My palm is permanently stuck to my face, I had to type this using telekinesis. Here's an interview with the moron who wrote the textbook I read.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU3Bwyo8crQ

Read the comments. "I'm continually referring people with everyday personal problems to David Buss's books. They'll certainly get a better understanding of what's going on in their lives even though it may not make their problems disappear. Last week it was an undergraduate woman breaking off a relationship and being harassed by the ex. Presumably there's more to be gained from learning the truth of the matter than listening to the "wisdom" of an Oprah or Dr. Phil."

To be honest I'm not surprised if it helped her """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""understand""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" the conflict. I compared evo psych to horoscopes before for a reason.

"Evolutionary psychology is the first thing that makes all psychology make sense"

...

"motives for murder, well it turns out many of the motives for murder can be traced back to mating. You can run but you can't hide from mating"

Oh woww you can "trace" things to things. No narrative going on here.

"A good way to understanding human behaviour is to look at this behavior in other species"

Yes. I'm being blown away by the smartness of this. David is so smart.

Then there's a section where they make fun of people who make fun of evolutionary psychology for having 'just so' stories. Like the skit I posted a few posts back.

Yes. I'm sure David's argument was airtight when he said people suicide because they can't find a mate.
And when he claimed that humans had giant orgies because of the size of male balls. (Because "big balls mean the species had lots of sperm competition")
And when women are wired to assure their husband their baby looks like them.
And when women are attracted to money, and men actually only like womens bodies because it means they're fertile because I guess ugly women aren't fertile.

oh my gosh plz someone kill me, why am I even bothering with this shit. I have never been more inclined against the older generation until these recent events.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:57 pm

I'm now at an hour or so in and they finally said something probably factual. Something about womens spines. Alright, I can believe that. That doesn't excuse the rest of your BS

And this guy is saying that businsess should adopt his model like wtf.
Already tried it with that google doc lol (Though tbf I dont mean to lump that google doc conflict with evo psych as it's a different issue and concerns speech freedoms too)
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:34 pm

So, in addition to seeing about visiting this dudes jazz band. I decided I can write up more teardowns of the book. I just wrote up another looong one and sent it off.

And I could do more.

Because. its really easy to. And makes me look like I'm writing long thesis's because the amount of bulls*** in the book and overall process there is to call out with almost no effort.

Like the claim that darwinianly people value their own genes (As in people related to them) because "muh genetics". Which I say, obviously,  a better framework is to look at relationships, since the data for modern day humans fits that better.
But that aside darwinianly THERE IS NO SUCH THING.
Darwinianly, survival of the fittest? Explain to me how adoption goes against that. IT DOESNT. If you adopt too many kids, then yes it will reduce the QoL. But that has to do with NUMBERS not MUH GENETICS. Adoption, willingness to take care of kids that aren't yours, I would think, would IMPROVE a species survival rating.

Humans adopt.
Animals adopt.
Primitive humans, who knows I'm not an evo psychologist.

And then it comes crashing down and I'm laughing when I find studies that show people invest more in adopted children over their biological children (Because they may be more needy it seems, but the reasoning doesnt really matter to tear down evo psychs claim). However, stepchildren ARE shunned.

but waaiiit bwaaahhh? That seems to claim that the issue isn't "MUH GENETICS" but the issue is more about RELATIONSHIP PROBLEMS.

bwahahhhh/???????
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:14 pm

"Please stop emailing me. There is nothing further to discuss."

Mkay. I'm starting to worry now. About whether or not a degree I get from this college is going to be worth anything. I mean the CS classes are fine, but it's about the brand ain't it. Damn it.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:51 pm

http://www.science20.com/science_20/evolutionary_psychologists_sex_maslows_hierarchy_needs

I wasn't really considering my rant against evo psychology as being part of the IAM, but it really is looking more and more like a prosexual propoganda group
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by SCH0206 on Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:12 pm

@Biscotti wrote:http://www.science20.com/science_20/evolutionary_psychologists_sex_maslows_hierarchy_needs

I wasn't really considering my rant against evo psychology as being part of the IAM, but it really is looking more and more like a prosexual propoganda group
Aye, yi, yi! I see what you mean.

SCH0206

Posts : 385
Join date : 2015-04-30

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:09 pm

Good news, I secured a mediator. We'll see how it goes.
I also MIGHT in the future delete some of these details, since I'm not sure of the something, i dunno my words are failing me rn but Im sure its understandable why
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:01 pm

There are some claims that the book made that I dropped. Reason being they were so idiotic that I didn't want to bring them up by examples because they'd make me look idiotic just by association. But recently, skimming through the book, my memory has been jogged.

