Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Slanted" Eyes in Orientals
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 7 of 97 (100756)
04-18-2004 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by reddish
04-18-2004 5:42 AM


just don't confuse sexual selection with survival of the fittest
the scissortail flycatcher has a tail that makes it dangerous for survival and tests have shown that females will select for males with longer tails if they are available. sexual selection at odds with survival.
sexual selection could be the cause of the rapid growth of human brain capacity.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by reddish, posted 04-18-2004 5:42 AM reddish has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 12 of 97 (100814)
04-19-2004 1:19 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Chiroptera
04-18-2004 11:40 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
Problem here is Natural Selection is the bigger umbrella, and can be seen to include both survival selection and sexual selection, even though those two selection pressures can operate in opposing manners. A specimen that survives to advanced old age has strong surival selection advantage, but if the genes don't get passed on it doesn't matter. Likewise a sexual preference that ends up causing lower surival rates is not long for survival either.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Chiroptera, posted 04-18-2004 11:40 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-19-2004 2:07 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 26 by macaroniandcheese, posted 06-16-2004 6:09 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 14 of 97 (100896)
04-19-2004 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Parsimonious_Razor
04-19-2004 2:07 AM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
The bias for sexual selection being disadvantageous could be the result of point of view: anything that we cannot explain any other way (ie no perceived benefit) is due to sexual selection. The long tails of the scissorbird that make it harder to fly, land, perch, and particularly slower on takeoff must be sexual selection views.
That sexual selection can cause a runaway mutation (Fisher, sexy son) and that it will test mate fitness due to high costs (can't fake, only the best look the best) is fairly obvious.
But how do you gauge selection for slanted eyes? Most of sexual selection might be unnoticed because it seems mundane most of the time. (Young) men tend to focus on aspects under their control for sexual selection (fitness, hardbody) while being in denial about other skills (verbal communication?) that may be more beneficial. And obviously if sexual selection was not a powerful part of human sexuality, hairstyle and make-up would be dead industries.
enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-19-2004 2:07 AM Parsimonious_Razor has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-19-2004 1:23 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 16 of 97 (100967)
04-19-2004 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Parsimonious_Razor
04-19-2004 1:23 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
I think we are arguing two facets of the same view, with perhaps a slight divergence on the relative importances of the different mechanisms.
I do think one needs to be a little careful on the "Most people find traits that belong to individuals they are around a lot more attractive than traits of individuals they do not see often" versus attraction to novelty. Attraction to novelty also manifests as interest in art etc.
Some novelty is desirable in a mate, too much is not. This would be a measure of compatability between gene sets while ensuring enough protection from {incest \ inbreeding}. All else being equal eye shape has novelty.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-19-2004 1:23 PM Parsimonious_Razor has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-19-2004 4:59 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 18 of 97 (100984)
04-19-2004 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Parsimonious_Razor
04-19-2004 4:59 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
I would be interested in the study
I just went through
Department of Psychology | The University of New Mexico
and am still digesting some of it.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-19-2004 4:59 PM Parsimonious_Razor has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-20-2004 1:05 AM RAZD has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 21 of 97 (101555)
04-21-2004 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Parsimonious_Razor
04-21-2004 1:33 AM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
There was also an (cover story) article in discover mag a while back about beauty -- the cover was a pastiche of pictures to arrive at an "ideal" beauty. If you are interested I will look for it.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-21-2004 1:33 AM Parsimonious_Razor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Asgara, posted 04-21-2004 12:27 PM RAZD has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 25 of 97 (101621)
04-21-2004 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Parsimonious_Razor
04-21-2004 1:26 PM


From the Feb 2000 Discover article (Discover Financial Services)
{{you need to sign in to get full articles now}}
Human beings may be born "cognitive averagers," theorizes Langlois. "Even very young infants have seen thousands of faces and may have already constructed an average from them that they use for comparison."
Inclination toward the average is called koinophilia, from the Greek words koinos, meaning "usual," and philos, meaning "love."
But koinophilia isn't the only-or even supreme-criterion for beauty that evolution has promoted, other scientists argue. An innate yearning for symmetry is a major boon, contend biologists Anders Moller and Randy Thornhill, as asymmetry can signal malnutrition, disease, or bad genes. The two have found that asymmetrical animals, ranging from barn swallows to lions, have fewer offspring and shorter lives.
"It turned out that the way an attractive female face differs from an average one is related to femininity," says Perrett. "For example, female eyebrows are more arched than males'. Exaggerating that difference from the average increases femininity," and, in tandem, the attractiveness rating. In the traffic-stopping female face created for this experiment, 200 facial reference points all changed in the direction of hyperfemininity: larger eyes, a smaller nose, plumper lips, a narrower jaw, and a smaller chin.
"All faces go through a metamorphosis at puberty," observes Johnston. "In males, testosterone lengthens the jaw. In females, estrogen makes the hips, breasts, and lips swell." So large lips, breasts, and hips combined with a small jaw "are all telling you that I have an abundant supply of estrogen, so I am a fertile female." Like the peacock, whose huge tail is a mating advantage but a practical hindrance, "a small jaw may not, in fact, be as efficient for eating," Johnston says.
If each person is constructing their personal average from their experience then exposure to more "foreign" faces for extended time periods would probably show a drift in the 'average' value. I would also expect recent experience to carry more weight than past.
Pictures not loading on the article one is a computer evolved face from 16 at start and subsequent generations made from the top picks.
almond eyes, but no fold (also not in the original samples, so biased results).

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 04-21-2004 1:26 PM Parsimonious_Razor has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 28 of 97 (115875)
06-16-2004 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by macaroniandcheese
06-16-2004 6:09 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
a trait that endangers survival will ensure the survival of only the strongest members...
I may have overstated the case, but lets not go overboard the other direction. Nothing ensures survival, and such extreme sexual selection pressure will mean that both survival and sexual selection will place extra pressure on the individuals. As a birder I am aware of the many examples of extreme sexual selection, some of them on the verge of extinction.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by macaroniandcheese, posted 06-16-2004 6:09 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by macaroniandcheese, posted 06-16-2004 9:22 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 30 of 97 (115903)
06-16-2004 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by macaroniandcheese
06-16-2004 9:22 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
we come closer.
putting extra survival pressure on potential mates through sexual selection means that those that are able to survive to mate will be the strongest and healthiest of the available choices. whether that is sufficient to ensure species survival is the question.
my feeling is that in the long term it is self (species) defeating compared to more generalist species.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by macaroniandcheese, posted 06-16-2004 9:22 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by macaroniandcheese, posted 06-17-2004 9:21 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 33 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 9:53 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 35 of 97 (116015)
06-17-2004 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by pink sasquatch
06-17-2004 9:53 AM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
"are more likely to) select themselves to extinction" because "overinvestment in a 'sexual selection handicap' might be a detriment to adaptability" as is "true for over-specialization in general"
I think you get the picture. Sooner or later the overspecialization will catch them unprepared.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 9:53 AM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 11:26 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 37 of 97 (116041)
06-17-2004 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by pink sasquatch
06-17-2004 11:26 AM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection

other than that the overspecialization boundary is self imposed rather than a response to a specialized niche. it's kind of like the distinction between stupidity and willfull ignorance.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 11:26 AM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 12:27 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 39 of 97 (116077)
06-17-2004 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by pink sasquatch
06-17-2004 12:27 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
There have been tests with scissortail birds where the tails have been artificially modified with 4 groups
(1) cut shorter
(2) left same length
(3) cut off and reglued with same length
(4) extended with glued on section (longer than normally survive)
The females consistently chose the longest tails for mating with no difference between (2) and (3) (so glue did not influence the choice)
Of course this also gets into the question of how much sexual choice is genetically driven ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 12:27 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 1:56 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 41 of 97 (116103)
06-17-2004 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by pink sasquatch
06-17-2004 1:56 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
As I said, it "gets into the question of how much sexual choice is genetically driven ..."
It also gets into the question of how much intelligence and choice animals have (not what we think they have).
We can see choices being made, but not what is behind the choice (heck we can't always tell why people make the choices they do).
A genetic version of {no free will}?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 1:56 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 3:57 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 43 of 97 (116143)
06-17-2004 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by pink sasquatch
06-17-2004 3:57 PM


Re: Natural and Sexual Selection
even in humans it goes to the question of homosexual behavior among other things: what controls attraction? genetics? hormones? environment? experience? choice?
If a koala is incapable* of digesting any other food that is available to it, then yes, it is self-imposed
* OOPS make that "If a koala is capable of digesting other food that is available to it, then yes, it is self-imposed (edit)
This message has been edited by RAZD, 06-17-2004 09:48 PM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-17-2004 3:57 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 56 of 97 (116606)
06-18-2004 11:57 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by almeyda
06-18-2004 10:45 PM


Silly me. Here I thought evolution was a science, and thus evolutionary ideas would be scientific ideas ...
glad that was straightened out.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by almeyda, posted 06-18-2004 10:45 PM almeyda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by almeyda, posted 06-19-2004 1:29 AM RAZD has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024