This comic is incorrect, because no evolutionary biologist thinks like that. Change “biologist” to “psychologist”, though, and that’s all it takes to make it accurate.
To be fair, I’ve met plenty of women with a similar attitude.
thirdmill301says
PZ, to a layperson for whom the argument in the cartoon makes superficial sense, how would you simply and clearly explain why that is not an accurate statement of evolutionary biology?
Mobiussays
I thought something similar, PZ, when I read that toon yesterday.
Pierce R. Butlersays
Huh? Whether you put ’em in a hamster wheel or on a treadmill, babies hardly generate any power at all.
Gregory Greenwoodsays
Pierce R. Butler @ 7;
Huh? Whether you put ’em in a hamster wheel or on a treadmill, babies hardly generate any power at all.
And while in extremis babies can provide meat, it doesn’t amount to much in the way of nutrition no matter how you prepare them…
gijoelsays
@5 I’m not an expert but this is my take on it. Evolutionary biologists (or paleontologist) looking at how species develop over time. They can look at living species, fossil records and genetic studies to see how organism have adapted and changed over time.
Evo Psych on the other hand, tries to determine how behaviour, thoughts, and customs have developed due to evolutionary pressure. Unfortunately unless someone wrote something down it’s practically impossible to know what the customs and behaviours humans have displayed in the past and when said behaviours arose. We can infer things from say looking at archeological record, but it’s very difficult to prove when such behaviours arose in the past, or whether they arose at all.
Evo psych also has a history of just-so stories such as the ‘pink is for girls, blue is for boys’ theory, which fell apart when it was pointed out that prior to the late Victorian period pink was thought of as a boy’s colour.
ravensays
Change “biologist” to “psychologist”, though, and that’s all it takes to make it accurate.
You could also change biologist to crackpot and it becomes even more accurate.
You could also change biologist to Jordan Peterson the crackpot and all 5 of his current fanboy troll club would cheer wildly.
I’m hungry.
Not as quick of a fix, but:
“…ever since you started reading Jerry Coyne’s blog”
=9)-DX
“Meat is babies! Babies is power!”
Ah! The thesis statement of the “Men’s Rights Movement.”
To be fair, I’ve met plenty of women with a similar attitude.
PZ, to a layperson for whom the argument in the cartoon makes superficial sense, how would you simply and clearly explain why that is not an accurate statement of evolutionary biology?
I thought something similar, PZ, when I read that toon yesterday.
Huh? Whether you put ’em in a hamster wheel or on a treadmill, babies hardly generate any power at all.
Pierce R. Butler @ 7;
And while in extremis babies can provide meat, it doesn’t amount to much in the way of nutrition no matter how you prepare them…
@5 I’m not an expert but this is my take on it. Evolutionary biologists (or paleontologist) looking at how species develop over time. They can look at living species, fossil records and genetic studies to see how organism have adapted and changed over time.
Evo Psych on the other hand, tries to determine how behaviour, thoughts, and customs have developed due to evolutionary pressure. Unfortunately unless someone wrote something down it’s practically impossible to know what the customs and behaviours humans have displayed in the past and when said behaviours arose. We can infer things from say looking at archeological record, but it’s very difficult to prove when such behaviours arose in the past, or whether they arose at all.
Evo psych also has a history of just-so stories such as the ‘pink is for girls, blue is for boys’ theory, which fell apart when it was pointed out that prior to the late Victorian period pink was thought of as a boy’s colour.
You could also change biologist to crackpot and it becomes even more accurate.
You could also change biologist to Jordan Peterson the crackpot and all 5 of his current fanboy troll club would cheer wildly.