Hello you beauties. Here’s the timestamps: 00:00 Intro 00:25 Why People Distrust Behavioural Genetics 11:10 Creating an Uneven Playing Field 19:35 Evidence of IQ Heritability 22:09 Impact of Replication Crisis on Behavioural Genetics 31:33 Is EQ Real? 38:48 Dying Psychological Concepts 45:39 The Placebo Effect in Psychology 51:54 Treating Depression with SSRIs 1:07:55 How to be Effectively Sceptical of Science 1:18:14 Where to Find Dr Ritchie
"Why Is Behavioural Genetics A Hated Science?" Because chicks have taken over the academy. lol Modern intellectualism is to knowledge what nonrepresentational art is to beauty - a mockery of it.
Hay Cris veary intresting vid, but what gets lost when talking about schooling and kids education is luirning disabilateys like dislexia which fly under the radar for many kids, and dislexia can make aIQ test hard coz of the natuer of the test. i wonder if you would be intrested in looking in to such things?
The real issue is that one of our major political parties, (you guess which one…..) that is very scared if science into evolution and genetics because it will bear more evidence supporting the REALITY of our world. It completely destroys one of the tiers of their philosophy, the “equity”. But science, as almost all of us humans know, just burns that insane idea down because it’s just a dreamed up fantasy land versus evidence/facts based.
Genetics shuffles the deck and deals your cards. Life is how you play the hand you were dealt. Different hands require different play. Some hands lead to easy wins. Some can’t be salvaged. Most of us get dealt mediocre hands.
As a parent of two children, now in their thirties, I have to recognize that both my kids have the same behavioral tendencies as they did when they were two years old and they're almost diametrically opposite in style. I can see the genes shining through, if you know what I mean.
Yes. The personalities of my two boys, now aged in their mid 30s, shone through in untero. One is active, physical, always on the go (he kicked like crazy in the womb) and always pushing boundaries. The other is laid back, chill, thoughtful before taking any decision, hated physical activities except the quiet ones like bushwalking (the other rides a fast motorbike). So quiet in utero I had to check his heartbeat regularly.
I heard that prisons used to plan ahead for how many cells they would need by looking at Elementary school records. Not sure if they still do that here.
"Good genes" don't just help the possessor of the genes, they help everyone. Newton, Einstein, da Vinci, go through the list. Just look at Newton. The guy wasn't exactly Mr.Happy.
The bit on mothers of more than one child appreciating genetic differences is spot on. My wife and I have twins that came out of the womb with entirely formed and entirely different personalities that have persisted all throughout their lives.
Here in America our education has been purposely dumbed down for equalities sake. Now you don't even have to take the SAT test to get into college anymore because certain people were scoring so low. Meritocracy does not exist here, it is all about inclusivity no matter what the consequences.
Australia is the same. I've heard universities offer literacy lessons to cope with the large number of people accepted in universities who are functionally illiterate. My niece passed her last year of highschool English exam by giving a talk about a sitcom.
@@TRLgoodvibesdotcom California is offering free college to anyone but white people. I suppose they will be using tax payer dollars to pay for these educational reparations.
Intelligence is the one trait that most greatly sets humans apart from animals so it makes sense that implying immutable properties to intelligence might be incredibly sensitive because it could be used to claim some people are more "human" than others and therefore justify abuses.
@@bigheadrhino My dogs' currently sat in the middle of the room licking his own testicles - if thats not a sign of an utter lack of self awareness then I'm not sure what is!
@@bigheadrhinothere’s a psychological construct testing self-consciousness called the rouge test. Most mammals fail it, humans around 16 months begin to pass it.
1- the concept was used as an excuse to mistreat certain groups. 2- people are afraid of what they'll find out. I think it's way more number two, but I don't think people are aware of it or they're not saying it out loud. So many sociological "theories" could be swept aside if links between certain genes and certain behaviors are found in certain groups. I think we're doing a huge disservice to ourselves and the future by being afraid to explore this topic.. I have two grandmothers who were full blood Native American and my father was an alcoholic. I know there's a genetic link with the way my body processes alcohol so I've mostly avoided it during my life. If alcoholism was still seen as a failure of character alone with no genetic component I may have taken a different route. We're withholding vital information from people who need it. Genetically linked behavior won't excuse those behaviors nor does it condemn people with those genes. Quite the opposite. If someone has a genetically strong disposition towards violence then they'd do well to find a way to corral their anger. You can apply this to any behavior. We can't allow fear to stop progress.
My genetically identical twins have very different personalities which was extremely surprising to me as a graduate of a 4 year genetics program. It’s definitely made me question how much influence genetics really have
@@CONEHEADDK Yeah man I didn’t know it was related to this to be honest but I didn’t really know what it was before your comment, thanks for linking them for me 🤩
So what he's saying is "Homeopathy seems to work,but because we know it can't work,we have to conclude it doesn't work" Anyone else see the flaw in this reasoning? Especially in the field of psychiatric medicine,where the side-effects can be life-changing....
He is saying Homeopathy is interesting because he knows it can not work, so some other mechanisms have to be in play. Kind of arrogant I agree, but probably correct
@@stigcc ....on the other hand,SSRIs,which we know are little better than placebo,and have side-effects,DO work because we understand the mechanism...no...hold on...
@@nickbarber2080 No I think he said SSRS' effect was very low (0.2 SD) and had an unknown explanation. Homeopathy is like studying the effect of praying for someone that does not know they are being prayed for.
@@stigcc I would dispute your last point,as someone taking Homeopathic medicine knows they are taking it....or,if within a trial,know with equal certainty as someone taking an SSRI in a similar trial.
@@tropicalnofruit1419 take a listen to Chris’ Love Island videos on this channel - he was bored with the absurdly boring, low IQ and overly predictable people on the show. Nothing to do with confidence, EQ, IQ or social skills, just a zero dopamine state combined with the self esteem to choose to not be an actor to “fit in”, and instead remain true to himself.
@@tropicalnofruit1419 Social intelligence in reference to an individual's ability to understand/act on, the feelings/thoughts/behaviours of other people? It’s ok to be weird. For some people it’s actually a turn on. The secret is to find your tribe and get on with it. lol
This is true in my own life. Come from a lower middle class family a lot of house painters, I for some reason probably delusion thought I could be something, went out in the world, tried and failed miserably, I think because I’m not that bright genetically. I just comment this just in case anyone else reading through these feels a little like damn I don’t think I have great genetics, you’re not alone but we’re making it happen anyways
What if painting houses wasn’t what you and your family were meant to do but at that time, the type of education they received only allowed them to be house painters? With the advent of technology and internet, you can learn almost anything online. Maybe you could in your spare time, learn a new trade and switch and see if you succeed in your new career. Good luck to you
I say this coming from a family of poor farmers. My parents, uncles and aunts, grandparents are all farmers. I could never get into farming. I just don’t like it. I went into nursing and I’m one of the best nurses, well known in my field. Compensated into the 6 figure salary. Maybe you’re not meant to be a house painter. Think about it
Why is behavioral genetics hated- man I wish I had the chance to write an essay about this in anthropology dept. @ SFSU... acknowledging such a thing could potentially open the flood gates for judging people based on their Genetics, and that is what behavioral sciences were founded on (in the modern sense) and Racism** came out of that along with social darwinism and all that... therefore (in their minds) its 100% negative - even if there is truth to genetics influencing peoples behavior... it would take a societal shift in order for people to acknowledge such a thing even if it was the magical key to understanding humanity. People in our current state would refuse to accept it. This is why the humanities, at their core... are not about objective fact or really a pursuit grounded in understanding the 'why' in human behavior. Anthropology was fully in apology mode when I was studying it in the 2000's because it was founded on theories of racism. Racism is bad, we all know this, or should... but that doesn't mean you cant try and understand things that might be hurtful, OR be used to hurt others... Science has got to have that 360 point of view, and our humanities have this loophole where the disciplines can recuse themselves from taking on things like the study of behavioral genetics, and at the end of the day, it does a lot of harm. I mean- we're out here being told that women can have penises and that men can give birth... This kind of thinking in the humanities where genetics are completely divorced from behavior opened the door for this flood of identity craziness that we're dealing with now. Even if the truth hurts or the path to learning the truth hurts, its still a path worth walking, because the truth is worth discovering, for better or worse. 'They're trying to put a society in place where the least suited to survival makes it to some kind of success on the other side regardless of what happens and that theres no edge to life, and we can already see... Humanity and life just doesn't work like that. - I always used to say: "If you could know the truth, and it wasn't what you wanted, would you want to know it?"
IF genes didn't matter A lot, women should have no preferences, and just get pregnant as fast as possible, with the first erect dude they could hook up with. There are some funny statistics about that, but I am NOT going to point the ones, I am thinking of, out.
Yea i get my sexual partners to get full genome testing before ill fuck em, all the girls do it. Sarcasm. It is widely accepted that environment and genes create a person.
It's hard to know how much environmental factors play a role in this. I'll trust that the data was collected accurately, but the interpretation of it should be a matter undertaken with care.
@games they have done twin studies and studies of foreigners adopted since birth and raised in the west. intelligence is almost entirely genetic. early childhood nutrition makes a difference but its in the neighborhood of 5-10%. the average IQ of sub saharan africans is around 70, that is a chasm between the average of 100 for a european.
@@juanwononeyuan It's hard for me to give any sort of super pointed response without reading all of the studies, but I guess part of me is skeptical for a few reasons. I don't know where all of the studies have been conducted, but in lots of countries, race has a heavy correlation to access to opportunities and other things. So, one worry I might have is that a lot of or all the difference in IQ could be due to the worse access to education, more turbulent home life, etc. Have things like this been controlled for? Like, what's the IQ distribution look like for black people who were adopted by well-off white families? Or what is the IQ distribution of black people when you control for the socioeconomic status of their parents? What is the IQ of white people who grew up in similar situations?Z Does that make sense. I'm just very very very hesitant to come to any conclusion before knowing without a shadow of a doubt that all of those things and more have 100% been controlled for.
@@zarki-games the twin studies are very revealing, twins separated at birth end up extraordinarily similar as if they had not been separated at birth. the nature vs nurture debate has been settled, who we are is mostly genetic. society likes to focus on social issues because then u can make political movements like socialism, instead of dealing with the uncomfortable reality that u can't change a persons nature by simply giving them an easier life. if u look at crime statistics it is also very revealing. across the board poverty is associated with higher criminality. but blacks making >90k/year still have twice the murder rate of whites making
They're directly correlated. The higher the IQ of a particular race or ethnic group, the lower the crime rate. And the lower IQ of a particular group, well...
@@brianmeen2158 What do you mean "where do you go from there?"? It's just a fact. Everyone makes their decisions by considering facts. People make decisions on an individual basis. Awareness of another fact is only ever a positive thing. Nobody has to "go" anywhere when they become aware of another fact.
On the subject of behavioral genetics I am reminded of a saying demography is destiny, and it is now I realize that this saying is a proxy for "genetics is destiny." Then you understand everyone has a unique genetic makeup. All to say everyone has a purpose in this world and a story they are fated to lead.
Why are we afraid of group differences exactly? People groups evolved to be optimized for specific environments. As modern humans move and live in places and environments they are not optimized for, they may find they have a set of particular advantages that enable them to thrive, while they also have particular disadvantages which hamper them. Just one example, African Americans may be more vulnerable to common colds because their darker skin inhibits vitamin D production, weakening their immune system in comparison to someone who has less pigmentation and higher levels of vit D absorption. Acknowledging this does not lead to eugenics or any other horrific outcome.
You are using the most uncontroversial example there is. Try talking about one like propensity for aggression and you will see why it is a touchy subject.
