{"id":93,"date":"2009-02-15T18:53:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-15T23:53:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/?p=93"},"modified":"2009-02-15T18:53:00","modified_gmt":"2009-02-15T23:53:00","slug":"evolution-and-the-ideomorph","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/?p=93","title":{"rendered":"Evolution and the Ideomorph"},"content":{"rendered":"
What better forum than the Catacombs of St. James to discuss the niceties of Darwinian theory. Margaret Wente seemed to stir up a more potent than usual wasps\u2019 nest this past week with her commentary on evolutionary psychology and the ongoing debate of whether we\u2019ve pretty much arrived (the \u2018as good as it gets\u2019 view) \u2013 or are still not only continuing to evolve, but at an accelerated rate. Responses, mostly rather unflattering (but then her skin has also \u2018evolved\u2019 to lizarderm status, as it were), populated the op-ed pages of the Globe this weekend. Briefly, evolutionary psychology applies C.D.\u2019s main thesis \u2013 that, pairing of stronger, more viable, and hence sustainable matches, over time produce a more dominant genetic line that will survive and thrive, while weaker, more \u2018flawed\u2019 pairs will gradually drop out of the mix \u2013 to social selection. Smart, accomplished folk who pair up with others of similar endowment and drive are in effect propagating that \u2018line\u2019; and you can fill in the other half of the equation.<\/p>\n

This exchange of view was perched atop an equally \u2018stimulating\u2019 piece citing this same theory as an element underpinning the gender-wage gap in our culture. Feminists are fond of pointing rather exclusively to the \u2018glass ceiling\u2019 that exists for women. The \u2018enlightened\u2019, young (female) psychologist \/ columnist was suggesting that accomplished women actually select themselves out<\/em> of the wage market (taking with them their significant incomes and abilities, thereby dragging down not only the \u2018female average earnings\u2019 but also removing a particularly promising group of employed and employable folk) by choosing as partners, males like unto themselves: bright, upwardly mobile, high achieving, etc., etc\u2026 In short, this process of modified \u2018natural selection\u2019 (to attach the usual Darwinian terminology) skews the number of top female candidates, leaving the males in play. <\/p>\n

To illustrate her point, she cites the case of Michelle and Barack Obama. A mere three years before his election, Michelle was reportedly earning in the $300,000 (USD) range annually. Expected 2009 income: $0. The implication of course is that the Obama\u2019s are representative of a significant group of similar couples, all studiously engaged in the process of pulling the female earning potential out of the market, leaving their male counterparts to boost the average male numbers. Maybe yes; maybe no. Unfortunately the theory is, how shall I put this, yet to be tested. While not a devil\u2019s \u2018advocate\u2019 per se, I\u2019m at least a promising prot\u00e9g\u00e9. <\/p>\n

An occurrence that old Charles D seemed to struggle to account for was not only the appearance of but the apparent thriving of anomalies \u2013 those quirky right turns in the methodical, relentless march of evolution from which sprang, quite suddenly, spontaneously, and without apparent genetic forebears<\/em>, completely new (and sometimes desirable) directions, homo erectus being a prime example. The fossil record, after several millennia of plod along one, well worn trail, seemed to lurch (in evolutionary terms) rather abruptly along a new path. I would maintain that the Obama \u2018match\u2019 might better be viewed as one of those desirable hiccups and far from sufficiently representative to account for anything as far reaching and ubiquitous as the wage gap across genders. I\u2019d put Mr. Obama himself (perhaps prematurely \u2013 hopefully not) in the category of the Winston Churchill\u2019s, the Lester B. Pearson\u2019s, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau\u2019s, the JFK\u2019s \u2013 politicians to be sure; but certainly not leaders born out of the existing genetic political pool, nor the \u2018expected\u2019 progeny of the existing \u2018political parentage\u2019. I\u2019m not sure if the term in the title is original (I highly doubt it) \u2013 but it certainly works in just these situations. The aforementioned are ideomorphs, one-offs as it were, unique forms (to consider the etymology of my makey-uppy term) that pop out of centre field (if the metaphors may be mixed) and not from the predominant, primordial ooze of the political landscape.<\/p>\n

Nicola and I got to discussing, at the same breakfast time \u2018round table\u2019, just such anomalies in the slightly lowered profiles of our own families; triggered in no small measure by content of an extended family history, provided Nicola some ten years ago and detailing three centuries of paternal genealogy and more particularly some of the extended writings of a grandfather. Her mother is fond of saying: \u201cjust where did<\/em> you come from?\u201d \u2013 reference the values, style, integrity, attention to detail, and so on that not only characterize her daughter (and make her, I believe in mother\u2019s view, something of a rebellious handful) , but set her at some considerable distance from the value systems detailed in a family history of high-achieving, but decidedly ethically challenged progenitors.<\/p>\n

I, like most borne out of a scientific training, subscribe quite heartily to Darwinian ideas. Creationist science is not only deemed bunkum, but is positively oxymoronic \u2013 with the emphasis on the final three syllables. I am left, nonetheless, in some awe of individuals that strike a unique path, that eschew the proscribed direction \u2013 whether it be swinging from trees with a penchant for walking on one\u2019s knuckles or simply donning the party (be it political or familial) colours and espousing the expected and predictable rhetoric. In a tradition within our household, certain festivals and other \u2018Hallmark days\u2019 are marked with homage paid each other, most often in form of a haiku. Following is a variation on just such an acknowledgment of the \u2018ideomorph\u2019 I am honoured to be partnered with:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Culvert cultivar;
One\u2019s weed, one\u2019s wonder \u2013
Uncommonly principled.<\/p>\n

\n<\/blockquote>\n

Psyguy<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What better forum than the Catacombs of St. James to discuss the niceties of Darwinian theory. Margaret Wente seemed to stir up a more potent than usual wasps\u2019 nest this past week with her commentary on evolutionary psychology and the ongoing debate of whether we\u2019ve pretty much arrived (the \u2018as good as it gets\u2019 view) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=93"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=93"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=93"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davidhowardpsychologist.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=93"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}