For example, did you know the reason why women have historically had less assets then men, is because women are sexually attracted to men that are more powerful then them? (In laymans terms, the reason is because women are horny for men that are more powerful then them. And the implication is that the direction of their lives and choices were shaped around their sexuality and what they find sexually appealing.) And likewise men only want to get powerful and compete because it gets them women.

In addition, women's brains are centered around their vagina, womb and woman parts. In fact, women are subconciously driven by what their vagina is doing. When they're ovulating they subconciously get more sexually promiscous because they subconciously want to get pregnant. And that they subconciously crave manly men when they subconciously want to get pregnant. Didn't know that. wtf's wrong with women.

Also, did you know ancient humans participated in big orgies? We know this because males testicles are big!
That's it, that's the proof. See, the reasoning is that in other animal species with big testicles they are promiscous. So naturally this applies to humans too.
Except, wait one second. That would mean that humans today regularly participate in orgies. After all, with every other postdiction of ancient humans this book has made, they usually then say that this applies to modern humans. I wonder why this book, in this particular case, didn't claim that? Maybe because it would be easily falsifiable.



This shit is not advancing at my school. I was advised to go the newspaper about this issue by someone (Yes, the same newspaper that thought it would be good taste to put a bunch of condoms on their front page), however. It would be just as feasible to gather the students emails online. And then send out an email to the tens of thousands that attend here.
It actually, really wouldn't be out of place. Considering the president of the college regularly sends out messages detailing his political opinions to an "all students list" (Ok ok, not really. It's more about the political stance of the school on issues).

Only thing is, I reaally don't want to give this publicity. So it's sort of a last-ditch-effort.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:51 pm

I do wonder.

I wonder.

I..
wonder

The study I'm wondering about is one I pitched on the venting thread. It's to determine whether sexuals penchant for making themselves out to be animals participating in some ancient natural ritual in any way heightens they're enjoyment of the activity
It would be totally feasible to make a study where participants must rate their arousal between something sexual, and between something sexual that emphasis how "natural" it is and how it's their holy purpose or something.

but man is this shit really something I want to do, it's makes me want to stab my brains out to escape it's stupidity. But the benefits would be potentially confirming this rhetoric is just fetish projecting. As well as potentially helping to define what kink-think is.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Aztec12 on Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:33 pm

I going to Tell you right now females are not like that and I'm sure males ain't ethier I agree this book feels almost sexist in nature even.
avatar
Aztec12

Posts : 73
Join date : 2016-04-23
Location : USA

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:49 am

Ok thanks, as that was something I couldn't outright debunk myself.

I made a mistake in my study pitch however. I said we should be measuring arousal, but that's not quite right. As I don't think this narrative is for arousal as much as it is for sexual validation.

A better study I feel would be asking sexuals anonymously to imagine they are at a party with potentially picking up a one night stand, and three members of the opposite sex approach them with 3 different speeches trying to get them to come with them. (One of the speeches containing the aformentioned elements) and seeing which speech makes them more open to sexual activity.

When using this rhetorically, though we didn't derive this hypothesis evolutionaryily (But could easily retro-actively fit this bias into an evolution narrative (herp derp)) we instead derrived it through antisexualism. WOOT WOW OMGOSH ANTISEXUALISM IS A LEGIT PSYCHOLOGICAL METHOD!!11 THE NEW NEW SCIENCE OF THE MIND!!11 "ANTISEXUALISM PSYCHOLOGY (copyright biscotti 2017) IS TOTES LEGIT!"
And also by David's own logic IF this is true then we have proven that his motivations are subconsciously driven by a need to validate his sexuality (Because sexuality is inherently wrong)
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:25 pm

"Evolution is an incredibly complex process. It may be that you're just not understanding, it takes a really nuanced and developed, learned mind to know how it all comes together with how complex it is"

"Soooo we can say that for sure from our population study, my fanfiction hypothesis and my penis that ancient humans had fetishes for big breasts. it's a simple as that"
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:26 pm

I'm going to try to pull back on this s****y s*** s*** and go back to community outreach stuff.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:40 pm

Well all signs seemed to point back to the director of the psychology college being culpable for addressing this issue.

Unfortunately he was the rude, stuck-up one who patronized me, refused to give comment and repeatedly ignored my emails asking for a meeting (spaced apart, wasn't spamming). So I had some baggage with him (Assuming he had some with me).

