Eugine_Nier comments on [LINK] Loss of local knowledge affecting intellectual trends - Less Wrong

18 Post author: GLaDOS 22 October 2011 03:54PM

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

Comments (50)

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

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 25 October 2011 04:07:36AM 3 points [-]

For example, look at how many cultures believed that what a female was thinking or looking at would influence the offspring.

Well, as Konkvistador pointed out, what happens to a pregnant woman does influence the offspring. As for what she was thinking or looking at, especially if it caused her to be flooded with adrenaline or other hormones, that it could effect the baby certainly doesn't strike me as absurd. (Do you know of any research in this area?)

Comment author: JoshuaZ 25 October 2011 04:11:31AM 0 points [-]

Sure, that sort of effect could maybe occur. But the versions in classical cultures aren't that. For example, the referenced example in Genesis has Jacob apparently using speckled sticks to make the the offspring of the cattle become speckled. Similarly, some cultures believed that if a woman was thinking of another man when she conceived the child then the child would be more likely to look like the other man.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 25 October 2011 04:28:14AM *  6 points [-]

Similarly, some cultures believed that if a woman was thinking of another man when she conceived the child then the child would be more likely to look like the other man.

That almost sounds like the type of "polite fiction" that developed to avoid dealing with the consequences of embarrassing affairs.