Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Arctotherium's avatar

Good post. I think the gene-culture coevolution model is generally better then the culture-as-extended-phenotype model. Consider something like the breakdown of marriage in the United States after the 1960s. After the incentives changed thanks to Great Society welfare programs and Second Wave feminism (a cultural difference), marriage collapsed almost instantly among blacks (the subject of Moynihan's famous report on the black family), who reverted to something closer to their ancestral mating pattern. Among whites, however, the institution initially remained fairly strong, albeit in altered form. But over the span of a few decades, without significant genetic change, whites also began to follow the new incentives (this is the subject of Charles' Murray's Coming Apart). Whites are more "genetically monogamous" then blacks, and thus responded to changing culture differently, but both groups were affected.

What is true is that the extreme homogenization of global culture and institutions (due to colonialism, the end of the Cold War, English as lingua franca, and improved communications, especially the Internet) makes genetics much more dominant as the major source of group differences. But this was not always true! Cultural transmission used to be much slower, allowing for large cultural differences even among very similar populations (see French vs other northwestern European, or Quebecer, marital fertility, 1760-1870 or so). These days, the only way to maintain those sorts of differences is with extreme cultural barriers (think Haredi Jews or the Amish).

Expand full comment
Reinformer's avatar

I don't know if Scandinavians are individualists taking their long-standing social-ists goverments

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts