Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Sep 21 05:12:35 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / Sex differences in navigation
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Sep 12 02:39:28
10 coverging sources of evidence supporting evolutionary predictions about our cognitive origins.

http://www...-sex-differences-in-wayfinding

It’s a massive article, but the TLDR is, sex differences in spatial reasoning is tied to navigation (men > Euclidian, women > object location) and they evolved, as supported by 10 sources of evidence, predictions and experiments.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Sep 12 03:14:22
Spatial reasoning is important for a range of disciplines in STEM and more mundane things like parking a car.

Anecdotes!!! :-)
I let my mother in law drive my car (I was very tired) and she drove too fast in a residential area with a speed choke and slammed the right front wheel into it and damaged it. *shakes fist* I WAS NOT THAT TIRED! I saw the whole thing coming. Her excuse, ”the third gear is better for fuel consumption”....sigh.... First don’t run over children, then don’t slam the wheels into hard surface at high speeds, and lastly, drive fuel efficient.

However, if I ask my wife where I put my keys, she will immediatly tell me where they are.
McKobb
Member
Wed Sep 12 07:48:58
I bet ya them/they's are object location wayfinders.
Seb
Member
Sat Sep 15 19:14:34
Skimmed this.

Was struck by the illogical claim that because the difference got larger in egalitarian societies it proved it must *not* be socialised and must be genetic in basis.

This is illogical.

If it were genetic, you would expect no difference across societies.

The fact there is a difference between societies is a demonstration that the effect is at least in part socialised.

If the hypothesis being advanced here is that this is genetic, then the divergence in egalitarian societies calls for a very clear explanation with a genetic basis which is entirely absent.


This paradox is widely known: the increase in gender differences in egalitarian societies.

There are a number of possible explanations for the apparent paradox of sex differences increasing in "egalitarian" societies, with no real consensus on the answer.

I'm sure the preferred one from some points of view is that "with more freedom, men and women and free to express their differences", but this is kinda crazy from a transmission mechanism perspective (e.g. societies where women are not educated).

Other possible explanations:

1. Societies considered egalitarian are egalitarian in principle only: i.e. we are not as egalitarian as we think we are, and the rhetoric is aggressively undermined in practice. Indeed, how one chooses to objectively measure egalitarianism vs aspirational rhetoric is interesting if all the measurable quantities show divergence in equality. Perhaps the resolution of the paradox is simple: We are not egalitarian.

2. A more sophisticated version of the prevous: the overt barriers to entry of women to all sorts of fields and endeavours they were previously shut out of is prima face egalitarian, but merely creates a great number of measures to see consequences of more subtle sex differentiation.

3. Correlation: the egalitarian societies are the ones that are most free, consume more media, which is the transmission factor for gendering all sorts of activities, and so free societies are far more more prone to socialisation factors than less economically developed and less free societies.

We could go on and on, but the basic argument:
"The feature varies starkly between societies, but in a way that appears counterintuitive to how we think these differences should evolve societies rate in terms of equality means this supports genetic" is absurd.

Unless a meaningful and evidenced argument explaining why a supposedly genetic trait becomes more sex differentiated in egalitarian societies is advanced, that's a big piece of contra-indicating evidence.

Sam Adams
Member
Sun Sep 16 00:04:52

"The fact there is a difference between societies is a demonstration that the effect is at least in part socialised."


While seb is correct in the above argument, i would like to point out his hilarious hypocrisy. Usually seb is making the exact opposite argument: that differences between groups are NOT proof of anything.
Dukhat
Member
Sun Sep 16 00:53:24
More to do with cultural differences rather than sex differences. All the asian cultures are strictly paternalistic and don't teach kids autonomy like they do in the west. They don't play team sports and aren't praised for being thoughtful. They are praised for being obedient. If there are any mechanisms to teach independence, usually it is the male that gets unique access.