@@soulfuzz368 But if group differences exist and individual difference exist, what is the justification for accepting one part of reality, but denying the other? If anything it will continue to perpetuate blind policies that create inequalities, some justified and others not, when sinple acknowledgment of reality would offer the opportunity to actually make improvements to people's lives. Let's just take your example of aggression. If one particular people group shares an increased genetic propensity towards a higher level of aggression are we better off pretending that isn't the case? Or perhaps acknowledging it, and finding a solution, for instance perhaps the children of this people group need more opportunity to channel aggression into team sports where it can have a healthy outlet, while also participating in mindfulness as part of their k-12 education to give them a tool to learn restraint, and alleviation of their aggression when they find it rising. Which one of these approaches is likely to result in a better, happier society with less prejudice? It's not as if people cannot recognize patterns unlike researcher confirm it, and more often than not, while people tend to see the outcome, they misattribute the cause. There are a thousand such "touchy" subjects that could be better addressed with frankness and honesty rather than denial and obfuscation. Suicide, drug addiction, obesity, diabetes, depression, violent crime, rising detachment etc. are all examples (to be clear I am not saying these all have genetic origins, just that these are all touchy subjects, the real causes of which is generally verboten to research or publicly disseminate out of fear of prejudice rising.) Interested to hear your thoughts. I hope you will respond. In short, is it better to be an ostrich with your head in the sand or an eagle seeking truth?
Well you know everyone wants to just stick with personality being based on star sign to blame bad behavior on 🤷♂️ like..." oh no, I got addicted to crack again 🥺 that's so Capricorn of me 💯 I can't help it "
The more complete synthesis of the "liberal" and "conservative" perspectives is much more challenging. If "we" expend our resources on the kids with lower potential for, say, mathematical intelligence, then we may be depriving ourselves of the Einsteins and Feynmans of the future. This would be a terrible outcome for us all. It seems that the best balance of individual and collective good, would be a best match of different resources to personalities, talents, etc. I don't mean just for the "gifted," though I obviously think they are important. This also means extra remedial education for some. It means better matching of teaching to the range of learning modalities and personalities (which we really don't do at all, despite the trendiness of "learning styles"). I do think this is the best way forward, but it's difficult to pull off in the real world. Description isn't engineering, and this would require engineering. Teaching, OTOH, attracts a narrow range of personalities, and they're generally the types who will do what we're already doing. So while I have long recognized behavioral genetics as the only way to accurately understand the relevant issues, I don't expect that any of this will be easy to apply, given human nature and incentives.
It's what I call being "politically ascared." What if black people were better basketball players because they are black? Could we live with this knowledge?
@@vlad6331 It is amazing that you can be so thick that you feel compelled to prove it by completely missing the point. and then doubling down with an obviously false assertion.
people knew that candidate gene research was rubbish before the most recent "the replication crisis" . the switch to genome wide association studies happened before "the replication crisis" that ravaged the rest of psychology but left behavioural genetics (twin studies, adoption studies. , genome wide association studies) untouched.
People have a very destructive idea that high heritability is bad or means it's unfair. It's the exact opposite. More fairness and equal opportunity means heritability increases: Heritability is a measurement of societal fairness.
The issue seems to me, not the uniformly of genes to character traits but more generally whether neo natal exposure can moderate or influence brain development in terms of how hormonally driven behaviour is moderated by elevated character traits, which might have their root in groups of genes being triggered etc Eg how many physiologically distinct psychopaths in terms of brain function under scan are actually functioning, non threatening (depending on your perspective) members of society & not in prison (or too clever to be caught). etc That doesn't remove the social engineering political argument as at the outset, one is more or less disadvantaged or advantaged by one's social status at birth and compounded over a lifetime (except for very few outliers).
Have you ever though of having Ricardo Lopes of The Dissenter on? I would watch that so hard. FYI The Dissenter is probably the best resource for all things behavior genetics/general evolutionary theory/game theory online today.
Different bloodlines have different traits that get passed down. This is the reason for some behavioral differences between races on the macro. But any individual can improve themselves from wherever they start in life.
Following de-solution of the ussr Estonia modeled Finland in modernizing and improving it’s educational system and that was a major factor in their success in economic and technological development
Genetics/genes is 50% of our personality, environment the other half. We have a lot to learn. But you probably won’t find just one gene that counts but a group of them. Environment turns them on or off.
I kinda miss Stuart stating regarding ADs the revelance of clinical relevance and improvement on for example depression subscales by Chris. This is quite important regarding effectiveness. In reality effects are more than 20%, but there also non-responders and it depends on severity.
