Post here for Tuesday's class. These comments can cover anything from the start of the chapter up to (but not including) the section on Finding a Place to Live: Shelter and Landscape Preferences. Please save comments on the reading until Thursday's class.
dr
-- Edited by 352ep on Sunday 26th of January 2014 06:54:08 PM
1. What determines when disgust reactions would be turned off or suppressed and why is it that only the disgust reaction can be turned off?
2. I don't think I believe in "the evolutionary hangover". If our ancestors were only consuming ethanol levels of typically only 0.6 percent, I do not find this a good enough reason to say that that is why humans nowadays consume well more than that. I think it simply explains why we still eat fruit, not consume alcohol to the point that we do nowadays.
Can the ancestral sex differences in specific spatial abilities be related to the sex differences in certain fields today? For example, engineering is typically a male-dominated field today. It seems as though the abilities of our male ancestors (i.e. navigation, mental rotation of objects) can be relevant in engineering. Computer-aided designing requires three-dimensional objects and mental rotation of such objects. Navigation also seems very logical/math-oriented, which would benefit engineers as well. On the other side of the spectrum, our female ancestors were skilled at object location memory and factual knowledge about plants. This, to me, made me wonder if this would help women excel at artistic endeavors. I believe art is a currently female-dominated field, so were the skills of our ancestors to blame for this statistic today? Or are these sex differences in skills of the past not relevant to sex differences in skills in modern society?
Reply to chichi: I agree, I think there has to be some other underlying factor contributing to the "evolutionary hangover". I think that alcohol has evolved similarly to the way other drugs have evolved, for the effects it can have on the body. Once people realized that alcohol can help a person relax and forget about stress for the meantime, they probably started consuming larger and larger amounts of it. But I don't think fruit could have been the bridge connecting alcohol to people's realization that alcohol can help them relax. The concentration of alcohol in fruit is far too small for people to lead to the extent of the usage of alcohol today.
-- Edited by JenniferElkin on Sunday 26th of January 2014 11:36:19 PM
In response to Chichi and Jennifer: I agree that the main reason behind present-day human consumption of alcohol is probably not solely a by-product of adaptive fondness for ripe fruit. I think that we also have to factor in the addictive properties of consuming alcohol as well as the social stigma behind drinking alcohol which frequently affect todays college students.
Also, the show-off hypothesis proposed by Kristen Hawkes concludes that, "Men hunted, not to provide for their own families, but rather to gain the status benefits of sharing their bounty with neighbors". This statement seems very superficial because it's basically saying that men did not hunt in order to nurture his family and increase their chances of survival. Rather, men hunted in order to increase their status and prestige within a group so that he could get laid more often and thus reproduce and ensure the survival of his genes. Two concepts which are necessary for the propagation of one's genes are survival and reproduction. The show-off hypothesis seems to somewhat neglect the survival aspect, preferring to focus mainly on reproduction as a means of propagating one's genes. Lastly, if this theory is correct, could it explain why women are more attracted to men of higher status compared to men of lower status?
The book discussed pregnant women avoiding certain foods to protect their babies from toxins, but I am also curious if there is an evolutionary psychology perspective on women craving certain foods while they are pregnant. Are some foods better for babies than others? Would our ancestors have wanted to eaten certain foods while they were pregnant?
I am also skeptical about human alcohol drinking arising from a preference for ripe fruit. Personally, I do not think that alcohol has an appealing taste. If it were not for its mind altering properties, I doubt anyone would drink it.
I have different preferences for the temperature of different foods, Ex Lemonade should be cold, pizza should be hot. Is there a evolutionary reason for that kind of preference.
There are obvious reasons for sex differences when it comes to hunting and gathering in the past. For example, women were typically gatherers because they were less well suited to hunting due to their preoccupation with child bearing and rearing. But in a society where we no longer really have a need for men to hunt and women to gather, are these sex differences still applicable? Are there different roles between men and women now since we have moved away from the hunter/gatherer society?
Also, it seems to me that in today's society women are more likely to be the one's purchasing and cooking food in the home, why? Are women more likely to spot food that would be harmful (spoiled, contaminated, or less healthy) to their kin than men are? Or have we just assigned that task to women as part of societal gender roles?
While the evolutionary hypothesis of suicide makes some sense for individuals with kin who have families or can still reproduce in the future, it doesn't really seem to explain why an individual without siblings or children would commit suicide. If there are no other family members that can pass on the individual's genes, then by committing suicide, aren't you bringing your fitness and inclusive fitness down to zero? Also, because humans aren't creatures that reproduce in great quantities and require a great amount of resources to rear, wouldn't losing even one family member be very costly? (especially in the past when not only did it take a significant amount or resources to raise a child, but the chances of survival due to a cut or ingestion of something poisonous was great)
The gathering hypothesis seems very weak compared to the hunting hypothesis. I wonder how many people hold to the gathering hypothesis as compared to the hunting one? Are people trying to gain more evidence to support the gathering hypothesis or is it not expanding in any way? If it is not changing I would think many would believe the hunting hypothesis more.
I am also curious whether women in STEM fields would perform better on rotational tasks. Is there a way to learn to be more successful at the task or is it purely instinctual?
Can evolved food or fear aversions be conditioned out, and can not nonevolved aversions (car fear for example) be conditioned to exist? Or are they difficult mechanisms to affect with conditioning?
Alcohol seems to be a really popular topic to comment on, so I will. I did not find the evidence listed by Buss to be a compelling argument for alcohol consumption. I was under the impression that there seems to be an equal chance of sugar turning rancid or turning into alcohol (why rotten fruit in my kitchen doesn't become some kind of alcohol, it just becomes nasty). I can accept Buss's explanation as somewhat true, but I do not find that it explains the entire story. I am surprised that there is no evolutionary connection of alcohol consumption and lowering of stress (which early humans and apes have quite a bit of running around in the wild) or that there are social bonding implications that would make alcohol consumption more worthwhile. Overall, I love sitting enjoying my alcoholic beverage and contemplating why evolution makes me want to drink more.
My question is, do the ancestral sex differences in specific spatial abilities have implications in multitasking? Are men/women indeed better at multitasking than men/ women? I can see this going either way, where women may be better at multitasking because they tend the children at home and must be aware of all problems, but men could be better because they are out hunting and must be aware of any danger.
The evolution of food selection in humans is a little odd to me. I find it interesting that a basic need of our ancestors was to gather and compete for food. Why is it that the sharing of food as become so customary in the modern world? The competition element has ceased to exist. Is it because food is more easily accessible now?
I have a hard time buying into "folk biology" - at least I don't feel as though Buss provided enough evidence for his argument. Couldn't these "hidden casual essences" such as understanding that rose has thorns to protect itself/barbed wires aren't barbed to protect the wires be learned concepts?
I find it interesting that humans have evolutionarily used spices as a way of fighting off bacteria, but that there are many people who cannot even tolerate a tiny bit of spiciness in their food. Why might this be? Is it that people who don't like spicy things don't have that evolutionary adaptation, or is it something more specific?
I found the embryo protection hypothesis as a cause of morning sickness rather interesting. I would think that our ancestors who didn't have access to nutritional supplements like vitamins would want all of the nutrients possible from as many different sources as possible and as many calories to support the embryo as possible. If women show sensitivity to foods like meats and vegetables during the "crucial organ development" stage of the embryo, how do the organs get all of the nutrients required and how does the mother get all of the calories required? Do the organs not need as varied a nutrient source to form correctly? Or maybe the body can make up for lost nutrients after the organs are no longer in danger, thus explaining the reason women only experience morning sickness in the first trimester? It seems like a very strange adaptation to me to make a growing embryo's source of calories and nutrients more limited.
I think it's really interesting to see that the ability to gather food was so important for a man that women would divorce their husbands, who fail to do so. Nowadays, this definitely doesn't seem like the case. Even though food is still important, women probably wouldn't divorce their husbands just for that reason. What changed?
I find it interesting that humans have evolutionarily used spices as a way of fighting off bacteria, but that there are many people who cannot even tolerate a tiny bit of spiciness in their food. Why might this be? Is it that people who don't like spicy things don't have that evolutionary adaptation, or is it something more specific?
When I was reading that section this made me think of my roommate who was born in Peru and raised in Miami (both warm climates) and has absolutely no tolerance for spices. She has a really strong disgust response to mold and ****roaches though. Maybe individuals who don't have the spice adaptation have stronger representations of the other bacterial avoidance adaptations? Just a some thoughts based on a small sample of personal experience.
After reading the section about sickness during pregnancy I was hoping they would touch on the reasons behind pregnancy cravings as well. I know I have read that science has no concrete answer for why pregnant women crave what they do, so I was wondering if evolutionary psychologists have ever tried to investigate the topic.
I wished there had been some elaboration/discussion on when the disgust reaction is advantageous and when it is not. I also am curious as to why there seems to be a gender difference (at least in our current society) in levels of revulsion or disgust around certain topics (men are less "grossed out" by certain things, or perhaps even enjoy humor revolving around typically disgusting ideas). Maybe this is just more in media and not actually as prominent as we think?
I am curious to see if there is any link between the evolution of our food palates and the evolution of the food species. For example, did fruit seeds change in any chemical composition based on the way humans digest/evolved in digesting their food?
it seems like evolutionary thinking could be used to design intelligent recipes, particularly for special situations like pregnancy or disease recovery. The evolutionary basis for food taste invites a totally different way of approaching cuisine, which is something i might explore further if i knew how to cook anything beyond cereal. I get the feeling that evolutionary thinking might present all sorts of interesting applications.
