Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!microsoft!gordonl
From: gordonl@microsoft.UUCP (Gordon Letwin)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,sci.bio
Subject: Re: reproductive stragegy and human behavior
Summary: sociobiology
Keywords: Men,Women,Competition,Selection
Message-ID: <844@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 10 Mar 89 17:22:31 GMT
References: <756@microsoft.UUCP> <1714@psu-cs.UUCP> <800@microsoft.UUCP> <7337@rosevax.Rosemount.COM>
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 26

In article <7337@rosevax.Rosemount.COM>, carole@rosevax.Rosemount.COM (Carole Ashmore) writes:
> 
> Oh goodness.  The trouble with 'The Argument from the Baboons' as my
> college anthro professor used to call it is that you can 'prove'
> anything about evolutionary trends by citing only the species that
> demonstrate the traits you want to prove are important  --just as
> certain religious people can 'prove' anything by quoting selectively
> enough from the Bible.  
> 
> The way to deal with this type of religious person is to know more about 
> the Bible than they do, so you can laugh in their face when they quote 
> Leviticus against homosexuality while eating lobster. And the way to 
> deal with sociobiologists is to know more about biology than they do.  
> Fortunately, neither is very difficult.

You seem to be stating here, indirectly, that you think sociobiology
is a bogus approach, and that all sociobiologists are wrong.   (Your
phrase "deal with...", in direct association with religious fundimentalists)
Is that indeed your stance, not that you disagree with a particular
claim, but that the entire approach is bogus?  If so, your beliefs in this
matter are easily shown to be incorrect.  Even Newsweek, this issue, 
will do the job.

	Pls advise

	gordon letwin