"Robert J. Chassell" wrote:
> (And I cam up with the notion that a society would permit those savy
> men to find out more about the enemy, to enable more spying, so as to
> be better able to kill them -- in effect, to enable a few to be more
> obvious about their xenophilia than before.)
^^^^^^^^^^
> My question is whether evolutionary psychology provides good
> explanations? It does provide a good source of hypothesises. No
> doubt about that.
>
> But as for explanations: the issue between modular and general
> capabilities is somewhat irrelevant, at least for me. (It is clear to
> me that `spaghetti code' is less likely to work than modular code; and
> I am willing to extend that idea from programs to brains.)
>
> One issue is whether one evolutionary explanation is more persuasive
> than another, a second issue is whether evolutionary explanation are
> more likely than others, and a third issue is whether capability is
> inherited primarily through genetic or primarily through cultural
> means?
>
> As an example, what about the hypothesis that xenophilia (among a few)
^^^^^^^^^^
> is triggered by bad times, on account it enables more effective
> fighting and a greater likelihood of killing the others?
Did you mean "xenophobia" in those two places where you wrote
"xenophilia"?
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
