4 ms·
> Melamed is expressing that the result is surprising. He is clearly not refusing to believe it. I didn't say that he's refusing to believe the result. Rather,
by leto_ii 6y ago
> Melamed is expressing that the result is surprising. He is clearly not refusing to believe it.
I didn't say that he's refusing to believe the result. Rather, I found it amusing that he did not reassess his prior beliefs in light of new evidence. He continued to assume that collaborative/mutualistic behavior decreases fitness, even while noticing that many animals engage in it. He saw this as puzzling, when it may simply mean that this type of behavior doesn't actually decrease fitness.
Not sure what you meant by eludidate btw.
- newacct583 6y agoYou don't think it's appropriate for a scientist to be puzzled by a result? (Also: please make fun of my typos some more. That absolutely benefits the discussion.)
- leto_ii 6y ago> You don't think it's appropriate for a scientist to be puzzled by a result? Definitely. However, there didn't seem to be an attempt to also question his existing theory regarding evolutionary fitness. Again, the results are only puzzling if you assume collaboration decreases fitness, but that assumption should always be open to reassessment. > please make fun of my typos some more No need for sarcasm, my comment was not intended to be snarky. The word could have been 'elude', 'elucidate' or smth else. I will go for 'elucidate' since it fits best in the context.