So asian and muslim women tend to be really fucking bad at driving and the men aren't that far behind.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 16 02:19:23
”This is illogical”

Because you are an idiot. The article is not arguing that this difference is purely genetic. So you spent the rest of the post making a case against something no one said. Grats.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 16 02:44:44
>>The fact there is a difference between societies is a demonstration that the effect is at least in part socialised.<<

Wow so the environment contributes to shaping population traits. I wish there was a scientific theory that could make sense of all this...
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 08:54:08
Sam:

Oh I think they are proof of something in your case: they correlate strongly to socio económico status.

Nim:
Once again you've not read your own source

"However, evidence suggests socialization and patriarchy are unlikely sources of these cognitive sex differences. This is because in the Silverman et al. (2007) study, increasing gender egalitarianism was associated with larger sex differences in object location memory (see Schmitt, 2015)."

It is precisely msking the argument I'm critiquing: that a difference in the variable between societies suggests it is not socialized simply because the difference is the opposite to what they would naively expect if it was socialized *AND* society has the effect they naively anticipate. This is sloppy thinking. There should be no difference between more and less egalitarian societies if the effect is not social.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 09:11:32
Nim:

"Wow so the environment contributes to shaping population traits."

You realise you are agreeing with me and against the articles author on this point right?

And we haven't even got to "hunter gatherer" theory. E.g.

http://www...vn9K7prhWL&cshid=1537106452504

(Further research left to interested parties, but talk to a modern, active anthropologistgists and archaeologists and they will scorn the simplistic idea that "men hunted, women gathered").

Sam Adams
Member
Sun Sep 16 09:50:24
"they correlate strongly to socio económico status."

So does iq.

But you like to ignore that bit.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 11:59:16
but iq also correlates to education levels and iq doesn't correlate of people of the same heritage in different countries indicating iq as a measure is culturally specific.

The pattern that emerges is: if you discriminate against people, particularly by making sure their areas are underfunded and with poor education, their children will likely have a poor education and then be poor too.
Sam Adams
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:17:13
"and iq doesn't correlate of people of the same heritage in different countries "

Wtf? Was that supposed to be readable? Talk about low iq. Lol.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:22:55
Sam can't parse an auto correct error.

"of people" = "to people".

Sad.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:23:28
People can normally tolerate a far greater degree of error and discern meaning.

Perhaps your verbal iq is low.
Sam Adams
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:28:39
In no sane mind does "of" turn into "to". Perhaps you could expect it to say one of [if or off on].

And even if we pit in "to", your statement is still nonsensical and wrong. Africans and indigenous perform poorly in all locations. Likewise europeans and jews and asians perform great in all locations.
Sam Adams
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:31:46
The obvious correlation here is between seb and retarded ideas. Lol@no correlation between groups in different places. What a retard.
hood
Member
Sun Sep 16 13:44:51
"People can normally tolerate a far greater degree of error and discern meaning."

Your degree of error is pretty prolific. It is a testament to the ingenuity and parsing ability of posters here to decipher anything you type.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 16:26:27
hood:

In this case, are you telling me that you can't figure out the word that follows "correlate" is supposed to be to?

Yes, the error rate is high. I think it's my phone dying - to be fair it's a nexus 6 so ancient now, but it seems to get a lot of random jittery lag now so it is probably screwing up the keyboard.

Sam:
You think the statement lacks sense as in doesn't have a discernible meaning?

I think that's just poor verbal intelligence which we know is a problem for you.
Sam Adams
Member
Sun Sep 16 20:00:07
Says the guy that tried to blame this nonsense on an autocorrect error.

"and iq doesn't correlate of people of the same heritage in different countries"

Lol
Nekran
Member
Sun Sep 16 21:59:44
Wow, Sammy's pretty butthurt that he couldn't decipher that sentence.
Seb
Member
Mon Sep 17 08:07:59
"But IQ also correlates to education levels and IQ doesn't correlate to people of the same heritage in different countries, indicating IQ as a measure is culturally specific."

Literally the only change her is the addition of a comma, capitalisation and changing "of" to "to".

Yeah, he's pretty butthurt.
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Sep 17 12:42:30
So you changed an unreadable lie to a readable lie. Still dumb and wrong.

