Bret WeinsteinVerified account

The capacity for culture is. The content of culture isn't. My ancestors gave me blue eyes but they knew nothing of quantum theory.

But why does some cultural content more reliable stays instantiated(your concept)? Example being some religion or epic of gilgamesh or the boy who cried wolf. Also genes enhance the capacity to be captured by these religion so as to confer greater benefit.

genes increase the tendency to be more captivated by those stories which increase fitness i.e. helpful to the germ line. Genes turn off capacity of those memes which focus on soma on average. So there is an interaction between genes and memes. Memes are not completely free.

Creating knowledge is not free. But culture and even whims often use inborn urges to fuel their opposites. E.g. anorexia, parachuting.

And, although the seemingly endless variety of culture makes it seem as if any kind of culture is theoretically possible, culture is, in fact, severely limited by our biology/nature.

Certainly. Although chess is constrained by the rules of chess - a much simpler and narrower set of constraints than human biology/nature - the possible variations have yet to be calculated. The range of possible cultural variation is obviously much more vast than that.

It could be infinite, but constrained, especially if you count small differences. Like the set of all positive numbers is infinite but constrained (it doesn’t include negative numbers). Humans also continue to evolve biologically, potentially changing the underlying biology of

*future culture and adding more possibilities (but still constrained by the new biology).

What's the point of establishing that as fact? Is there more to this tweet it feels incomplete unless it's meant to just be a statement

it's useful to know that biology affects culture, for a number of reasons... Have you ever watched a Jordan Peterson lecture by any chance?