Evidence that in-group preference is an innate quality of human nature.  Still, that doesn't stop the ideologues pushing to eliminate it. 

Born good?  Babies help unlock the origins of morality - 60 minutes

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50135408n

BUNK ALARM!
A babies mental characteristics can be determined in the womb.
It depends on what type of environment the mother is in during pregnancy, and subsequently which chemicals she produces/releases.
In a evolutionary sense, a mother who is at risk from predators would produce a baby who puts survival of itself above others. A mother who is in a calm and non threatening environment would produce a baby who puts survival of the pack above others etc..

And we would believe a schoolchild with no qualifications or expertise over the Yale baby lab.....why?

See what I mean about the ideologues?

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:03am:

And we would believe a schoolchild with no qualifications or expertise over the Yale baby lab.....why? See what I mean about the ideologues?

The study is completely bunk, it doesn't even have a control.
This is also the same bunk theory idiots use to 'prove' that babies are born with a belief in a god...  ::)

And we would believe a schoolchild with no qualifications, expertise or experience over the Yale baby lab.....why?

Sgement runs for 13 and a half minutes.  "BUNK ALARM" raised 11 minutes after posting.

Couldn't you at least watch it?

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:15am:

And we would believe a schoolchild with no qualifications, expertise or experience over the Yale baby lab.....why?

What qualifications would one need to show that they have no evidence to come to the conclusion they did?
Its not exactly rocket science...
If they could study a baby before it had any influence from the outside world then they would be credible.

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:20am:

Sgement runs for 13 and a half minutes.  "BUNK ALARM" raised 11 minutes after posting. Couldn't you at least watch it?

I have seen it before.

When did you watch it?

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:25am:

When did you watch it?

Haha ignore the point why don't you.

I'm cutting right to the point - the point being that a) you have no qualifications, expertise or experience and b) you haven't even watched a 60 minutes segment, let alone the primary source, yet still think your word counts for something. 

Anyway, your stance has been noted. 

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:30am:

I'm cutting right to the point - the point being that a) you have no qualifications, expertise or experience and b) you haven't even watched a 60 minutes segment, let alone the primary source, yet still think your word counts for something.  Anyway, your stance has been noted.

Well I will just let it speak for itself then. It has no legs to stand on.
And I have read the primary source idiot.

bobbythefap1 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:32am:

... wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:30am: I'm cutting right to the point - the point being that a) you have no qualifications, expertise or experience and b) you haven't even watched a 60 minutes segment, let alone the primary source, yet still think your word counts for something.  Anyway, your stance has been noted.  Well I will just let it speak for itself then. It has no legs to stand on. And I have read the primary source idiot.

Have you?

Can you post the link please?

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:36am:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:32am: ... wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:30am: I'm cutting right to the point - the point being that a) you have no qualifications, expertise or experience and b) you haven't even watched a 60 minutes segment, let alone the primary source, yet still think your word counts for something.  Anyway, your stance has been noted.  Well I will just let it speak for itself then. It has no legs to stand on. And I have read the primary source idiot. Have you? Can you post the link please?

You may as well just admit its bunk if you are refusing to even talk about it.

bobbythefap1 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:40am:

... wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:36am: bobbythefap1 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:32am: ... wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:30am: I'm cutting right to the point - the point being that a) you have no qualifications, expertise or experience and b) you haven't even watched a 60 minutes segment, let alone the primary source, yet still think your word counts for something.  Anyway, your stance has been noted.  Well I will just let it speak for itself then. It has no legs to stand on. And I have read the primary source idiot. Have you? Can you post the link please? You may as well just admit its bunk if you are refusing to even talk about it.

You may as well post the link so I can see for myself. 

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:42am:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:40am: ... wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:36am: bobbythefap1 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:32am: ... wrote on Nov 22nd, 2012 at 11:30am: I'm cutting right to the point - the point being that a) you have no qualifications, expertise or experience and b) you haven't even watched a 60 minutes segment, let alone the primary source, yet still think your word counts for something.  Anyway, your stance has been noted.  Well I will just let it speak for itself then. It has no legs to stand on. And I have read the primary source idiot. Have you? Can you post the link please? You may as well just admit its bunk if you are refusing to even talk about it. You may as well post the link so I can see for myself.

Wesley, the study is about getting babies to pick between a bad and good puppet for phuk sake.
Why are we even having this discussion?

http://pantheon.yale.edu/~kw77/WynnInnatenessChapter2007.pdf

There is the link, now stop whinging like a pathetic bitch and admit its bunk.

Just post the link bro - I can't find it myself and I'd be interested to see it.  I can't very well make an informed choice without it, can I?

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:46am:

Just post the link bro - I can't find it myself and I'd be interested to see it.  I can't very well make an informed choice without it, can I?

Think about this Wesley.
They are saying that babies are born with morality, and they prove this by testing babies who have spent 9 months in a womb and a few months-years outside it.

The link you posted - not the same study. 

Wesley?   :o


"Does Wesley here, at the ripe old age of 5 months, know the difference between right and wrong?