Also, no autocorrect ever changes "of" to "to". Both characters are different and not near eachother on the keyboard. Seb your lack of basic understanding of fundamental logical principles is quite telling.
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Sep 17 12:47:05
"and IQ doesn't correlate to people of the same heritage in different countries"

Completely and utterly wrong, contrary to all established research. But then again, we all know seb hates facts and science when those oppose his feelings.
Seb
Member
Tue Sep 18 07:55:09
If it is a lie, show me a study then where the correlation of people of same race but who are bought up in different nations/cultures.

This is quite consistent with research, e.g. children of mixed race and the same parents not having statistically different intelligence from their parents or each other (as you would expect for a poly-genetic trait).

Sam, you are just a bullshit artist.

I find my spell check changing words left right and centre.

For example, it changed hood, which is correctly spelled word, to good. And Seb, which it knows because I've added it to the dictionary, to Web.

Google's keyboard autocorrect feature does contextual corrections like this for gesture typing.

At the same time, my phone is on it's last legs - it gets random lags on the UI (either processor dying or the battery voltage dropping to threshold levels).

So, you can speculate all you like if it is auto-correct or not, but fundamentally simply rendering to into of should not make that sentence unintelligible to you. That it does so says way more about me than you.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Sep 18 09:20:54
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1016313718644

Mixed race africans, while showing improvement, are still deficient.

Lol that was easy.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Sep 18 09:24:00

"For example, it changed hood, which is correctly spelled word, to good. And Seb, which it knows because I've added it to the dictionary, to Web. "

Exactly. Those are both a single letter off AND that letter is next door on the keyboard.

You don't even have the mental faculty to understand basic autocorrect. Lol.
Seb
Member
Tue Sep 18 15:08:57
Sam:

How would g keyboard know hood (which I've now twice replaced in this sentence) should be hood not good except by looking at the sentence as a whole?

It's not location on keypad, its some markov weighting.


Idiot.

Seb
Member
Tue Sep 18 15:18:47
The study Sam presents doesn't address the point.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Sep 18 17:10:44

"It's not location on keypad, its some markov weighting. "

Which would be generally based on the most common mistakes: one letter, one space off. Sebfail.


"The study Sam presents doesn't address the point."


Of course it does. It shows that a racial group has statistically significant lower than normal iq even when they migrate to a modern nation. Even worse, they have below normal iq even when combined with better dna. This is a pretty clear correlation even outside national borders, and directly contradicts your horrendous sjw lie.

Nothing you say is correct.

Sam Adams
Member
Tue Sep 18 17:10:44

"It's not location on keypad, its some markov weighting. "

Which would be generally based on the most common mistakes: one letter, one space off. Sebfail.


"The study Sam presents doesn't address the point."


Of course it does. It shows that a racial group has statistically significant lower than normal iq even when they migrate to a modern nation. Even worse, they have below normal iq even when combined with better dna. This is a pretty clear correlation even outside national borders, and directly contradicts your horrendous sjw lie.

Nothing you say is correct.

Seb
Member
Wed Sep 19 05:56:40
Sam:

Only one factor. Google a few years back introduced a feature with gesture typing where they catch false negatives on error checking: words spelled correctly but which are actually intended to be a different word. e.g. Hood is changed to good.

Couple that with gesture typing where your finger flows across the keyboard, and your screen isn't responsive enough, you get some pretty weird substitutions.

Searches through a Markov tree are computationally expensive, and I imagine what's happening is that it truncates the search after a period, going with the best weighted response to keep up with the flow of the writing. If the phone is dying it's probably truncating earlier than it should be and severely affecting performance. This kind of thing is one reason why Apple phones were designed to degrade in a planned way.

So yeah, off by one letter isn't the only possible mechanism here idiot.

Seb
Member
Wed Sep 19 06:05:37
The study doesn't compare people of the same heritage in different nations.

It compares people of different heritage in one nation.

You are assuming the results are the same, my point is they aren't.

Verbal iq is notoriously dependent on social and environmental factors, and it's not clear if they have controlled for socioeconomic factors.

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share