|
|
|
|
|
by helen___keller
1130 days ago
|
|
> But yeah, I have to imagine these effects are society-wide with varying strength for different sub-populations. This is consistent with various macro-scale observations like decreasing population-wide male fertility. Right, what I’m saying is based on your hypothesis we should expect a population-wide boom in socialism. Based on how it tends to be at the intersection of multiple demographics (young people, more educated people, people who live in certain cities) I would expect that there’s not a significant environmentally-driven biological driver, unless there’s a specific environmental factor that exists primarily and only at the intersection of these demographics. Like maybe you could say, MacBook pros specifically are causing socialism. Personally I don’t find this plausible but that would be an example of an environmental factor that largely affects urban young white collar workers :) |
|
Correct, which is also consistent with observed data.
> unless there’s a specific environmental factor that exists primarily and only at the intersection of these demographics
I've described two - sedentary lifestyle and diet.
Even the fattest guy in alabama is probably not sitting in an office all day, and he's probably not cholesterol-deficient.
> maybe you could say, MacBook pros specifically are causing socialism
The difference is with endocrine disruptors we have a pretty clear causal model of the process.