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.

DanArmak 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: gwern 11 June 2015 01:29:30AM 5 points [-]

Wikipedia on causes of homosexuality says there are "various biological causes", and quotes:

I don't much care about quotes from very prestigious professional bodies; they are always mealy-mouthed and self-serving, where they do not endorse pleasing claims on radically insufficient evidence (eg diet). What's more relevant is the actual research, like the link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation ; I'm not too impressed, as it seems to be mostly a laundry list of fairly dubious corrrelations and downstream effects or irrelevant to humans animal research (does anyone think that deleting an entire gene in mice to turn them gay tells us anything relevant about causes in healthy humans?).

Comment author: DanArmak 11 June 2015 07:16:08AM *  1 point [-]

Fair enough. I should rely less on popularized professional consensus in this kind of thing.

Being who you are, it's no surprise that you have this attitude (and correctly so).