You have to admit the pope called Cadaver Synod had a very metal name. Wonder why they have never named a pope Cadaver Synod II.
E: also lol at the person just not knowing about the [dunbar number](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number)
I'm also pretty sure they don't fucking know Mendelian inheritance either (both the motte OP and the book author).
edit: "and your grandparents (and their grandparents) married your cousins" , assuming he's not talking of the age difference problem resulting from your cousins marrying your grandparents, obviously he doesn't know shit.
This is so hilariously racist I legitimately don’t know what to say.
Imagine one of these guys patiently explaining to someone in Nairobi
that they’re poor because they fuck their cousins too much, unlike the
enlightened west, where cousin marriage is checks notes legal
in 19 U.S. states (where it may have been common into the
19th century!), all of Western Europe and most of Eastern Europe,
and present deep in the elite level of society through centuries of
monarchical inbreeding.
I don't really want to read this shit too closely but does he also confuse higher frequency of expression (due to inbreeding) with higher frequency of actually having those mutations?
Because if anything, inbreeding increases selective pressure against loss of function mutations. Not a good reason for inbreeding, but it just doesn't do what he thinks it does.
Inbreeding is an issue because children are more likely to end up homozygous for some recessive genetic disorder (instead of being heterozygous for several). But if said children themselves don't mate with relatives, then grandchildren are going to be completely fine. It really doesn't matter if your grandparent married their cousin, as long as your parents didn't.
First-cousin marriage is legal without restrictions in 19 states, and legal with restrictions in another 8, for a total of 27 states. Also, fucking and/or cohabiting with your first cousin, without marrying them, is legal in fully **41 states**, as is marrying your first cousin once removed. (Not quite the same set of 41 states, oddly.)
For sure, the laws here are characteristically bizarre. I focused on marriage since it seems like that's the thrust of the post, and there's definitely a weird history there. I can't find anything which details the history of restrictions on sexual intercourse specifically between cousins here in the States, but it's worth pointing out that vis-a-vis cousin marriage marriage the first restrictions were passed after the Civil War, and at least according to [this graph](https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/figure/image?size=large&id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060320.g001) from a [study](https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0060320) in PLOS Biology many were passed well into the 20th century.
As much as I like a sneer, it's still probably good practice to disregard monarchies' effect on development, as so much happened due to more common people in spite of the government and royals.
Social history can pretty easily sit alongside “great man” accounts of how monarchs ruled from on high, because even hardcore Marxists are going to acknowledge the interaction between substructure and superstructure, and that monarchs had/have a pretty big impact on culture from their position up on that hill (as a Brit I am acutely aware of this even more than people from other monarchies in Europe)
I posted here a short while ago about how I’ve been reading Dalrymple’s *The Anarchy*, and as usual with him he does a very good job of blending the two in explaining the shifts up and down, in and out in the politics of the East India Company
I'm not stating great man history trumps social history. I'm more making a mocking/joking statement about contractions within other poster's mental schema.
Seriously dudes? You’re going to write thousands of words about how
the influence of the Catholic Church specifically is what
caused the success of Western Europe/USA, and not even think to mention
whether or not those arguments apply to South/Central America, which is
a prime example of “Catholic takeover”, to put it extremely
lightly? Why is the influence of Catholicism etc all-important when you
start at 305 CE, but apparently has zero impact from 1492 CE on?
You clearly don't understand the Mottean method. Here's how it works: you assume something that confirms your most deeply held bigotries. Then you write 15 paragraphs of complete wank relating it to IQ somehow and ignore even the most obvious investigations that may lead to a contrary conclusion.
Well firstly you should have zero understanding of genetics. I mean, *none whatsoever*, not even at the "both of us have blue eyes, why is the kid brown eyed?!" level. Mendelian inheritance? Who's that guy again?
Then, once you purged yourself of any knowledge of genetics (and while at it, you need to also know nothing about history), you can truly achieve the enlightened state of the book author and the motters doing genetic arguments. Since inbreeding results in genetic disorders, it thus follows that lack of inbreeding, for many generations, will remove genetic disorders. The more generations the better. It is totally and completely obvious, if only you know absolutely nothing about what inbreeding does and why it is bad.
It’s impressive how they avoid discussing basically any potential
causes besides cousin fucking or the lack of it. You can really tell
that they surveyed a wide variety of different studies to ensure that
they came to a balanced and sound conclusion.
Japanese subjects are about 1.6x more likely to conform (than WEIRD
ones)
Shit, that really supports this evopsych woo… given that Japan is
part of the imperial core and has been for a long time.
A Swede will forgo 00 now to receive 44 in a year. But globally, the
average person requires 89 in a year to give up 00 now, and the far-end
of the spectrum (Rwanda) requires 12.
