Evolutionary biology is incorrect here. It's evolutionary psychology -- which is basically splitting hairs.
Yes, it's usually called "evolutionary psychology" but it's bullshit no matter what it's called. Actual evolutionary biology can be a useful science. Evolutionary psychology not so much.
One of the hardest red pills I have ever had to swallow is that the vast majority of women (even my PhD wife) are logically deficient and rely on feelings. When you rely on feelings you can justify any of your actions because it "felt right/good."
She isn't logically deficient then. She is morally deficient. You are married to a time bomb. Good luck!
Yes, she's a time bomb if she uses feelings to derive moral principles of what's right and wrong, your words were:
When you rely on feelings you can justify any of your actions because it "felt right/good"
Someone willing to justify their any of their actions based on their feelings has no moral core. Sure, everyone, both men and women, often rationalize their wrongful behaviour away, but at the end of the day what's stopping people becoming truly evil is their conscience which (eventually) steps in to say "stop". What you described above is someone who is willing to override their conscience for "any of their actions" if the action, for example, makes them happy. Unlike TheImp, I don't believe women are all morally-deficient, so not all women are like that. But anyone that fits that description is.
No, his philosophy lines squarely in line with yours, in opposition to the "women are born this way and we have to create systems to control it" crowd. Though he may think more of them are bad than you do. He will admit there are good women when pushed, just that most of them act bad because we haven't risen up and punished them yet.
Do you subscribe to the concept that evolution stops at the neck, everyone is born a blank slate and that genetic inheritance for personality is a myth? Because that is usually the stance critics take.
Yes, it's usually called "evolutionary psychology" but it's bullshit no matter what it's called. Actual evolutionary biology can be a useful science. Evolutionary psychology not so much.
She isn't logically deficient then. She is morally deficient. You are married to a time bomb. Good luck!
She's a time bomb because she uses feelings before logic?
That is quite literally nearly every woman, mate.
Yes, she's a time bomb if she uses feelings to derive moral principles of what's right and wrong, your words were:
Someone willing to justify their any of their actions based on their feelings has no moral core. Sure, everyone, both men and women, often rationalize their wrongful behaviour away, but at the end of the day what's stopping people becoming truly evil is their conscience which (eventually) steps in to say "stop". What you described above is someone who is willing to override their conscience for "any of their actions" if the action, for example, makes them happy. Unlike TheImp, I don't believe women are all morally-deficient, so not all women are like that. But anyone that fits that description is.
That comment had nothing to do with my wife and was referring to cheating whores, bud.
No, his philosophy lines squarely in line with yours, in opposition to the "women are born this way and we have to create systems to control it" crowd. Though he may think more of them are bad than you do. He will admit there are good women when pushed, just that most of them act bad because we haven't risen up and punished them yet.
Because as we know, the brain isn't an organ and thereby the study of living organism's anatomy and behavior resulting from it is completely useless.
Do you subscribe to the concept that evolution stops at the neck, everyone is born a blank slate and that genetic inheritance for personality is a myth? Because that is usually the stance critics take.
I've got a degree in Psychology, specifically Counseling and Therapy.
So it would be kinda weird for me to believe that.