3 ms·

That’s right. We do not fully understand fluid dynamics. We are still trying to model it. And we are certainly not “post fluid dynamics” even though we successf

by dpark 5y ago

That’s right. We do not fully understand fluid dynamics. We are still trying to model it. And we are certainly not “post fluid dynamics” even though we successfully send water through pipes and put planes into the air.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
We are “post-molecules” for most fluid dynamics behaviour. Though I don't see how fluid dynamics is relevant, here; I'm using these as examples where your general argument falls down, not analogies.
- dpark 5y ago
  I didn’t make a general argument. I made a statement about being “post-genome”. Let’s go back to your original comment: > Modern computing is “post hardware”. That doesn't mean the hardware doesn't matter, or that changes to the hardware don't make a difference; it means describing the hardware is insufficient to describe computers, whereas describing the software is mostly sufficient. You are correct about software. Describing it is largely sufficient to explain computer behavior. This is not the case for human behavior. The genome encodes the hardware, but also encodes a ton of critical software (call it firmware?). Even basic needs like eating are not explained by culture/society. More complex behaviors called out in the article are also not explainable solely by cultural influence. Certainly culture influences the gymbro to build muscle, but it cannot be solely that because most people do not build massive amounts of muscle. If culture were solely responsible you’d expect to see this influence people far more evenly. Same for climbing mountains. There’s very little societal push for this. And I mentioned weddings already. You can certainly explain the specifics of weddings culturally. But you cannot explain why people desire to pair bond culturally. We’re not post genome because we cannot explain most human behavior by looking solely at cultural influences.

by dpark 5y ago

wizzwizz4 5y ago

We are “post-molecules” for most fluid dynamics behaviour. Though I don't see how fluid dynamics is relevant, here; I'm using these as examples where your general argument falls down, not analogies.

dpark 5y ago
I didn’t make a general argument. I made a statement about being “post-genome”. Let’s go back to your original comment: > Modern computing is “post hardware”. That doesn't mean the hardware doesn't matter, or that changes to the hardware don't make a difference; it means describing the hardware is insufficient to describe computers, whereas describing the software is mostly sufficient. You are correct about software. Describing it is largely sufficient to explain computer behavior. This is not the case for human behavior. The genome encodes the hardware, but also encodes a ton of critical software (call it firmware?). Even basic needs like eating are not explained by culture/society. More complex behaviors called out in the article are also not explainable solely by cultural influence. Certainly culture influences the gymbro to build muscle, but it cannot be solely that because most people do not build massive amounts of muscle. If culture were solely responsible you’d expect to see this influence people far more evenly. Same for climbing mountains. There’s very little societal push for this. And I mentioned weddings already. You can certainly explain the specifics of weddings culturally. But you cannot explain why people desire to pair bond culturally. We’re not post genome because we cannot explain most human behavior by looking solely at cultural influences.