Theory Differences

The two theories differ in scope and in method. The Essential Difference theory sticks to the theme of gender differences, whereas the Gradient Correlation theory pursues all evolutionary effects of basic object properties and so reaches beyond gender. Gradient Correlation first observes that an inescapable population density gradient causes gender in the first place, and brings with it a host of correlated trait differences. The theory then notes that because population density has always varied systematically with global position, inborn human behavioral traits are expected to correlate with global position of ancestral homeland. Systematic differences in the outward appearance of humans show that mixing has not entirely prevented such correlation. This unavoidable result is the hot potato of the Gradient Correlation theory. Fortunately the theory also shows that Gradient Correlation does not lead to the global superiority of any gender or race.

The two theories differ in method. The Essential Difference theory is founded primarily on observation, and Gradient Correlation theory on insight, both of which are basic to science. The Essential Difference does finally invoke insight about evolution to account for observed gender differences. However, the attempt exposes the following further difference between the two theories.

Darwinian theory has long suffered from the fact that it is easy to construct Just So stories about evolutionary courses. The hallmark of such stories is speculation that particular traits confer a selective advantage. However, the complexity of life almost always prevents a priori proof that the same traits carry no disadvantage. Although many of the Essential Difference's speculations about evolution seem plausible they remain Just So stories. This puts them in dangerous company: Just So stories about human differences rationalized the Holocaust of World War II. In the face of this problem the Gradient Correlation theory takes a different tack: The Gradient Correlation theory's force derives not from speculation about what may have been so, but rather from what must have been so. All populations must have had sparse frontiers, for example. This does not entirely skirt the problem, but it puts inferences on much solider ground and comprises a radical difference between the two theories.

See how the two theories are *IMPORTANT*.
Return

Copyright 2001-2003 by Gregory B. Yates.   All Rights Reserved.