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.

ChristianKl comments on When does heritable low fitness need to be explained? - Less Wrong Discussion

15 Post author: DanArmak 10 June 2015 12:05AM

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

Comments (146)

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

Comment author: DanArmak 10 June 2015 10:35:26AM *  5 points [-]

You're right, this is a problem.

If something is heritable but also uncommon, it should be possible for selection pressure to act on it. So why doesn't it? That clarifies the issue for me. What I wrote before (in this comment thread) now seems mistaken. Thank you for helping me to understand better.

It seems my original question was partly due to a misunderstanding. The crucial fact about homosexuality isn't just the lowered fitness or relatively high incidence, but the (partial) heritability. Then the only relevant remaining question is: can we quantitatively estimate the reduced fitness due to homosexuality and so calculate the unlikelihood of its 3% rate being due to chance, drift, etc?

Comment author: ChristianKl 10 June 2015 03:32:04PM 2 points [-]

So why doesn't it? That clarifies the issue for me. What I wrote before (in this comment thread) now seems mistaken. Thank you for helping me to understand better.

Congratulation for good updating.