When I was a kid, my dad had a scientist colleague who remarked the mind was the most powerful “sex organ”. While at the time my dad telling me this story I found cheesily reminiscent of a scene out of the film Sideways about wine connoisseurs who are also womanizers, the idea nonetheless stuck with me. Certainly, author Geoffrey Miller in his book The Mating Mind makes an argument to this effect.
Early on, Miller provides an interesting overview of Charles Darwin, who while best known for Origin of Species (1859) also wrote a work called Descent of Man (1871) that introduced the idea of sexual selection that was in intellectual exile for the better part of the next century until experiencing an intellectual revival. Miller subsequently discusses interesting ideas like runaway sexual selection and compares our mating habits with those of our cavemen ancestors.
Miller’s central thesis seems to be a retort to thinkers like Steven Pinker and Stephen Jay Gould, who have argued “creativity” is leftover brain function with no clear survival benefit. In contrast, Geoffrey Miller argues that demonstrable ability in the aesthetic realm, painting, conversation, song, what have you, can serve as a powerful “fitness indicator”. What an advertisement is to a product so too is a fitness indicator to one’s genetic potential.
Implications for guys in the community
It seems one of the central ideas of the seduction community is the necessity of so-called “cold approaching”. Essentially, a cold approach entails hitting on a random woman in a bar or daytime setting. It is interesting to consider whether the cold approach is the optimal strategy from an evolutionary perspective.
Miller gives examples from the natural world like a specific type of bird that spreads its wingspan to impress females of the species. Cold approach might function similarly with men and women, a brief display of male bravado to impress a girl. If the girl gives you an in with her, I suppose a cold approach is also an opportunity to convey conversation skills as a fitness indicator.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for occasionally approaching a hot woman I see organically, but Miller’s book also makes me wonder whether there are generally more gainful avenues of male self development than committing time to doing so-called “daygame”. Maybe endeavouring to get better at music if you historically had an aptitude for it, as an example of one thing that might give you more social currency than being a lone pick-up artist of dubious genetic worth (My point here is merely the girl doesn’t fundamentally know you).
Criticism
The one thing I wonder is if fitness indicator displays have something of a youth premium. Of course, things like music or athletics would give you signalling power throughout life but I am inclined to agree with David Buss that resource potential motivates a lot of mating in women, or even at some point resource proof. Although I am sure no girl is consciously thinking this, creativity or athleticism in youth suggest early raw talent that might be a predictor of later earnings potential. The point is when the dust of early assortative mating settles people pair off along socio-economic lines.
Conclusion
In summary, Geoffrey Miller’s The Mating Mind makes an interesting argument that being exceptional in some humane pursuit like music, art, conversation, etc. can work as a fitness indicator signalling sexually attractive intelligence. In this review, I also considered the cold approach, the essential praxis of the seduction community, from an evolutionary perspective, arguing it might function as a thin signal relative to putting yourself out there with something you’re good at. With that said, I also speculated on how artistic pursuits might have diminishing value as one gets older and economic stability gains more primacy. At any rate, I think any guy ought to think about what his “peacock’s tail” might be besides his immediate look and how he might scan to a random female stranger.
Early on, Miller provides an interesting overview of Charles Darwin, who while best known for Origin of Species (1859) also wrote a work called Descent of Man (1871) that introduced the idea of sexual selection that was in intellectual exile for the better part of the next century until experiencing an intellectual revival. Miller subsequently discusses interesting ideas like runaway sexual selection and compares our mating habits with those of our cavemen ancestors.
Miller’s central thesis seems to be a retort to thinkers like Steven Pinker and Stephen Jay Gould, who have argued “creativity” is leftover brain function with no clear survival benefit. In contrast, Geoffrey Miller argues that demonstrable ability in the aesthetic realm, painting, conversation, song, what have you, can serve as a powerful “fitness indicator”. What an advertisement is to a product so too is a fitness indicator to one’s genetic potential.
Implications for guys in the community
It seems one of the central ideas of the seduction community is the necessity of so-called “cold approaching”. Essentially, a cold approach entails hitting on a random woman in a bar or daytime setting. It is interesting to consider whether the cold approach is the optimal strategy from an evolutionary perspective.
Miller gives examples from the natural world like a specific type of bird that spreads its wingspan to impress females of the species. Cold approach might function similarly with men and women, a brief display of male bravado to impress a girl. If the girl gives you an in with her, I suppose a cold approach is also an opportunity to convey conversation skills as a fitness indicator.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for occasionally approaching a hot woman I see organically, but Miller’s book also makes me wonder whether there are generally more gainful avenues of male self development than committing time to doing so-called “daygame”. Maybe endeavouring to get better at music if you historically had an aptitude for it, as an example of one thing that might give you more social currency than being a lone pick-up artist of dubious genetic worth (My point here is merely the girl doesn’t fundamentally know you).
Criticism
The one thing I wonder is if fitness indicator displays have something of a youth premium. Of course, things like music or athletics would give you signalling power throughout life but I am inclined to agree with David Buss that resource potential motivates a lot of mating in women, or even at some point resource proof. Although I am sure no girl is consciously thinking this, creativity or athleticism in youth suggest early raw talent that might be a predictor of later earnings potential. The point is when the dust of early assortative mating settles people pair off along socio-economic lines.
Conclusion
In summary, Geoffrey Miller’s The Mating Mind makes an interesting argument that being exceptional in some humane pursuit like music, art, conversation, etc. can work as a fitness indicator signalling sexually attractive intelligence. In this review, I also considered the cold approach, the essential praxis of the seduction community, from an evolutionary perspective, arguing it might function as a thin signal relative to putting yourself out there with something you’re good at. With that said, I also speculated on how artistic pursuits might have diminishing value as one gets older and economic stability gains more primacy. At any rate, I think any guy ought to think about what his “peacock’s tail” might be besides his immediate look and how he might scan to a random female stranger.
