Why evolution favors the foolhardy (but only if you’re a guy) January 21, 2008
Posted by Niels in : Life, the universe, and everything , 2 commentsThe recent talk about pairbonding at the Pacific Science Center made me reread an even better article, Is There Anything Good About Men? by Prof. Roy Baumeister of Florida State University.
Though DNA analysis (for example, comparing the genetic variability in the Y chromosome - inherited from the father, vs. mitochondrial DNA - inherited from the mother), scientists have found that we’re descended from about twice as many women as men.
In other words, historically, the reproductive situation was vastly different for women and men. While the average women will have the opportunity to have children, men had to do much more to differentiate themselves to end up in the select group of “reproducers”.
For men, the outlook was radically different. If you go along with the crowd and play it safe, the odds are you won’t have children. Most men who ever lived did not have descendants who are alive today. Their lines were dead ends. Hence it was necessary to take chances, try new things, be creative, explore other possibilities. Sailing off into the unknown may be risky, and you might drown or be killed or whatever, but then again if you stay home you won’t reproduce anyway. We’re most descended from the type of men who made the risky voyage and managed to come back rich. In that case he would finally get a good chance to pass on his genes. We’re descended from men who took chances (and were lucky).
So high variance in male traits and behaviors is much more highly rewarded than high variance in female traits and behaviors. And this is where statistics makes things interesting:
A pattern of more men at both extremes can create all sorts of misleading conclusions and other statistical mischief. To illustrate, let’s assume that men and women are on average exactly equal in every relevant respect, but more men at both extremes. If you then measure things that are bounded at one end, it screws up the data to make men and women seem significantly different.
Consider grade point average in college. Thanks to grade inflation, most students now get A’s and B’s, but a few range all the way down to F. With that kind of low ceiling, the high-achieving males cannot pull up the male average, but the loser males will pull it down. The result will be that women will get higher average grades than men — again despite no difference in average quality of work.
The opposite result comes with salaries. There is a minimum wage but no maximum. Hence the high-achieving men can pull the male average up while the low-achieving ones can’t pull it down. The result? Men will get higher average salaries than women, even if there is no average difference on any relevant input.
Thanks to my friend Eric at ApproachAnxiety.com for tipping me off to this article.
Your thoughts?Sultry Science at Pacific Science Center January 18, 2008
Posted by Niels in : Personal , 6 commentsI went to the Pacific Science Center’s monthly Science with a Twist nerdfest today. $15 gets you a free drink, a bunch of food and chocolate, a chance to run around a children-sized museum, a lecture on the evolutionary aspects of pairbonding, and a nausea-inducing KISS laser show. Sweet.
The lecture on pairbonding was the most interesting part. Apparently men go into hormonal cycles that synchronize with the women they’re living with. I disagreed with the researcher’s conclusions (he begins from the assumption that monogamy is a cross-cultural human trait - dubious, to say the least) but it was fascinating data.
Your thoughts?Now enjoy the experience of being put on hold - without a phone! January 15, 2008
Posted by Niels in : Personal , 1 comment so farWhile on hold to report a water main break, a recording of Seattle Mayor Greg Nickles informed me that all the fantastic music I was listening to is also available online, at http://www.seattle.gov/onhold/! I was just thinking about how much I enjoy the experience of being on hold and wondering if there was any way I could experience it more often. Isn’t technology wonderful?
Your thoughts?Sledless in Seattle January 15, 2008
Posted by Niels in : Personal , add a commentIt’s not often that I get to be really happy about living on a hill with a 20 degree incline. But when Seattle suddenly dumps an inch of hail on the ground within the span of an hour and I’ve only got about 30 minutes before it turns into slush and my hill becomes the perfect sledding hill because no car would be dumb enough to drive up or down it… oh yeah, then I love my hill.
Oh, and when sledding on cardboard boxes - use the glossy ones with pictures on them. They’re way faster than plain corrugated cardboard!
Your thoughts?I want to talk at TED January 14, 2008
Posted by Niels in : Personal , add a commentI am adding “Give a speech at TED” to my list of life goals. It fits in nicely with my goal of living an extraordinary life. As for the short term consequences, I need to stay committed to my effort to build my own business. While I’m not facing any financial pressure to work long hours, doing so could be the difference between taking ten years to find a build my career vs. doing it in one year. This week I’ll be making a concerted effort to put in a lot more hours and I hope to see a difference at the end.
Your thoughts?