Hmmm… could it be that in a Swedish economic context one could expect
the money next year with greater certainty? Could it be that a
functional welfare state allows people to forego 00 today? Could it even
in some way reflect the prevailing rate of profit in small local
industries (Rwanda presumably higher, Sweden lower if not irrelevant for
00 or because such endeavours have long been subsumed by monopolies).
Chickens and eggs. But nah, fuck that, gotta be skulls innit?
Henrich’s point is that this isn’t normal; rather, we’re the
abnormal (weird) ones.
I made a list of 5 properties to single out the group I like over
groups I dislike. Isn’t it striking that my ingroup scores better on
these than my outgroup?
Henrich points to the WEIRD “clock-time mindset” as one example of
the importance of cultural evolution on our psychological differences.
WEIRD folks are obsessed with concepts like hourly work efficiency,
being “on time”, and not “wasting time.”
This is the kind of hand-waving huge generalization I hate about
these kinds of works - it just posits a random trait as being shared
across hundreds of millions of people. I’d argue that the importance of
“being on time” or “work efficiency” is vastly different across
“WEIRD societies” - heck, even just in the US, ask someone who works in
a white-shoe law firm in NYC about arriving late to work and you’ll get
a very different answer than someone who works at an arts collective in
Portland. To say nothing of different cultural norms about being on time
between, say, USA, Germany, Spain, Japan…
As usual reality is very complex and human models of it are sometimes
too simplistic, so its a bit of all, but some are correlated. It’s
scientifically undeniable (this argument is relatively more truth value
because of much more evidence than all other opposing arguments) of the
European (Western civilization) “White supremacy” in the sense of its
relative evolutionary adaptive superiority in natural
survival/competition with other civilisations is real as inconvenient
truth it might be at least for the last 500 years. The fundamental
causes are part of WEIRD but go beyond:
- the most fundamental cause is the succesful combination of
caucasian genes and european culture memes in the European geo-climate
context that forced them to be more
competitive/aggressive/innovative
- then roots of the global rise & domination of European started
about 600 years ago during the italian renaissance (rather
southern/central not Western relatively in Europe) which is restarting
and evolutionary gradually improving the dusted Greek (scientific,
phylosophical) civilization & Roman/Latin
(technological,administrative/managerial) civilization that were put on
pause (but preserved/guarded by the christian establishment
churches/monasteries) for 1000 years during the European “barbarian”
nomadic migratory waves of invasion; if didn’t have that basis very
likely some other civilization (China, India, etc.) would have been
dominating the world in the 20ts century;
- then Western (relative to Europe) countries picked up from italian
renessaince and took the evolutionary adaptive fitness further through
the the protestant reformation, and the corelated individualistic work
ethic and resulting capitalism and colonialism;
- then the ever increasing control of natural resources (the
instinctive goal of all living species) allowed them to accelerate their
socio-economic evolution and domination within their species (above
other races/genes and cultures/memes); because humans already as a
species achived similar world domination at least from 10000 years agol
this gave them unfettered domination of all species from the
ece-biosphere by the mid 20th century;
The proof is in the pudding too: in 1950s the European civilization
wanted to unite to dominate there rest of the human species (non
euro-caucasian) they could have easily do it as they had overwhelming
scientific/technological politico-military-administrative supremacy:
literally destroy (massive nuclear,chemical, conventional destruction
and isolation) those resisting while literally enslave all remaining
after bringing them to famine stage. Paradoxically they didn’t chose to
act against the natural instinct only (usually most species in nature
aren’t merciful but take any opportunity to win/crush any competitor)
because the European Caucasian civilization (gene/meme) that acted as a
constraint.
Btw, All forms of groupism (sexism, racism xenofobia, homofobia,
etc.) are natural and attempts of denial & eradication are doomed to
fail while causing avoidable unnecessary sufferance; as its normal for
an individual in a social species to identify and associate and prefer
with those that are similar to him whatever the criteria (sex, race,
ethnicity/culture/language, sociopolitical ideology/dogma). The key is
to find social constraints to prevent/correct the extremes.
[deleted]
This is so hilariously racist I legitimately don’t know what to say. Imagine one of these guys patiently explaining to someone in Nairobi that they’re poor because they fuck their cousins too much, unlike the enlightened west, where cousin marriage is checks notes legal in 19 U.S. states (where it may have been common into the 19th century!), all of Western Europe and most of Eastern Europe, and present deep in the elite level of society through centuries of monarchical inbreeding.
The start about cousin fucking made me laugh out loud as so many of the “WEIRD” monarchies were inbread to the point they collapsed.
