Er, well said, Katha.
But back to Kelley, who's catching a lot I ain't throwing:
>also, how is that you ignore the research that suggests that our social
>>conditions shape the biological?
I'm not ignoring it, just wasn't talking about it at the time is all. Wouldn't be surprised at all if this is the case, anyway.
>the brain research that
>shuggests that the brain changes under social conditions ?
Look, I didn't mention I saw a dirty great Tiger Snake yesterday, either. But I sure as hell wasn't ignoring it.
>why ignore
>research that suggests something counter or fatal to your argument?
Well, I was kinda hoping we might not take an either/or theoretical approach here. Dialectic doesn't let us do that, does it?
>i could deal with research about how testosterone
>makes men more agressive. i'd simply say, so what? that doesn't mean that
>we have to accept aggression or the behavior they engage in and if it's an
>issue then we can make special places for them to go to constructively
>expel it.
Well, I reckon testosterone probably does just this, and, no, it doesn't mean we have to accept any shit from the testosterone-rich, and, yes, there's lots of ways we might come up with for a bit of aggression expulsion. We agree then. Good.
Cheers, Rob.