Epstein Secrets

FREE GROWTH AND OTHER SURPRISES Draft Gordon Getty HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010912 FOREWORD BY THE AUTHOR How Come This Book? A few months ago, Robert Trivers was kind enough to send me his new book. The title is “Wild Life”. Perfect two ways. Bob is a world authority on wildlife, to wit evolutionary biolog

OR How Come This Book? A few months ago, Robert Trivers was kind enough to send me his new book. The titl

n the Neutral Zone in 1953. The Emir’s identical house was a few steps away. My father’s favorite maple sugar was still in the fridge. I read the few Shakespeare plays | hadn’t read in college, and read or reread the complete poems and plays of John Keats. The house arrest was probably as much dressing-down

0), 718-723; Sigmund, K., Hauert, C., & Nowak, M. (2001). Reward and punishment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 989), 10757- 10762; Trivers, R.L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35-57. Quotes Watts, D. P., Muller, M., Amsler, S. J., Mbabazi

so. These ideas started with Charles Darwin. One hundred years later, they were developed in exquisite detail by the American evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers. Combined, they provide an explanation for why, in most species including our own, males compete with each other for access to females — the most val

join in on future cooperative ventures, but this is a delayed benefit, and it may never materialize. This adds another potential opportunity cost. As Shakespeare so deftly noted “Defer no time, delays have dangerous ends.” Hauser Chapter 1. Nature’s secrets 47 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012793 Waiting for a future be

lves are also the ones most likely to lash out with extreme violence when someone threatens the reality of their stature. The evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers was the first to identify the adaptive significance of self-deception and its connection to deception. As he insightfully notes in his book The Folly

s of victory in war — or any competitive arena. Though this is a costly strategy, there are clear evolutionary benefits under conditions explained by Trivers and Johnson. Self-deception is favored when opponents have imperfect information about their strengths and weaknesses, and where the payoffs are high

the way for awe-inspiring bursts of creativity in art, music, literature and science. A promiscuous brain enabled Bach and Bono, Picasso and Pollock, Shakespeare and Shaw, and Descartes and Darwin. A promiscuous brain enables us to imagine things we have never directly experienced, to create once unimaginable

rmalizes a simple intuition first spelled out by Trivers (I): One can imagine. for example. compensating

s and in health.•' For example. love causes individuals to ignore other potential mates, even if those mates are better than one's current mate, as Shakespeare's Juliet did when her love for Romeo led her to rebuff the advances of the otherwise more suitable Paris. Why does love have this property? Our mo

can choose) because males with their now ill-adapted anti-parasite (histocampatability) genes will find few willing mates. This begins the part from Trivers. I'll come to Alexander’s later. Mothers in the source deme see an opposite picture. Conditions are not necessarily better than before, but they ar

rates were well within the range of modern rates and the lowest were far below modern rates in periods of credit stringency.” Merchants of Venice in Shakespeare’s time and long before borrowed from banks, not from Shylocks, and at rather lower cost than merchants of the twentieth century. Economics and Biol

ard for both sexes. R. A. Fisher in 1930, and Bob Trivers in 1972, suggested why. Males, in humans, produce

ound a clear choice for third. There are awesome things in Milton, Blake, Coleridge, Tennyson, Emily, Houseman, Robinson, Dowson, Yeats and others. Shakespeare, like Mozart, doesn’t figure in the center of the picture. I take him as the greatest mind and soul yet known, the greatest playwright, the greatest

ness and in health.” For example, love causes individuals to ignore other potential mates, even if those mates are better than one’s current mate, as Shakespeare’s Juliet did when her love for Romeo led her to rebuff the advances of the otherwise-more-suitable Paris. Why does love have this property? Our mode

-- References 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 R. L. Trivers, Quarterly review of biology pp. 35-57 (1971). J.