Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.sf.science
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Are the Moties us?
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:10:10 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <42gy7qm@rpi.edu> kasprj@rpi.edu writes:

> MF= Michael Friedman
> JK= myself

> There are no genetic traits that lead to prosperity, as far as anyone
>knows. 

This statement is frankly ludicrous.

Are you going to suggest that intelligence is not genetic?  If it
isn't then please explain why proper upbringing can't turn a horse
into a savant.

Also, what about good health and tallness (which has been shown to e a
significant economic advantage)?


>Your argument seems to be based on the fallacious assumption that
>all conscious activity can be traced to one's genetic pattern. I don't 
>want to open the "nature vs. nurture" can of worms, so suffice it to say
>that it's generally accepted that both have a significant influence on 
>human behavior. In other words, people gain the inclination to become 
>rich, or to have many children, from other sources than genetic makeup,
>so the concept of such habits being "bred out of the race" is silly.

Jeeze.  First ytou say it's both, then you say it is all nurture.
Make up your mind, then I'll respond.

> MF:
>|> And what happens in the next generation?  People who are motivated by
>|> prosperity over protecting their bloodline will die out.

> Yes, the people who are so obsessed with money that they don't bother to
>start a family will leave no descendants. But those people are few and 
>far between. 

And what about the families that have 2 kids instead of 4?  Are you
seriously claiming that they aren't also reducing their genetic stake
in the next generation?

> MF:
>|> Even if you are right, one very simple strategy to out-grow your
>|> opponent is to have the same number of kids he has, but to have them a
>|> few years earlier.  Two equal populations with doubling times of 4
>|> generations and generation times of 16 years and 24 years,
>|> respectively, will have a 2 to 1 population imbalance in just 192
>|> years. 

> Yes, you're quite right. But how many people do you see, rich or poor,
>whose goal is to "out-grow" their neighbors?

None.  Get it straight - you don't need a concious goal.  Those who
happen to have the tendency to have shorter generation times will
out-perform their neighbors geneticly without any goals whatsoever.

> MF:
>|> Let's try it slow.

> Okay. Sorry for my cluelessness. 

> MF:
>|> Right now there is a negative correlation between wealth and birth
>|> rate.

> In other words, the wealthier you are, the fewer children you will have.

Exactly.

> MF:
>|> I contend that this negative correlation will decline in magnitude over the
>|> next 100 years and I'm guessing that is has already declined.

> So you're saying that the rich people are starting to have more children.
>And I'm saying that they're not.

No I am not saying that the rich are starting to have more children.
What I am saying is a very precise mathematical statement.  I am
saying that the correlation factor that you get will be smaller.  This
could just as easily happen if the poor start having fewer children.

> MF:
>|> Anyone know how to check this out?

> JK:
>|> Census data. Try a trip to your local library.

> MF:
>|> Until something happens to forcibly restrain humn breeding I would
>|> expect to see a continuing trend that brings us closer and closer to
>|> the Motie model.

> JK:
>|> You'd be in the minority, then. The facts fail to support your hypothesis.

> MF:
>|> Which facts are those?

> JK:
>|> Demographics as recorded by the census bureaus of the world. Again, I 
>|> reccomend going to the library and doing a bit of research on the subject.

I'm talking about long term trends.  Some may not have had effects
yet.  If you want to prove me wrong you have to show why evolution
won't work the way I say it will, not that the effects haven't shown
up yet.  

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.