" This is an very good example of the goggles many anti-evolutionists wear."
I wouldn't call Tom Wolfe an "anti-evolutionist", by far. His argument about language and evolution in that article is way off however, at least I wouldn't have used the terminology he is using. (I.e. evolution stopping with the advent of language. It is now perfectly demonstrable that it did not.)
"In fact the common belief today is that any 'primal animal urges' we have led to our development of community and conflict resolution."
Contrary to what Liberal Creationists (TM) tell you, human evolution has never stopped. And yes, Hamiltonianism is the best theory on the evolution of sociability and altruism available.
"Heck even Pinker believes our genome contributes to only about 30% to 40% of our mental makeup."
As for estimating the precise "genetic impact" on our mental state, that is dependent on the environment, as well as on precisely which variable is being studied. General intelligence is frequently estimated to have an hereditability coefficient above 60 percent, for instance. But keep in mind plasticity is also a trait coded for by our genes...
My remark was aimed at the comment, not the commenter. As I explained in my response to the other poster, whether Wolf e is a creationist or not is irrelevant, the comment he made was an example of comments made by those with a cursory knowledge of evolution. There are times when even the most ardent proponent of evolution makes a seemingly unknowledgable or incorrect statement reminiscent of something a creationist would say. This very well could be one of those times. That this is the case or not does not diminish the error in the statement made, which was the focus of my response.
"Contrary to what Liberal Creationists (TM) tell you, human evolution has never stopped. And yes, Hamiltonianism is the best theory on the evolution of sociability and altruism available.
I find it difficult to believe that some would think that any evolution, even human evolution, has ceased. Large populations make it more difficult for a specific allele to fix but says very little about the availability of variation. I suspect many that suggest human evolution has ceased are limiting their considered selection to environmental processes where human technology has had a limiting impact. They tend to forget technology can have it's own selective influence on the human phenotype. The human population has yet to meet the 7 Hardy-Weinberg conditions.
"As for estimating the precise "genetic impact" on our mental state, that is dependent on the environment,
Simply because as a ratio, any reduction in the environmental proportion increases the genetic proportion.
" as well as on precisely which variable is being studied. General intelligence is frequently estimated to have an hereditability coefficient above 60 percent, for instance. But keep in mind plasticity is also a trait coded for by our genes...
That very plasticity, a result of evolution itself, reduces the need for initial innate mental states to those necessary for the developmental period of ontogeny (including intelligence).