Ruben Bloom | v1.13.0Sep 24th 2020 | (+287/-280) | ||
Grognor | v1.12.0Jun 19th 2012 | (+66/-13) | ||
Eliezer Yudkowsky | v1.11.0Sep 14th 2011 | (+35) Phil, I'm willing to link to your posted opinion, I don't think it's common enough to deserve primary billing in the LW wiki. | ||
Eliezer Yudkowsky | v1.10.0Sep 14th 2011 | (-776) Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/PhilGoetz|PhilGoetz]] ([[User talk:PhilGoetz|talk]]) to last revision by [[User:PeerInfinity|PeerInfinity]] | ||
PhilGoetz | v1.9.0Sep 13th 2011 | (+4/-3) all => most, due to my uncertainty | ||
PhilGoetz | v1.8.0Sep 13th 2011 | (+17) be more specific about genetic vs. cultural phenotypes | ||
PhilGoetz | v1.7.0Sep 13th 2011 | (+758) Adding a separate section at the end with a contrary view | ||
PeerInfinity | v1.6.0Sep 8th 2009 | (+4/-4) | ||
Eliezer Yudkowsky | v1.5.0Jun 12th 2009 | (+24/-9) | ||
Eliezer Yudkowsky | v1.4.0Jun 12th 2009 | (+36/-16) |
Added by Phil Goetz: In contrast to what is written above, I note that:
Added by Phil Goetz: In contrast to what is written above, I note that:
The historical fiasco of group selectionism is relied on as a clear-cut(clear-cut) case in point of the dangers of anthropomorphism.
Yudkowsky usesThe historical fiasco of group selectionism asis a clear-cut case in point of the dangers of anthropomorphism.
People who are unfamiliar with evolutionary theory sometimes proposeGroup Selection posits thata featurenatural selection might not operate at the level of genes in individuals, and instead also operate at genes in groups of individuals, i.e. selecting for genes for the group even at the expense of theorganism is therefor the good of the group- forindividual. For example, you might posit that human religion is an adaptation to make human groups more cohesive, since religious groups outfight nonreligious groups.Postulating group selection is guaranteed to make professional evolutionary biologists roll up their eyes and sigh.See also:Evolution, Alienness of evolutionSee alsoEvolutionAlienness of evolution