The Red Queen

I’m reading The Red Queen by Matt Ridley. It’s an evolutionary psychology book, but flawed by the author’s left-wing politics. He tries very hard to deny the social implications of the biologically based qualities he discusses. For example, after 15 pages about the innate differences between the male and female mind, he suddenly declares,

Therefore, there is absolutely no justification from evolutionary biology for the view that men should earn and women should darn their socks….

Indeed, in a curious way, an evolutionary perspective justifies affirmative action more than a more egalitarian philosophy would, for it implies that women have different ambitions and even more than different abilities…. Since the bane of all organizations, whether they are companies, charities, or governments, is that they reward cunning ambition rather than ability (the people who are good at getting to the top are not necessarily the people who are best at doing the job,) and since men are more endowed with such ambition than women, it is absolutely right that promotion should be biased in favor of women – not to redress prejudice but to redress human nature.

Do I even need to comment on this?

Or here:

Laws against racism do have an effect because one of the more appealing aspects of human nature is that people calculate the consequences of their actions. But I am saying that even after a thousand years of strictly enforced laws against racism, we will not one day suddenly able to declare the problem of racism solved and abolish the laws secure in the knowledge that racial prejudice is a thing of the past.

I expect that most readers of this blog are familiar with the ways that “anti-racism laws” have been abused. Besides which, the libertarian in me cannot stomach limiting personal, individual freedom in favor of what whoever controls the government has decided would be best for all of us to be forced to do. Right now it’s getting rid of racism, so sacred a principle that individual rights must be scrapped if it conflicts with it. What will it be tomorrow? There’s a reason certain individual rights are sacrosanct, not to be scrapped with political fashions. But Ridley sees absolutely no problem with repressive, easily broken, ill-defined laws for the rest of humanity’s existence.

Anyway, here’s the passage I wanted to share:

Our closest relatives, the chimpanzees, live in promiscuous societies in which females seek as many sexual partners as possible and a male will kill the infants of strange females with whom he has not mated. There is no human society that remotely resembles this particular pattern. Why not? Because human nature is different from chimp nature.

That kind of naivete is downright touching.

Advertisements

8 Responses to “The Red Queen”

  1. Alphadominance Says:

    Indeed, on many an occasion people have decried my comparisons of humans and chimps despite our near identical motivations and social structure and genomes. Take the thread here for example: http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2009/06/michael-jackson-is-dead-vegetarianism.html One commenter says, "we share 90% of our DNA with rats, so should we eat sewage and garbage?" What folly, if one denies the conclusion that our proximal genomes allow us to draw parallels between them and us, one has to deny virtually all research based on mouse and rat models, the basis for most health research, and likely the one which the author there references. What? Please.

  2. Alphadominance Says:

    Indeed, on many an occasion people have decried my comparisons of humans and chimps despite our near identical motivations and social structure and genomes. Take the thread here for example: http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2009/06/michael-jackson-is-dead-vegetarianism.html One commenter says, "we share 90% of our DNA with rats, so should we eat sewage and garbage?" What folly, if one denies the conclusion that our proximal genomes allow us to draw parallels between them and us, one has to deny virtually all research based on mouse and rat models, the basis for most health research, and likely the one which the author there references. What? Please.

  3. Alphadominance Says:

    Indeed, on many an occasion people have decried my comparisons of humans and chimps despite our near identical motivations and social structure and genomes. Take the thread here for example: http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2009/06/michael-jackson-is-dead-vegetarianism.html One commenter says, "we share 90% of our DNA with rats, so should we eat sewage and garbage?" What folly, if one denies the conclusion that our proximal genomes allow us to draw parallels between them and us, one has to deny virtually all research based on mouse and rat models, the basis for most health research, and likely the one which the author there references. What? Please.

  4. Alphadominance Says:

    Indeed, on many an occasion people have decried my comparisons of humans and chimps despite our near identical motivations and social structure and genomes. Take the thread here for example: http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2009/06/michael-jackson-is-dead-vegetarianism.html One commenter says, "we share 90% of our DNA with rats, so should we eat sewage and garbage?" What folly, if one denies the conclusion that our proximal genomes allow us to draw parallels between them and us, one has to deny virtually all research based on mouse and rat models, the basis for most health research, and likely the one which the author there references. What? Please.

  5. The_Editrix Says:

    The problem with those people is that they want to have their cake AND to eat it. Of course, we humans can boast the unique quality to be able to tell right from wrong. We are, different from animals, ethical beings. But if we do not act according to that higher self, we behave just like chimps. Those people want to see some "higher being" in humanity, but without the moral responsibility that goes with it.

    Men are blamed for all the evils in the world. In fact, I observe that most of them are remarkably ethical in staying with their fat, nagging, slutty wives who think that they have no stake in keeping the marriage alive and healthy.

  6. The_Editrix Says:

    The problem with those people is that they want to have their cake AND to eat it. Of course, we humans can boast the unique quality to be able to tell right from wrong. We are, different from animals, ethical beings. But if we do not act according to that higher self, we behave just like chimps. Those people want to see some "higher being" in humanity, but without the moral responsibility that goes with it.

    Men are blamed for all the evils in the world. In fact, I observe that most of them are remarkably ethical in staying with their fat, nagging, slutty wives who think that they have no stake in keeping the marriage alive and healthy.

  7. The_Editrix Says:

    The problem with those people is that they want to have their cake AND to eat it. Of course, we humans can boast the unique quality to be able to tell right from wrong. We are, different from animals, ethical beings. But if we do not act according to that higher self, we behave just like chimps. Those people want to see some "higher being" in humanity, but without the moral responsibility that goes with it.

    Men are blamed for all the evils in the world. In fact, I observe that most of them are remarkably ethical in staying with their fat, nagging, slutty wives who think that they have no stake in keeping the marriage alive and healthy.

  8. The_Editrix Says:

    The problem with those people is that they want to have their cake AND to eat it. Of course, we humans can boast the unique quality to be able to tell right from wrong. We are, different from animals, ethical beings. But if we do not act according to that higher self, we behave just like chimps. Those people want to see some "higher being" in humanity, but without the moral responsibility that goes with it.

    Men are blamed for all the evils in the world. In fact, I observe that most of them are remarkably ethical in staying with their fat, nagging, slutty wives who think that they have no stake in keeping the marriage alive and healthy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: