Birth Order
by tdaxp ~ November 17th, 2007
Two recent posts (at Tom’s and Sean’s blogs) describe birth order. For both environmental and biological reasons, older siblings tend to be more intelligent, and are more likely to be heterosexual, than younger siblings. Tom describes how the former can be to the advantage of younger children: less able to coast on life experience and visual-verbal reasoning ability, they are more likely to concentrate on social interaction. Likewise, it is easy to argue that homosexuality (which Sean discusses in passing) may be to a group’s advantage, as it allows a nonreproducing worker/warrior population to serve the reproductive interest of the rest.
Hmm…
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Here was the book I read initially about birth order:
http://www.amazon.com/Birth-Order-Book-Why-You/dp/080075977X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195398374&sr=8-1
I loved. It is about 6 feet away from as I type this.
I think this is the article that was anti-birth order:
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2006/09/the_birth_order.html
It is less comprehensive then I remember. It concentrates on 1st borns as high-achievers.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
PurpleSlog: There is actually a significant body of evidence for a birth order effect in certain species. But, it remains highly controversial in primates. Unfortunately, many of the studies are fundamentally flawed. If you happen to find the article you are referencing, please post it!
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
My understanding was that birth order stuff was disproved by statistical analysis by economists a few years back. I can't find the link though.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Dan: I disagree with your evolutionary hypothesis. I'm going to post a full response to my blog shortly. – DMH
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Wikipedia actually has a decent review of this topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_order
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
This certainly is an interesting area!
David, I replied over at your post:
http://dmhallowell.blogspot.com/2007/11/evolution-of-rainbows.html
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I'd like to see CatholicGauze's comments.
November 18th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Richard Posner, in his excellent book, Sex and Reason, had a very good explanation for homosexuality being good for societies, IIRC he explained it as more of a cultural caretaker role.
November 21st, 2007 at 12:00 am
belated comment, but thanks for the link, Dan.
November 23rd, 2007 at 12:00 am
Steve,
Interesting, through I'm not aware of evidence that homosexuals actually make better caretakers. My speculation was that they were less likely to be distracted by caretaking in general, which is on the opposite end of idle thoughts.
Sean,
No prob! Thanks for the post!
November 24th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I guess those homosexual couples who'd like to be caretakers and adopt or be parents in general are more motivated as they have to be to FACE hostile elements in society.
So I guess if they are better parents it comes down to motivation which does not really have so much to do with sexuality as it has to do with the motivation.
VoidMan
The world would also be better off without Sexual Orientation or at least people who meddle into others private lives and sexuality