@hbdchick ... It's quite weird for evolutionists to insist that pathological maladaptation be defined in total abstraction from environment.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness
@Outsideness i don't at all. i totally agree with you that this adaptation is *not* working well in the new social environment. but...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick
@Outsideness ...that *still* doesn't make it pathological. just makes it mismatched. as@declamare said, there's a fitness problem here...2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @hbdchick
.
@Outsideness ...a *new* fitness problem. it would be like relocating penguins to the sahara. their adaptations wouldn't be...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick
.
@Outsideness ...pathological. they'd just be no good in the middle of the desert.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @PoisonAero
@PoisonAero yup.#IronyAlert (a strong, reciprocal altruism has in this case.) (@Outsideness see? now people are starting to understand!)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick
@hbdchick@Outsideness that makes it pathological. But it isn't "altruism" anyway. It is a signaling tragedy of the commons.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PoisonAero
@PoisonAero no, that doesn't make it pathological. reciprocal altruism is an adaptation, not something cause by disease.@Outsideness2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick
@hbdchick@Outsideness It isn't caused by reciprocal "altruism" (tit for tat). Tit for tat does not create a desert, it creates a garden.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@PoisonAero yes. and it did create a garden: Western Civilization. @Outsideness
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.