Violet comments on Problems in evolutionary psychology - Less Wrong

55 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 13 August 2010 06:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (102)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Violet 14 August 2010 08:35:11AM 4 points [-]

Given two groups there are probably mental differences.

More interesting is are the distributions bimodal and how much have they changed in e.g. last 100 years.

If the distributions are not bimodal or change relatively strong with time then a simplistic view of "women X, men Y" won't work.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 14 August 2010 09:29:13AM 6 points [-]

Agreed. I'm very tired of articles which say "Hey look! There's a difference" without getting into the amount of individual difference or group overlap.

Comment author: HughRistik 16 August 2010 04:51:53AM 6 points [-]

I agree. I'm also tired of "Hey look! There's overlap between the distributions, so let's pretend the difference doesn't matter!"

Comment author: Violet 16 August 2010 09:08:12AM 8 points [-]

A simple example is height. On average men are taller than women.

But most of the time making a men=tall, women=short simplification does not make sense. It makes more sense to provide multiple sizes for both women and men.

And if providing only a very limited selection of sizes (e.g. hospital clothing) it makes sense to provide different unisex sizes rather than one for men and one for women.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 16 August 2010 08:34:20AM 5 points [-]

And while we're busy being tired, I'm really tired of no research by anybody (so far as I know) about keeping reactions to ideas one has about group differences in proportion to what one actually knows instead of exaggerating the size or extent of the differences.

It took rather a lot of hammering to get to the idea of atypical women.