Geoffrey MillerVerified account

It's not irrelevant. The "stone aged mind" claim is likely false or misleading (although some mismatch is probably true). And the idea that the mind/brain of people of European ancestry is the same as the mind/brain of, say, the Hadza is remarkably implausible.

I couldn’t disagree more strenuously. Just because a mind is stone aged doesn’t mean it’s mismatched. It depends on how developmental programs are designed.

I'm not sure what you are strenuously disagreeing about, so it's hard to comment : ) Do you think that all human populations have the same mind/brain? I find that radically implausible, and most evidence contradicts it.The stone aged mind is senseless unless we operationalize it

All it means is that there have been no new, qualitatively distinct adaptations constructed to solve new adaptive problems in the past 100k years. Yes, until demonstrated otherwise, I do think extant hunter-gatherers have the mind/brains w/ same basic design as WEIRD people

I think the evidence against that is rather strong. Furthermore, it makes virtually no evolutionary sense. Why wouldn’t brain/mind change just like skin color to environmental challenges?

What evidence? There isn’t even a specific hypothesis under evaluation re: a new adaptation that evolved in response to a novel adaptive problem. Let alone evidence for one.

I wouldn't say "novel" adaptive problem; I'd say slightly different environmental challenges. If you took a tiger from the equator into Northern Europe, then surely it would face different challenges! Same holds for humans.

I think it’s best to deal in specific adaptationist hypotheses, rather than generalities re: intuitive plausibility. I just don’t consider minor quantitative variants in the settings of universal psychological mechanisms to mean that people have different mind/brains