Re:The heritability of self-control: A meta-analysis
by username90 on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @03:42PM
(#21642467)
Normal as in there is very little difference between the lives of most people in first world nations. They go to a school for a decade and don't have to worry about sleeping out in the rain or going hungry. That is enough for kids to bloom. If you deny them any of those then there are problems, but that is not an issue even for poor people in the west.
Re:The heritability of self-control: A meta-analysis
by Enginerrrd on Wednesday November 27, 2019 @12:56AM
(#21645615)
>They go to a school for a decade and don't have to worry about sleeping out in the rain or going hungry. [...] but that is not an issue even for poor people in the west.
Ooof. Just FYI this is actually horribly out of touch with reality. Go talk to a social worker sometime, or someone that runs a soup kitchen/shelter.
Or just check out the official government stats for the US: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo...
To quote: "Both children and adults were food insecure in 7.1 percent of households with children (2.7 million households.
Although children are usually protected from substantial reductions in food intake even in households with very low food security, nevertheless, in about 0.6 percent of households with children (220,000 households), one or more child also experienced reduced food intake and disrupted eating patterns at some time during the year."
The parent uses an extreme example, but I think the underlying concern is: what assumptions get baked in when we assume the available environments are pretty normal?
Our modern environments are very abnormal compared to human environments for most of human genetic history. We can measure traits of statistically "normal" humans living in statistically "normal" environments and still ultimately be sampling in a weird corner of the possibility space.