OrphanWilde comments on What is moral foundation theory good for? - Less Wrong

9 Post author: novalis 12 August 2012 05:03AM

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

Comments (296)

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

Comment author: OrphanWilde 13 August 2012 07:22:49PM 5 points [-]

Marriage is getting less common. I don't know the statistics for monogamous relationships in general over the last thirty years, but in the 1960's and 1970's, the trend definitely shifted to more relationships, which permits Charlie's position, although it obviously doesn't prove it. (Searching "mean relationships men women" didn't provide any useful evidence as to whether his position holds.)

I don't particularly care to get into the color politics. I wasn't attempting to prove anything, I was trying to explain what Charlie's position was, because you didn't seem to be catching it.

Comment author: CharlieSheen 14 August 2012 05:25:25AM *  5 points [-]

Marriage is getting less common.

Marriage rates have basically collapsed among lower SES African Americans in the US and dropped significantly for all other classes as well. In addition to this the number of relationship hours one can expect from a marriage is that the average age of marriage is getting higher and higher for women.. In addition to this divorce rates are high and mostly driven by women, for example:

Evidence is given that among college-educated couples, the percentages of divorces initiated by women is approximately 90%.

Both also speak of a probably lower quality of relationship hours as does a lower satisfaction with marriage than in the past.

Comment author: Mitchell_Porter 14 August 2012 05:47:41AM 3 points [-]

Marriage rats

They have animal models of everything now!

Comment author: novalis 13 August 2012 07:27:08PM 2 points [-]

Thanks for the explanation.

I'm also not particularly into color politics; as noted, I don't fit easily into Haidt's dichotomy, and I suspect that most of Less Wrong also doesn't.