Also, everyone who accepts Style 3 will be accused of doing Style 2 by Style 1, and of doing Style 1 by Style 2.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Also, everyone who accepts Style 3 will be accused of doing Style 2 by Style 1, and of doing Style 1 by Style 2.
The mildly deranged penguin asserts “Behavioral Genetics” is the study of geneticists after a long night at the pub, being thrown out and wheelbarrowed home: The loud singer, the enthusiastic vomitter (not always over the side of the wheelbarrow onto the garden gnomes), and the loud snorer. These can oftentimes be the same passenger, albeit rarely at the same time. The Guild of Drunken Wheelbarrow Pushers (they really need to change the name of the guild) is known to charge extra, on an exponentially increasing scale, when “behavioral gene” is said, sung, or slurred.
Sure. No error bars in #3. Junk science!
There are always 2 sides to a story, never more or less. I learned this watching cable news and they never lie.
For folks like myself who understand that one should never underestimate humanity: the above statements are sarcasm.
@#3:
To quote something I heard once before: “Anybody who says there are two sides to every story has never tried to interview three witnesses to the same accident.”
The issue, of course, is that it seems to be often the case that the people doing #3 still haven’t accounted for a social or cultural or institutional explanation, so even their small variance may be a confound. I’m inherently skeptical of any attempt to try to isolate genetic components to behavior because of the all-important aspect of context. Doesn’t mean style #3 is practicing #2, just that the criticism of some people who superficially sound like #1 may also be valid. The human mind is pretty hard to study.