This is pretty weak argument, imo. The brain change is an aftermath of involvement not the causal reason why that happened. You are mistaking causality for mediating factors, presumably what this may imply is other men has evolutionary/genetic potential to be so! Unless you subscribe to genetic determinism but you don’t since you identify men’s perception as the factor implicitly here. In the case of children’s cultural change, one may ask what better ideology will a child subscribe to than what’s available in their family/society? The causality in children is with blind beliefs granted after birth, with men it seems to be an outcome not of some abstract policy making, conversations (think as you made in one post ab impact of advices in obesity/HIV) nor leaves themselves (as in the American ex provided), but something else in the environment. This fails to tackle what that is here and I don’t know clearly what that is either.
This is pretty weak argument, imo. The brain change is an aftermath of involvement not the causal reason why that happened. You are mistaking causality for mediating factors, presumably what this may imply is other men has evolutionary/genetic potential to be so! Unless you subscribe to genetic determinism but you don’t since you identify men’s perception as the factor implicitly here. In the case of children’s cultural change, one may ask what better ideology will a child subscribe to than what’s available in their family/society? The causality in children is with blind beliefs granted after birth, with men it seems to be an outcome not of some abstract policy making, conversations (think as you made in one post ab impact of advices in obesity/HIV) nor leaves themselves (as in the American ex provided), but something else in the environment. This fails to tackle what that is here and I don’t know clearly what that is either.
The perception is important, but I don’t think that’s the causal link here, the question is what causes the perception itself to be clear.