What a strange article. Sets up the "Career Striving" hypothesis as a rival to the "Mating Display" hypothesis, and then basically argues that career striving IS a mating display. And it's all framed as: "art is about work, not sex".
-
-
-
It seems to be an example of why it's important to actually read the theory you're testing before you test it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But there is also another point: if you are single due to lack of women you are more productive, because there is no family, no kids etc. Families are a huge time sink. I can barely do stone carving during Sundays because of it. If I were single I would be more productive.
-
Yes, but that's just another way of looking at the tradeoff between parenting effort and mating effort.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Do you think it supports a status competition model, though? That is, the key is that men are battling among each other for status, which can be used for a variety of things, including lineage enhancement, kin investment, paternal investment, and/or mating.
-
More intense sexual competition (within either sex) should lead to both more status competition and more creative mating displays. I don't understand why the authors assume these two theories would yield different predictions in that regard.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Is this applicable or antithetical to explain the disproportionately larger rate of gay artists from a historical standpoint?
-
I have no good theory about that, and as far as I know, neither does anybody else.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
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.