Comments on: The “E” factor http://encefalus.com/general/factor/ Studying the complex interaction between brain, society and mind Mon, 23 Jan 2012 23:15:37 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: gustavo http://encefalus.com/general/factor/comment-page-1/#comment-93475 gustavo Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:31:49 +0000 http://encefalus.com/?p=2054#comment-93475 hola me facinas hola me facinas

]]> By: Susannah Ocampo http://encefalus.com/general/factor/comment-page-1/#comment-68521 Susannah Ocampo Fri, 14 Jan 2011 20:12:43 +0000 http://encefalus.com/?p=2054#comment-68521 definitely have to mention you render various fantastic facts and will probably submit a variety of points to add in shortly after a day or two. definitely have to mention you render various fantastic facts and will probably submit a variety of points to add in shortly after a day or two.

]]> By: javid http://encefalus.com/general/factor/comment-page-1/#comment-61224 javid Thu, 30 Dec 2010 11:52:05 +0000 http://encefalus.com/?p=2054#comment-61224 very hot very hot

]]> By: Js http://encefalus.com/general/factor/comment-page-1/#comment-34457 Js Sat, 09 Oct 2010 20:32:27 +0000 http://encefalus.com/?p=2054#comment-34457 Well, this article is pretty old, so I suppose there's not much point in commenting on it. However, I feel I have to point a flaw in this reasoning. You claim that the Playboy bunny has a higher E-factor. But her profession has roughly 0 to do with her E-factor. The fact that she makes more money DOES NOT mean she is more likely to survive than the college professor, nor does it mean she'll have more children. In fact, she may delay child-bearing to preserve her figure and livelihood. In the end, she'll likely have 1-3 kids, same as the professor. In the modern developed world, having more money or resources does not make you more likely to have children or survive (most people do that just fine these days). Psychology and access to contraceptives probably has the most to do with it, meaning that the poor and Mormon have a significantly higher E-factor than the fabulously wealthy (look at childless George Clooney, for example). You're right: survival and reproduction are the only things that influence evolution. Don't be confused into thinking that societal markers of power - beauty, money or education - have anything to do with the E factor in our modern world. Look at how many children someone has, that's all that matters. Okay, rant done. Thank you. Well, this article is pretty old, so I suppose there’s not much point in commenting on it. However, I feel I have to point a flaw in this reasoning.

You claim that the Playboy bunny has a higher E-factor. But her profession has roughly 0 to do with her E-factor. The fact that she makes more money DOES NOT mean she is more likely to survive than the college professor, nor does it mean she’ll have more children. In fact, she may delay child-bearing to preserve her figure and livelihood. In the end, she’ll likely have 1-3 kids, same as the professor.

In the modern developed world, having more money or resources does not make you more likely to have children or survive (most people do that just fine these days). Psychology and access to contraceptives probably has the most to do with it, meaning that the poor and Mormon have a significantly higher E-factor than the fabulously wealthy (look at childless George Clooney, for example).

You’re right: survival and reproduction are the only things that influence evolution. Don’t be confused into thinking that societal markers of power – beauty, money or education – have anything to do with the E factor in our modern world. Look at how many children someone has, that’s all that matters. Okay, rant done. Thank you.

]]> By: Dan http://encefalus.com/general/factor/comment-page-1/#comment-22879 Dan Wed, 11 Aug 2010 00:33:34 +0000 http://encefalus.com/?p=2054#comment-22879 Hi Found it interesting. However I would not agree with this article at all, and tell you why: 1. The modern society has lots of resources: human, natural, intellectual - to support, rise and drop down stars like you mentioned above. Stars don't have that power and strength to be do on their own. 2. Modern society has different meaning of survival, life and luxury life. And on different levels people share differently their knowledge, wealth, and time. 3. Evolution gave us freedom from being sexually attracted to a particular type/shape of a body (YES, Playboy and Co tries to bring us back to basics) rather than to a emotional part of love, friendship etc. Even the most sexiest girl will be completely unatractive if she speaks like a skank, or a well-build guy will look like a fool when his knowledge limits by English of the first grade. The mind is still the main tool to create present and build future there is no such a power as a mind power. Everything else just supports it P.S. sorry for my english, it is not my first language, but i was impressed reading your thoughts Thank you Hi

Found it interesting. However I would not agree with this article at all, and tell you why:

1. The modern society has lots of resources: human, natural, intellectual – to support, rise and drop down stars like you mentioned above. Stars don’t have that power and strength to be do on their own.

2. Modern society has different meaning of survival, life and luxury life. And on different levels people share differently their knowledge, wealth, and time.

3. Evolution gave us freedom from being sexually attracted to a particular type/shape of a body (YES, Playboy and Co tries to bring us back to basics) rather than to a emotional part of love, friendship etc. Even the most sexiest girl will be completely unatractive if she speaks like a skank, or a well-build guy will look like a fool when his knowledge limits by English of the first grade.

The mind is still the main tool to create present and build future there is no such a power as a mind power. Everything else just supports it

P.S. sorry for my english, it is not my first language, but i was impressed reading your thoughts

Thank you

]]>