Re: A New Form of Lit. Analysis

Jim writes:
<< [T]he point is that if it's a "evolutionary" (thus biological)
mechanism, then it should be observed across all cultures and all times.
And that's simply not the case. Eurocentric "evolutionary" studies aren't
science at all [. . . .] >>

As I said, these might not be most properly called "evolutionary studies,"
and it is often not the case that they are performed by "evolutionary"
theorists.

And to be fair, it is not clear that the phenomena are absent in other times
and cultures -- I presume that neither of us pretends to having read the
literature thoroughly enough to know how well the question has been
examined, and in fact one might expect these phenomena to be supressed in
many societies since they are so subtle (we're talking about a
predisposition for a preference, and such as would only become clear in
large samples) and also so dependent on women's freedom of movement when
away from their primary male partners.

Third, certain biological correlations (like that to ovulation) make clear
that at least some aspects of these studies are probably not exclusively
linked to European (or any other) culture.

And in any case, I was writing primarily to note that the article is not
indicative of the scientific rigor of this sort of study, and I'm no less
happy if that's the only point you're willing to buy.

-Robbie
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Sun Dec 14 04:20:14 2003