I propose using the term “social creationist” for anyone who claims to believe in biological evolution but rejects its implications for human beings, i.e., those who claim that all sex, race, etc., differences are due to “society.”
-
-
For it to be possible for genes to cause psychological traits, there would need to be psychophysical laws. Psychophysical laws do not exist. Therefore the genetic transmission of psychological traits is logically impossible.
-
This doesn't make any sense
-
For it to be possible for genes to cause psychological traits, there would need to be psychophysical laws. Psychophysical laws do not exist. Therefore genes don't cause psychological traits. The same applies for the genetic inheritance of psychological traits.
-
I'm not buying your first sentence or your second sentence.
-
There are no laws linking mental or psychological states with physical states so there are no psychophysical laws. I'd there are no psychophysical laws, then mental/psychological states cannot be genetically inherited.
-
I think there's some difference here with how you're defining causation and psychology, but I don't necessarily care to get to the bottom of it.
-
block him already. He is a lysenkoist, there is no point in arguing with such stupidity. He supports Denis Noble. Also i think he is a dualist.https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2013/08/25/famous-physiologist-embarrasses-himself-by-claiming-that-the-modern-theory-of-evolution-is-in-tatters/ …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.