Because a social engineering strategy is already in play today and any investigation in to the human nature and underlying psychology behind it would reveal that conspiracy, and it would hinder any adherence to it similar to how the best marketing/advertisement campaign are the most successful against people who have the least self awareness and understanding of there own psychology, the moment the masses understand this, i.e. music, colors, symbols, sex etc. And how it's used on people to manipulate them to make choices that benefit the advertiser, is the moment that they cease to have an impact and work and thus they don't make there money and they also lose influence. So one of the ways to keep people ignorant to there own psychology so that these Manufacturers of consent have a complete monopoly on your psychology terrain, is to have a immoral, inhumane, diabolical, evil association with it in the public. Before the "evil" Germans , you have 100s of years of British Eugenics at play coinciding with colonialism and wealth hoarding.
Those people he refers to at the start… the ones who misconstrue behavioral genetics and the intentions of those who study it… Those people haven’t heard of (or if they’ve heard of it, they haven’t absorbed the meaning of) *epigenetics.* The genetic makeup of an organism provides a set of predispositions; neurologically, cognitively, physically, behaviorally. A template, if you will. A very complex one. Epigenetics covers the added dimension of complexity observed in how that template is filled in gradually over the development of the organism, which is quite obviously influenced by environment, rearing, education and indoctrination. It’s the answer to the generations old question about “nature vs. nurture.”
This social scientist says at the end, 'People are being too nice if they don't criticize and just tell everyone how brilliant their findings or papers are." But that's where exactly where EQ comes in - the ability to inquire TACTFULLY without unnecessarily offending or alienating anyone. Too many people are weak in this area. They don't know to constructively critique or care to know. EQ is more than 'job performance,' as this behavioral scientist mentioned. Emotional intelligence is the ability to recognize and describe different environmental situations and act correctly or proficiently within each given circumstance, with each individual. Not an easy task for many - especially more sociopathic types with cunning manipulative (inherited) tendencies.
You totally missed his point, because that's not what he was saying at all. There is a professionalism that is expected, not just to be tacky and call each other out. His whole point was about challenging each other because the practice of science is literally based on debate and questioning. Without it we don't learn anything. We've seen this all thru the pandemic, certain scientists being silenced while others insist that they are "the science" and trying to cancel anyone who even questions all the rules imposed that had never even been studied in the first place. Scientific debate was floundering already, but it died in 2020 when it became fully political
@@jennh2096 I never disagreed with his point that scientific research/papers should be compared, questioned and analyzed with a critical eye. If people have inside knowledge, and they know something is a lie or something has been twisted, then they should offer more honest information. It benefits the general public. But keep in mind, Twitter and similar platforms are NOT there to educate the "ignorant." They were created to draw eyeballs to the screen and make money anyway they can. And that's why I say people should use common courtesy and tact when "critiquing" others opinions/findings. There's too much negativity online - in posts. People love attacking others by saying "You're wrong" or "You missed the point" - as if there's only ONE point, tight? ;
19:26 - speaking of ahistoric ideas, the idea that a belief in eugenics is a right wing idea is as ahistoric as it comes. Eugenics was always associated with left wing political movements like progressivism and fascism.
People are just scared of being judged purely meritocratically. The concept of your social connections being isolated out and your body of work being judged on it's own merits is scary. We have all the technology to create a real life equivalent of matchmaking ranking that we use in sports and videogames but we don't because people don't want that.
Hi. Verry interesting conversations you have. Can you please point me a link to study about registered studies on depression, mentioned on 55th minute of video. I like to read it in original. Thank you in advance))
53.10 Does the speaker understand the mechanism of gravity? Or is it a case of only being able to observe the effect? If the latter is true, then does that make theories of gravity invalid? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but surely the job of science is to observe effects and then to find out the mechanism. It can't be to dismiss the effects out of hand because the scientist thinks the theory is 'bollocks'.🧑🏻⚕
His reasoning on homeopathy was a downright caricature of my concerns about narrrowminded and arrogant scientists. No wonder science is stuck on so many subjects.
“They” hate behavioral genetics because the findings point to some very uncomfortable conversations. You need only two eyes and some common sense to observe it play out in everyday life.
I hope in the future we are legally allowed to use the already existing technology to select for better children by hand picking genetic traits. TwentyThree and Me was legally suppressed from selecting for genetics in any way other than a short list.
