“Evolutionary psychologists have long thought that facial attractiveness was a health cue. However, recent work suggests that it might simply be a byproduct of how easy some faces are for the brain to encode.” — @Ben_C_J https://t.co/ZZeiuw2lVo
-
-
I don’t disagree in theory but I have been surprised at the unreliability of phenotype-linked fertility hypotheses in general.
-
The reason for the surprising empirical failure is that people have tended to emphasize the indication of current fertility, rather than residual reproductive value (actuarily expected future fertility). The effects of apparent age/parity are huge (and valid)
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
If every trait can be singled out yes. But what if traits come as packages? Maybee the fast encoding/decoding mechanism is related to fast information processing in generall?
-
Yes, I wonder if looking at “packages” makes far more sense in actual practice, akin to what Dan Conroy-Beam has been doing with his Euclidean algorithms for eg: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnx1Y3NiY21jbHxneDozMjViOTEyZjlkMTcwNTEy …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"There would be intense selection against using any mate choice cue that isn't actually correlated with useful underlying traits." - only if the non-useful cues were associated with highly deleterious traits, if they were usually neutral I don't see why that would be the case.
-
If you have a strong mate preference for a neutral cue, that means you are less focused on true adventageous traits, to your detriment.
- 9 more replies
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.