3 ms·
The title of his article includes "You can’t take it with you". That is not anything close to implying "we can’t rule it out". I know the evidence does not tot
by FollowingTheDao 4y ago
The title of his article includes "You can’t take it with you". That is not anything close to implying "we can’t rule it out".
I know the evidence does not totally support epigenetic transmission, but it is pointing towards that conclusion. What we need is more evidence, not dismissing it on the basis of not knowing.
Besides, it just makes sense biologically. Why would we not have a biological system that prepared offspring for
risks or even changes in the environment?
- rayiner 4y ago> I know the evidence does not totally support epigenetic transmission, but it is pointing towards that conclusion. The point of the article is the opposite: that the evidence is pointing away from epigenetic transmission. Acknowledging that we can’t yet rule out epigenetic transmission doesn’t undermine the point that the existing evidence is pointing away from it.
- oa335 4y agoWhat evidence in particular? I scanned the article but couldn’t find much.
- robertlagrant 4y ago> Besides, it just makes sense biologically. I think the author is trying to pursuade us that this sort of instinct is not sufficient to base large social theories on.