Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 207 posts

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#81

Post by honestoHeminway »

jawns wrote: post #42
tosser350 wrote: post #9

People need to realize we are built on hardware that is hundreds of millions of years old. We share a similar hormonal dominance hierarchy system with fucking lobsters. You can't just say it's and expect these things to disappear. Tribalism was important for survival, trusting someone who didn't look like you could mean death and thus was selected for over long periods of time.

And then we became human and started not acting like lobsters. We have intellects, a sense of morality, and a will. Those allow us to drastically curtail what might otherwise be instinctive behaviors. I know there are some determinists who say that free will is illusory and we're as much slaves to our genetics and instincts as lobsters are. But it certainly seems as if, in practice, tribalism (at least the clear-cut…

Yes, but its hard work- and maybe that hard work is not always worth the effort.

So instead of doing hard work, we decided to make tools to circumvent the bugs, for example by avoiding buggy routine executing personal communication - and instead discuss that paper online.

Work with the smart, no matter what skin colour, instead of doing the PC-Dance.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#82

Post by tomsthumb »

emodendroket wrote: post #71
rawnlq wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you choose friends who share values with you, "tribes" will naturally self segregate based on those values. Is that really so bad?

I, uh, do not see what that has to do with your friends being genetically similar.

If one considers that the conservative vs. liberal spectrum in America has a statistically significant genetic [0] why would it not?

[0] - Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind"

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#83

Post by KGIII »

gph wrote: post #74
emodendroket wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it isn't, I don't think there is much meaningful distinction left among Americans of English and French ancestry. How many people would even notice?

Depends on the area. I think in parts of Maine where there's a strong Quebecois influence there's definitely a meaningful distinction. There's other areas, especially in rural communities, where a specific European country has a lingering overstated influence. But within any major metro area you're right, there's typically little meaningful distinction anyone would pick up on between two Americans of different Europe…

I live in Maine. You are correct. They teach French in school, to everyone. Some areas have classes in French that are not specifically French learning classes. The majority of those living here without documentation are Canadians. If you get into cities like Lewiston, you'll find whole areas where French is commonly spoken.

It's kinda neat, actually. I am also a citizen of Canada, but don't speak French. It's fun to learn and be exposed to the culture, but I digress.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#84

Post by colordrops »

emodendroket wrote: post #70
tosser350 wrote: post #9

People need to realize we are built on hardware that is hundreds of millions of years old. We share a similar hormonal dominance hierarchy system with fucking lobsters. You can't just say it's and expect these things to disappear. Tribalism was important for survival, trusting someone who didn't look like you could mean death and thus was selected for over long periods of time.

Adultery and murder have happened in just about every human society in the history of time but nobody thinks we shouldn't bother trying to suppress those impulses.

It's more nuanced than that though. The question is where to draw the line about which behaviors are bad and which ones aren't. Things like murder are obviously bad in most cases and should be suppressed, but social structures are not so clear cut. If there aren't any clear consequences to a instinctual behavior then it's probably better to not suppress it.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#85

Post by okreallywtf »

oh_sigh wrote: post #38
okreallywtf wrote: post #17

I have anecdotally noticed this with tall people and short people, I will notice a group of friends who are all 6'2"+, or who are all <=5'7", both of which seem statistically unlikely. There are plenty of more diverse groups (in terms of height) but its hard to say whether they are work friends or something else where you have less overall choice.

Tall friends could be explained from sports which are useful to be tall like basketball or volleyball teams.

I've had that thought too, I would say there is some validity to that explanation.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#86

Post by emodendroket »

colordrops wrote: post #84
emodendroket wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adultery and murder have happened in just about every human society in the history of time but nobody thinks we shouldn't bother trying to suppress those impulses.

It's more nuanced than that though. The question is where to draw the line about which behaviors are bad and which ones aren't. Things like murder are obviously bad in most cases and should be suppressed, but social structures are not so clear cut. If there aren't any clear consequences to a instinctual behavior then it's probably better to not suppress it.

There are lots of clear consequences to "tribalist" behavior, especially if we mean the obvious example of racism.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#87

Post by subroutine »

Real_S wrote: post #79
subroutine wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe these findings though? (original article: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/Supplement_3/10796.full ) To me there are a few things worth highlighting, that are at least tangentially relevant: 1. This article was a PNAS Direct Submission. PNAS Direct Submission, a privilege typically reserved for members of the National Academy of Sciences, is like using trump-card to basically skip peer review. Since NAS…

1. You are perceptive, this is usually something to watch out for. However, it does not always indicate that a study is flawed, just that the research might have met with unwanted resistance, and the authors are in position to avoid that resistance. 2. Yes, these scientists are looking to make their research popular, highlighting an unfortunate conflict of interest present in academia. They do this to get big grants.…

Thanks for these replies. Also, very cool idea you have here: Cryptography for genetic material

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#88

Post by gph »

QAPereo wrote: post #75
gph wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Framingham, MA is old school New England. I wouldn't be surprised if 75+% of the participants are of direct English/Anglo-Saxon descent, even though the article describes it as "European" descent.

Framingham is pretty much just like that, although it's less than 75% it's still a supermajority. https://datausa.io/profile/geo/framingham-ma/#demographics

Remember also that the dataset they are using began back in the 1940s when the towns demographics would have been much farther skewed towards English/Anglo-Saxon. And while they've included more participants over the course of the study, it's mainly been adding the descendants of the original participants.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#89

Post by emodendroket »

tomsthumb wrote: post #82
emodendroket wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, uh, do not see what that has to do with your friends being genetically similar.

If one considers that the conservative vs. liberal spectrum in America has a statistically significant genetic [0] why would it not? [0] - Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind"

I have not found little correlation between sharing my values and phenotypes, and short of DNA testing my friends that's all I have to go on.

Further, while there may be a correlation, it's far from deterministic. Experiences count for a lot in developing values.

Re: Friends Are Genetically Similar (2014)

#90

Post by wutbrodo »

jawns wrote: post #42
tosser350 wrote: post #9

People need to realize we are built on hardware that is hundreds of millions of years old. We share a similar hormonal dominance hierarchy system with fucking lobsters. You can't just say it's and expect these things to disappear. Tribalism was important for survival, trusting someone who didn't look like you could mean death and thus was selected for over long periods of time.

And then we became human and started not acting like lobsters. We have intellects, a sense of morality, and a will. Those allow us to drastically curtail what might otherwise be instinctive behaviors. I know there are some determinists who say that free will is illusory and we're as much slaves to our genetics and instincts as lobsters are. But it certainly seems as if, in practice, tribalism (at least the clear-cut…

Sure, of course we curtail these behaviors. It's uncharitable to read the parent comment as suggesting that we ignore our conscious, moral minds. I understood him as simply saying that the dogmatic belief in humans-as-blank-slates is going to keep being belied by the way humans act in practice, even those who have as much a claim to conscious morality as anyone else. Something as subtle as why you get along with someone and choose to keep seeing them isn't fully-specified, and whenever something isnt fully-specified, our lizard brains have a strong chance to fill in the gap.

In case you think I'm arguing against a strawman, the blank slate view is _extremely_ popular, and likely even more so in the circles that this commentariat likely run in.

Post reply on HN