And how are you able to rule out that societal or environmental effects are the primary driver? How is your argument not circular, that observed differences are therefore the result of biology?

▲

epolanski 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I've never stated that biology is the primary driver.

I merely stated that biology, should not be ignored when judging very large samples.

There are cross sex cognitive tests at which women and men tend to perform differently, such as spatial awareness or speed perception and many others.

What's the environmental or cultural factor behind the fact that a female's brain, on average, is able to judge speed much more correctly than a male?

	▲	us-merul 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I see you edited your response after my reply. I’m not denying that you’ve read about those observed differences. I’m trying to say that those differences don’t need to be driven by biology, and evidence suggests otherwise. Behavior can’t be reduced to genetics, and the mechanistic link isn’t there. You are claiming that morphological differences explain the variation. Besides, by your reasoning, you could look at the NBA before Bill Russell and make very different claims.

▲

3cKU 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> And how are you able to rule out

It is not possible to rule out unfalsifiable hypotheses.

▲

2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]