I learned this winter break that people don't listen to emails, so I showed up at his office in person and just loitered waiting for him to show up ( while doing homework/video games) but he never showed up (hold on I'm getting to the "good" news)

It turns out that he is no longer the director of the psychology college! Good! because he obviously wasn't doing his job.
It turns out he got promoted to some other rando 6 figure job (it was boring waiting so I looked up the faculty salaries okay)

So ultimately the good news is that I get to start over, I requested a meeting with the new director and hopefully she'll do her job and address it.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by xenosimiana on Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:31 pm

Ok. Thanks for the update, hopefully she will address it and meet up with you.

xenosimiana

Posts : 302
Join date : 2016-11-12
Location : Detroit, MI

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Sat Jan 13, 2018 7:14 pm

I'm wondering how long I should give it before I press harder (show up in person). I'm a bit antsy as the class is currently being provided and would like this addressed asap. I should have probably put "Urgent" in the email somewhere. Right now I'm giving it until Wednesday.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by xenosimiana on Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:17 pm

Yeah I think Wed or Thurs is long enough.

xenosimiana

Posts : 302
Join date : 2016-11-12
Location : Detroit, MI

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:46 pm

So I made contact, and am writing up another draft to them rn. I do have another question.

They go on and on and on about male/female differences. But males and females are THE SAME ****ING SPECIES. A MALE who has "evolved" a certain trait can have FEMALE offspring, and a FEMALE who has "evolved" a certain trait can have MALE offspring. 
Thus, do you not need to prove that if these thing are genetic, they are tied to the Y/X chromosome?

My thought stops here because I don't know a lot about chromosomes.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:18 pm

I wonder if the purpose of evo psych is ...
Say that they don't relate current suicidal tendencies with the origin of suicidal tendences. Say that they compare the origin of suicidal tendencies with say, growing an extra arm, and current suicidal tendencies to be analogous to  holding an extra arm with NO initial additional meaning carried over from the first instance of the extra arm.
But now say that you could study the initial extra arm, and found that because it formed because of (X) you could get rid of it if you do (Y).

Is that what they're going for? Would it work like that (I don't think so)? Would it be healthy? I don't think that's what they're going for though as they ALWAYS seem to treat their "origin stories" and present day phenomenon as directly related/analogous with no explanation (except that it's obvious sex propoganda and pop-culture pandering and enabling and everything else). Sorry, I started DAing when writing up my second letter.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:36 pm

I think I just wrote a good paragraph. To explain how evo psych is biased WITHOUT going full antisexual.

"Another thing that is never explained is how the author thinks that the way an initial development occurred (under his narrative) is related to current day situations. The author always assumes they are directly analogous and is one of many, many skips in logic that are never explained and make it clear that this author is just pandering to his audience. Obviously you cannot attribute someones current situation to his narrative that he controls, as his narrative I will claim is highly biased. To what? You'll have to look at what he values. He values things like "passing on genes", "fertility" and etcetera. And is often why I get the sense that he is perverted. However we don't have to use the author in this, because proving the authors intentions is out of my capability. However, even without a person behind it, these values are still present, and I can still claim that this book is biased toward these values."

I may remove the whole "author is perverted" part and go straight to the point? But at the same time, it bridges a gap in my flow.

However the catch is that he'll excuse it by saying evolution naturally values these values. But 2 things
1. Because evolution values something does not mean the products of evolution value it. (logic gap)
2. False equivalency between human-thought and animal-thought, as well as human-thought and evolution-though.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Biscotti on Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:46 pm

Eh...good? or not.

Another thing that is never explained is how the author thinks that the way an initial development occured (under his narrative) is related to current day situations. The author always assumes they are directly analogous and is one of many, many skips in logic that are never explained and make it clear that this author is just pandering to his audience. Obviously you cannot attribute someones current situation to his narrative that he controls, as his narrative I will claim is highly biased. To what? You'll have to look at what he values. He values things like "passing on genes", "fertility" and etcetera. And is often why I get the sense that he is just some pervert trying to validate his sex fetishes. However we don't have to use the author in this, because proving the authors intentions is out of my capability. However, even without a person behind it, these values are still present, and I can still claim that this book is biased toward these values.
The author will defend this by saying evolution naturally values these values. But the author makes the same logic-leap again and again by assuming that products of evolution share the same values as evolution itself. And obviously you can look at modern-day humans to dis-prove that idea.
So since modern-day humans do not share the same values of (classical) evolution, I do not believe the author can use that justification to excuse his biases. And I believe the false-equivalancies he makes are agenda'd and biased on purpose. But I digress.
Serious question. Making this move is bold, but since I believe I was able to articulate it beyond "SEX-POSITIVE PROPOGANDA" (which is fine, but not for non-antisexuals) it's tempting.
avatar
Biscotti

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Evolutionary Psychology

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum