3 ms·
It's more complicated ... it's "multifactorial". To expand on it, I'll quote from a short review of 'Behave', by the inimitable Robert Sapolsky, that I wrote o
by kashyapc 5y ago
It's more complicated ... it's "multifactorial". To expand on it, I'll quote from a short review of 'Behave', by the inimitable Robert Sapolsky, that I wrote on a previous thread[1]:
The most important idea in the book: "when you explain a behaviour with one of the various disciplines [biology, psychology, culture, et al], you are implicitly invoking all the disciplines [...] A 'neurobiological' or 'genetic' or 'developmental' explanation for a behaviour is just a shorthand for temporarily approaching the whole multifactorial arc from a particular perspective."
Six hundred pages into the book, Sapolsky restates the central thesis: the biology of human behaviours that interest us, in all cases, is "multifactorial". What does it mean? There's a dizzying array of factors that influence our behaviour; too many enumerate, but a quick few: blood glucose levels; the socio-economic status of your family of birth; sleep quality and quantity; prenatal environment; stress and glucocorticoid [a key stress-signaller] levels; if you live in an individualist or a collectivist culture, and so on.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25559890 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25559890
- mannykannot 5y agoNevertheless, these factors are separable, and it is necessary to distinguish between them if we are to understand, in detail, how they work together. Here, by equivocating and muddying the waters over the term 'evolution', broadening it to encompass learned methods of coping and thriving, the authors are impeding a clear understanding of how the factors work together.