Posted on 11/21/2007 11:08:38 AM PST by Aristotelian
WASHINGTON - Even infants can tell the difference between naughty and nice playmates, and know which to choose, a new study finds.
Babies as young as 6 to 10 months old showed crucial social judging skills before they could talk, according to a study by researchers at Yale University's Infant Cognition Center published in Thursday's journal Nature.
The infants watched a googly-eyed wooden toy trying to climb roller-coaster hills and then another googly-eyed toy come by and either help it over the mountain or push it backward. They then were presented with the toys to see which they would play with.
Nearly every baby picked the helpful toy over the bad one.
The babies also chose neutral toys — ones that didn't help or hinder — over the naughty ones. And the babies chose the helping toys over the neutral ones.
"It's incredibly impressive that babies can do this," said study lead author Kiley Hamlin, a Yale psychology researcher. "It shows that we have these essential social skills occurring without much explicit teaching."
There was no difference in reaction between the boys and girls
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Yes and no.
Some liberals believe that humans “evolve” politically, too ... i.e. become more liberal.
Some liberals believe that forced sharing and communal living are most consistent with the dictates of evolution.
Some believe that evolution is a factual “natural” process, but that human beings create/construct a reality above and beyond evolution, and that therefore we are “above” evolution.
“Some believe that evolution is a factual “natural” process, but that human beings create/construct a reality above and beyond evolution, and that therefore we are “above” evolution.”
This must be the elitists. :)
There is plenty of food in the food chain. I hardly think animals have to take food from humans to survive. BTW, my dog certainly knows when she does something wrong.
But mere might does not make right.
Glare at the animal and it will back off.
And there are peoples pets who act “guilty” after doing some damage to things.
Especially if they are breast fed...
Totally wrong, there are many on the right who know evolution to be true. I would even say the majority. See Darwin central for starters. In Kansas where the Republican state board of education tried to get rid of evolution they were all defeated in the REPUBLICAN primary. The same thing happened in Dover PA and Cobb county Georgia. When ever evolution has come up for a vote it has always won no matter how red the area.
Survival of the fittest is basically a tenet of republicanism. By this I mean, we are given the opportunity to excel by ourselves without infringement. Opportunity knocks and we either take it or don’t.
Sums it up well. Plus Conservatives usually base their beliefs on logic and all the evidence logically points to evolution.
My question is this. Does anyone find the relationship between liberlism and Evolution a strange dichontomy of philosohpy.
This was not always so, Williams Jennings Byran the guy who defended creationism in the scopes trial ran for president as a socialist and Stalin sent evolution scientist to the gulag and the biggest group of believers in creationism are blacks and they vote 90% rats.
The left uses evolution too paint ALL republicans/conservatives as anti-science luddites, and unfortunately thanks to a small vocal minority it usually works.
William Jennings Bryan ran for President three times as the Democrat nominee—1896, 1900, and 1908. In 1896 he was also the nominee of the Populists. He never ran as a Socialist—in 1908 one of his opponents was Eugene V. Debs, the Socialist candidate.
This study is a sham, a fabrication, another just-so story to justify Hillary’s “child liberation” and leftist Rousseauian nonsense.
not at all. liberalism is about using the govt and unions as a tool to control people. Conservatives use free markets and religious institutions in order to foster cooperation and improve the lives for all. We believe in families taking care of the old and not have them used as tools to prop up some govt program.
anyone who believes in public education isn’t a conservative.
No no no, altruism factors into the survival fitness of each individual and the species as a whole. Symbiotic relationships can be evolved as well as predatory ones.
Oh, the "every man for himself" anthropology is more Classical Liberal than Darwinian, though Darwinism in some ways presumed and provided some pseudoscientific support for such a view. Some conservatives even think classical liberalism is a good thing.
Aristotelians should endeavor to rescue teleological and formalistic understandings of nature from the reductive tendencies of modern science and modern liberalism. They shouldn't make silly objections to Darwinism.
Wow! What a spin in favor of your agenda. It didn’t even dawn on me to look at it that way until I saw your comments. But now that you force me, it seems more likely that these findings point towards natural selection rather than intelligent design.
But then again, I don’t have an agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.