You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

buybuydandavis comments on [POLITICS] Jihadism and a new kind of existential threat - Less Wrong Discussion

-5 Post author: MrMind 25 March 2015 09:37AM

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

Comments (143)

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

Comment author: buybuydandavis 25 March 2015 09:31:55PM 3 points [-]

A huge chunk of evolution went into men competing with each other for women, so it is reasonable to start investigating abnormal behavior from there.

I think "crush the inferior Others and take their women as slaves" is more the norm than the exception on historical time scales.

Comment author: [deleted] 26 March 2015 08:19:37AM *  0 points [-]

This is one of the harshest truths to swallow, but unfortunately it does seem likely. We know little about the ancestral environment, but early recorded civilizations are rife with bride-kidnapping (alive as an fake ceremony / playful wedding game even to this day), Sabine women, Greek legends about princess Europa, and so on. Perhaps we could try to argue this is a feature of early civilization and not of the ancestral environment, or we could try to argue Indo-Europeans are unusually aggressive (this, independent from the issue here, seems at least 30-40% likely to me) but the Yanomamö would disagree.

Rollo Tomassi probably takes it way too far when we argues women evolved to actually like this, I find it more likely that the effect on romantic relationships is not as much as a Stockholm-syndrome falling in live with the kidnapper but falling in love with the kind of guy who can be a useful protector against kidnappers. I mean, that predicts polygamy in e.g. Islamic societies just right - nobody really dares to kidnap the emir's wives. The research showing that the most attractive guys are those who are dominant out-tribe but nice, friendly and easy-going in-tribe seems to support this, it fits the kidnapping-protector role better than the kidnapper role. There is something I have also noticed in soccer (team sports are quite good simulations of the ancestral environment IMHO): leadership, alpha-stuff is used to organize defense mostly, offense is more often a lone-hero thing. It takes only a small band to sneak in kidnap a few brides, but it takes a whole tribe to organize defense against it, so the leader-alpha types are more defense than offense oriented IMHO so not that aggressive. This is largely where the RP-sphere goes wrong.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 26 March 2015 05:58:56PM 1 point [-]

This is one of the harshest truths to swallow

Or, you could look at it as a sign of progress that has been achieved moving away from a savage evolutionary history.

Rollo Tomassi probably takes it way too far when we argues women evolved to actually like this

But the evolutionary pressures are probably in that direction.

but falling in love with the kind of guy who can be a useful protector against kidnappers... the leader-alpha types are more defense than offense oriented IMHO so not that aggressive.

While they wouldn't start with violence, because they would expect submission, I doubt the dominant alpha leaders were in the business of taking no for an answer.

Comment author: [deleted] 26 March 2015 09:26:29AM 1 point [-]

we could try to argue Indo-Europeans are unusually aggressive (this, independent from the issue here, seems at least 30-40% likely to me)

That sounds like an overestimate. As far as I've seen, the Indo-European expansion was just the first of the steppe hordes -- weren't they the first to domesticate the horse?

Also, isn't it possible that women could have evolved to like both the kidnapper and the guy who can protect her from the kidnapper?

Comment author: [deleted] 26 March 2015 09:48:09AM 0 points [-]

What I have in mind is more like Thucydides' chilling explanation how the early Ancient Greeks simply did not understand the term peace, engaging in constant piracy against each others ships and villages, and peace was invented as side-effect of military alliane against a third polis. Was the whole world as bad as that?

Comment author: satt 27 March 2015 04:39:13AM 0 points [-]

early recorded civilizations are rife with bride-kidnapping (alive as an fake ceremony / playful wedding game even to this day)

And some later ones, too.