Like, wtf?!? How racist do you have be to believe this crap.
Ctrl-F “South America”
no hits
Seriously dudes? You’re going to write thousands of words about how the influence of the Catholic Church specifically is what caused the success of Western Europe/USA, and not even think to mention whether or not those arguments apply to South/Central America, which is a prime example of “Catholic takeover”, to put it extremely lightly? Why is the influence of Catholicism etc all-important when you start at 305 CE, but apparently has zero impact from 1492 CE on?
It’s impressive how they avoid discussing basically any potential causes besides cousin fucking or the lack of it. You can really tell that they surveyed a wide variety of different studies to ensure that they came to a balanced and sound conclusion.
To be fair, the book is not about eugenics or inbreeding. I was specting something like that, but it took the surprising twist of being cultural chauvinism instead. Still nonsense. This amazon review destroys it with FACTS and LOGIC: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R28QL9PWWETSD6/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B07RZFCPMD
FUUUUUCK
Shit, that really supports this evopsych woo… given that Japan is part of the imperial core and has been for a long time.
Hmmm… could it be that in a Swedish economic context one could expect the money next year with greater certainty? Could it be that a functional welfare state allows people to forego 00 today? Could it even in some way reflect the prevailing rate of profit in small local industries (Rwanda presumably higher, Sweden lower if not irrelevant for 00 or because such endeavours have long been subsumed by monopolies). Chickens and eggs. But nah, fuck that, gotta be skulls innit?
I made a list of 5 properties to single out the group I like over groups I dislike. Isn’t it striking that my ingroup scores better on these than my outgroup?
This is the kind of hand-waving huge generalization I hate about these kinds of works - it just posits a random trait as being shared across hundreds of millions of people. I’d argue that the importance of “being on time” or “work efficiency” is vastly different across “WEIRD societies” - heck, even just in the US, ask someone who works in a white-shoe law firm in NYC about arriving late to work and you’ll get a very different answer than someone who works at an arts collective in Portland. To say nothing of different cultural norms about being on time between, say, USA, Germany, Spain, Japan…
As usual reality is very complex and human models of it are sometimes too simplistic, so its a bit of all, but some are correlated. It’s scientifically undeniable (this argument is relatively more truth value because of much more evidence than all other opposing arguments) of the European (Western civilization) “White supremacy” in the sense of its relative evolutionary adaptive superiority in natural survival/competition with other civilisations is real as inconvenient truth it might be at least for the last 500 years. The fundamental causes are part of WEIRD but go beyond:
- the most fundamental cause is the succesful combination of caucasian genes and european culture memes in the European geo-climate context that forced them to be more competitive/aggressive/innovative
- then roots of the global rise & domination of European started about 600 years ago during the italian renaissance (rather southern/central not Western relatively in Europe) which is restarting and evolutionary gradually improving the dusted Greek (scientific, phylosophical) civilization & Roman/Latin (technological,administrative/managerial) civilization that were put on pause (but preserved/guarded by the christian establishment churches/monasteries) for 1000 years during the European “barbarian” nomadic migratory waves of invasion; if didn’t have that basis very likely some other civilization (China, India, etc.) would have been dominating the world in the 20ts century;
- then Western (relative to Europe) countries picked up from italian renessaince and took the evolutionary adaptive fitness further through the the protestant reformation, and the corelated individualistic work ethic and resulting capitalism and colonialism;
- then the ever increasing control of natural resources (the instinctive goal of all living species) allowed them to accelerate their socio-economic evolution and domination within their species (above other races/genes and cultures/memes); because humans already as a species achived similar world domination at least from 10000 years agol this gave them unfettered domination of all species from the ece-biosphere by the mid 20th century;
The proof is in the pudding too: in 1950s the European civilization wanted to unite to dominate there rest of the human species (non euro-caucasian) they could have easily do it as they had overwhelming scientific/technological politico-military-administrative supremacy: literally destroy (massive nuclear,chemical, conventional destruction and isolation) those resisting while literally enslave all remaining after bringing them to famine stage. Paradoxically they didn’t chose to act against the natural instinct only (usually most species in nature aren’t merciful but take any opportunity to win/crush any competitor) because the European Caucasian civilization (gene/meme) that acted as a constraint.
Btw, All forms of groupism (sexism, racism xenofobia, homofobia, etc.) are natural and attempts of denial & eradication are doomed to fail while causing avoidable unnecessary sufferance; as its normal for an individual in a social species to identify and associate and prefer with those that are similar to him whatever the criteria (sex, race, ethnicity/culture/language, sociopolitical ideology/dogma). The key is to find social constraints to prevent/correct the extremes.