What amazes me is that in this whole conversation no one even mentions the differences between men and women, as these differences were shaped by evolutionary forces. In all our attempts to make women and men "equal", not just in this country, but across the world, women and men still go into different professions and do have different interests, and are good in their gender-specific things. There is a reason for that: men and women are different. Surely, there will be women in tech and men in nursing. But the differences are there and they go back hundreds of millions of years, and they've…
I believe "macro evolution" is a bit of a controversial term, as it that term and the corresponding "micro evolution" have been co-opted by creationists, who obtusely claim that there is no evidence for macro evolution, but that they accept micro evolution. I'm reading "The Greatest Show on Earth" (which is a fantastic book for a broad overview of the evidence for evolution. The evidence is truly astounding and awesome). Dawkins spends a bit of time arguing that the distinction between micro and macro isn't that meaningful. However, I just skimmed the Wikipedia pages and it seems the terms…
Strongly recommend you read Dawkins' "The Greatest Show on Earth" (https://www.amazon.com/Greatest-Show-Earth-Evidence-Evolutio...) and come back to tell us what you think :)
I have previously read the site kindly submitted for discussion today and have recommended it (here on Hacker News, too, as I recall) before. This site is well worth a read. A comment asks for a recommendation of a book about macroevolution, transformation to new species among descendant organisms, and I can not only recommend two books, but also a free website. The website is 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution,[1] which I have recommended often to readers here on Hacker News. The books are Why Evolution Is True by Jerry Coyne[2] and The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins.[3] Both books…
Here's a passage from Dawkins' "The Greatest Show on Earth": "As we look back on the history of life, we see a picture of never-ending, ever-rejuvenating novelty. Individuals die; species, families orders and even classes go extinct. But the evolutionary process itself seems to pick itself up and resume its recurrent flowering, with undiminished freshness, with unabated youthfulness, as epoch gives way to epoch." And a passage from Brecht's "Leben des Galilei": "Eine Menschheit, stolpernd in diesem tausendjährigen Perlmutterdunst von Aberglaube und alten Wörtern, zu unwissend, ihre eigenen…
You should try reading "The Greatest Show on Earth". It lays the overwhelming evidence for evolution out in stunning detail. It's absolutely incredible. Also, Dawkins manages to stick to the facts and evidence and almost entirely avoid the religion bashing in this book, making it much more approachable for religious folks.
Dawkins does try to educate people, in fact from his book output he mostly tries to educate people - see for example "the greatest show on earth". I think he has a specific reason for attacking religion, and it isn't to de-convert people. His intent is to break religion's special status as immune from criticism in polite society. There is this assumption that religion always does social good, is always well-intentioned, and even if it turns out to be mistaken about reality, it's harmless. This lets religions get away with all sorts of rascally behaviour - see the Catholic church in Ireland,…
I have bought The Greatest Show on Earth but haven't read it yet. Dawkins is an author that I automatically buy (won't wait for it to be available at the library...). Selfish Gene was indeed life-changing for me. I you want more Yudkowsky stuff on Evolution, check out the rest of this sequence of posts: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Evolution
Of course my moral views are affected by my culture. That is a big part of how morality works. I encourage you to learn more about evolution. The evidence and coherency is overwhelming. “The Greatest Show on Earth” by Richard Dawkins is a very good brief overview of the evidence. It’s quite stunning.
Diversity, when it comes to sexes, is such a nebulous idea. Here is a comment I left above. What amazes me is that in this whole conversation no one even mentions the differences between men and women, as these differences were shaped by evolutionary forces. In all our attempts to make women and men "equal", not just in this country, but across the world, women and men still go into different professions and do have different interests, and are good in their gender-specific things. There is a reason for that: men and women are different. Surely, there will be women in tech and men in…