"Wesley watches as the puppet in the center struggles to open up a box with a toy inside. The puppy in the yellow shirt comes over and lends a hand. Then the scene repeats itself, but this time the puppy in the blue shirt comes and slams the box shut. Nice behavior...mean behavior...at least to our eyes. But is that how a 5-month-old sees it, and does he have a preference?

"Annie: Wesley, do you remember these guys from the show? "To find out, a researcher who doesn't know which puppet was nice and which was mean, offers Wesley a choice.

"Annie: Who do you like?

"He can't answer, but he can reach... (reaches for nice puppet)

"Annie: That one?

"Wesley chose the good guy and he wasn't alone."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57551557/born-good-babies-help-unlock-the-origins-of-morality/

Quote:

Paul Bloom: If you want to eradicate racism, for instance, you really are going to want to know to what extent are babies little bigots, to what extent is racism a natural part of humanity. Lesley Stahl: Sounds to me like the experiment show they are little bigots. Paul Bloom: I think to some extent, a bias to favor the self, where the self could be people who look like me, people who act like me, people who have the same taste as me, is a very strong human bias.

There is no "Bunk alarm" involved there IMO. It is really just stating the obvious.

Of course similar looking babies will be more attracted to each other.
Is it just per chance that Asian communities, Sudanese commuties, Anglo communities, Aboriginal communties, ..etc. tend to group themselves together? Of course it's no fluke.

There's no going forward until the heads get outta the sky and realise that we actually do have differences and we are not all clones born to work for the machine.

...that calls for a video clip  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCfVFxRsKQc

Its BS. Comon. Havent any of you seen any kids? Stick them in a daycare centre and watch them all play with each other and not care what colour each other are.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2012 at 5:05am:

Its BS. Comon. Havent any of you seen any kids

I've got 2 younger than 4 years old that, naturally, I observe closely.  Isn't it funny that those who call it "BS' have none?  Isn't it also funny that there's no elaboration, no addressing of the issues raised - just "It's BS". 

Reaaal deep thinkers aren't ya?  ;D ;D

... wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2012 at 9:51am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 23rd, 2012 at 5:05am: Its BS. Comon. Havent any of you seen any kids I've got 2 younger than 4 years old that, naturally, I observe closely.  Isn't it funny that those who call it "BS' have none?  Isn't it also funny that there's no elaboration, no addressing of the issues raised - just "It's BS".  Reaaal deep thinkers aren't ya?  ;D ;D

Why would you say ii have none? In fact a bunch of you (the trolls basically) have been just assuming that since i have been here. Im 50 fer chrissakes. Why would i still have lil kids running around?

I see you didnt actually address my comment though.

SOB

Even if you did have kids (which you don't) the memory of what they're like would have loooong since disappeared.  hell, you demonstrate time and again that you can't remember even 10 minutes ago, let alone 10 years or more. 

What's to address - you asked "don't you have kids" and I said yes.  I'm aso *a bit* smarter and more observant than you.  They do play with "others" but they also display clear aversions and preferences.  That hideous black doll on play school elicits a "yuck" every time he comes on screen, and burkha wearing women get the "ugly" and finger pointing treatment.  I teach them to hold their tongue and not to be rude, but you can't tell them they're wrong - that they're not ugly, because that would be lying. 

... wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:15am:

And we would believe a schoolchild with no qualifications, expertise or experience over the Yale baby lab.....why?

Right on, Honky. Better run it past NYC’s most dangerous callers’ expert panel.

There might be a few ontological issues to resolve before publishing.

Amadd wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2012 at 11:41pm:

There is no "Bunk alarm" involved there IMO. It is really just stating the obvious. Of course similar looking babies will be more attracted to each other. Is it just per chance that Asian communities, Sudanese commuties, Anglo communities, Aboriginal communties, ..etc. tend to group themselves together? Of course it's no fluke. There's no going forward until the heads get outta the sky and realise that we actually do have differences and we are not all clones born to work for the machine. ...that calls for a video clip  ;D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCfVFxRsKQc

There’s been a lot of study on this. Toddlers around the age of 3 notice gender before race.

Are you saying the sexes should be segregated because 3 year olds notice gender differences? 

... wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2012 at 10:17am:

Even if you did have kids (which you don't) the memory of what they're like would have loooong since disappeared.  hell, you demonstrate time and again that you can't remember even 10 minutes ago, let alone 10 years or more.  What's to address - you asked "don't you have kids" and I said yes.  I'm aso *a bit* smarter and more observant than you.  They do play with "others" but they also display clear aversions and preferences.  That hideous black doll on play school elicits a "yuck" every time he comes on screen, and burkha wearing women get the "ugly" and finger pointing treatment.  I teach them to hold their tongue and not to be rude, but you can't tell them they're wrong - that they're not ugly, because that would be lying.

Obviously learned behaviour in your household.

SOB

Nope.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 25^th, 2012 at 5:48am:

Obviously learned behaviour in your household.

Exactly.

I pity those poor kids.

What a coincidence - they pity you too.

This is interesting to think about, could the child have liked yellow?

... wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2012 at 10:17am:

I'm aso *a bit* smarter and more observant than you.  T

got a belly laugh out of that, thanks.

Awww disagree do you?

RP