More likely, knowledge of behavioral genetics is perceived as a *threat* to the established order, which since the 1960s is largely based on assumptions of biological equality.
THE GOSPEL Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: - 1 Corinthians 15: 1-4 KJV Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. - John 15:13 KJV SAVALATION For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. - John 3:16 KJV For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. John 3:17 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. - John 14:6 KJV Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts 4:12 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. Romans 5:10 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. - Isaiah 53:5 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. - Mark 1:15 KJV He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. - John 3:36 KJV Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. 2 Timothy 1:9 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost. Luke 19:10 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Peter 3:9 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:22 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:7-8 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. John 10:9
No one is harder to convince of a fact than a man who's wages depend on the results being negative. If someone was paid for acknowledging that another person was sleeping, you would never be able to convince him that that person has woken up. The person himself could go up to him and say yo I'm awake, here's 10 different official ID's, my fingerprint and iris scan and here's my picture and signature. That man will probably reply, you're just sleepwalking, go back to bed.
This guy completely dodged "behavior" just in the first few minutes, just goes to show. Height is not a behavior, eyesight is not a behavior, intelligence is not either, genetic diseases (identifiable by aberrant protein(s) that causes disease progress) are also not, these are features. In order to claim "a gene for a behavior/behavioral tendency", you have one extra hard step in between, you need to find a neurological mechanism (or at least a neuro-correlate) to explain why this is so. This is not to say genes do not affect behaviors at all (anyone with half a brain won't say this), this is to say most research in behavioral genetics is plain wrong by mis-identifying the set of responsible genes/mis-drawing conclusions.
There is no such thing as 'fair'. Fair is a purely subjective word and should not be a goal in anything except individual behavior. To spend huge amounts of public or common resources on less capable people is just completely irrational. No public resources should ever be spent on benefitting the individual.
Isn't Schizophrenia a gene carried by the mother? It shows up in her children if it is set off by environmental factors. Such as, a neglectful childhood, traumatic events through childhood, etc. It is more dominate in males, and is triggered at the ages between 18-20.
No Schizophrenia is a complex trait that involves thousands of genes and the effects come from every chromosome pair. The heritability is extremely high
before i stumbled upon this channel i had no idea how shitty my life under communism actually was. thanks to this great sage i now realise all those lovely memories must be the result of genetic oppression.
Good up until you guys started talking about psychology. Anybody can see how harmful that particular field has become, and when anybody talks about "losing their mind and becoming a conspiracy theorist" is a weak human. ALL the important discoveries made by humanity have been made by men who were willing to step into the unknown, who would have been called "crazy" or whatever at the time. Following the consensus and falling in line is for low T individuals.
Isn't it called evo-psych? That's their name for it. Had I gone to so much trouble to create a brandname for my ideas I wouldn't want to switch to another so quickly. What does Google think? Behavioural Genetics - About 38,500,000 results (0.62 seconds) Evolutionay psychology - About 120,000,000 results (0.53 seconds) Evo-psych it is !
SO MANY PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE SITTING HERE AT MINUTE 20. GOING WHEN IS THIS SCOT GOING TO CONFIRM MY ASSUMPTIONS OF RACE AND GENDER IS SCIENTIFIC. LETS FACE IT. WE ARE NOT ALL CREATED EQUAL.
Hmm... yeah , really weird how people might have a "dubbel standard" when it comes to height and eye color vs intelligence, yes, very strange indeed... I mean, its not as if intelligence it what humans value almost more than anything, its not as if intelligence is the best predictor of how successful a person will be come in various aspect of life.. so yes, very strange indeed.. The guy can't even be honest about that, he has to pretend like those are the same things
Intelligence actually does not dictate 'success', it's one positive factor and not necessairily the best factor to measure either, considering 'geniuses' often suffer considerably or lack other traits that help them navigate success
@@brianmeen2158 I would suggest a loving , secure childhood with positive , aware parents gives you the very best chance of success to do well in life . When I say success I don't mean at the top of the tree, I mean you flourish within your own boundaries and have a good impact on those around you,. That is how I would define success.
