Charles Darwin was not the first thinker to suggest that living organisms evolved through time. The pre-Socratic philosopher Anaximander said as much 2,500 years ago, and the concept had become widely accepted by Darwin's own time. Nor did Darwin's originality lie with the idea that all animal life is related, or that parts of organisms or their behavior patterns are conductive to survival: by Darwin's time, such facts were constantly being appealed to by theologians as evidence for God's hand in nature. Darwin's theory of evolution triumphed because it proposed a physical mechanism to make evolution both intelligible and possible: the development of species by a process of random mutation and selective retention, known forever as natural selection.

-- Denis Dutton

from "The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution"

Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are a broad class of stochastic optimization algorithms, inspired by biology and in particular by those biological processes that allow populations of organisms to adapt to their surrounding environment: genetic inheritance and survival of the fittest. These concepts were introduced in the 19th century by Charles Darwin (50) and are still today widely acknowledged as valid, even though complemented with further details (52).

The first proposals in that direction date back to the mid-1960s, when John Holland, of the University of Michigan, introduced genetic algorithms (GAs) (97), Lawrence Fogel and his colleagues, of the University of California in San Diego, started their experiments on evolutionary programming, (71) and Ingo Rechenberg, of the Technical University of Berlin, independently began to work on evolution strategies (185). Their pioneering work eventually gave rise to a broad class of optimization methods particularly well suited for hard problems where little is known about the underlying search space. The last development of this research thread is so-called genetic programming, introduced by John Koza, of Stanford University (117) at the beginning of the 1990s.

Recent texts of reference and synthesis in the field of evolutionary algorithms are (143. 12).

[...]

(12) T. Bäck. Evolutionary algorithms in theory and practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996.

[...]

(50) C. Darwin. The Origin of Species. John Murray, London, 1859.

[...]

(52) R. Dawkins. The Blind Watchmaker. W.W. Norton and Company, New York, 1986.

[...]

(71) L. J. Fogel, A. J. Ownes, and M. J. Walsh. Artificial Intelligence through Simulated Evolution. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1966.

[...]

(97) J. H. Holland. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1975.

[...]

(117) J. R. Koza. Genetic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1992.

[...]

(143) Z. Michalewicz. Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs, 3rd Edition. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996.

[...]

(185) I. Rechenberg. Evolutionsstrategie: Optimierung technischer Systeme nach Prinzipien der biologischen Evolution. Fromman-Holzboog Verlag, Stuttgart, 1973.

-- Andrea G. B. Tettamanzi , Marco Tomassini

from "Soft Computing: Integrating Evolutionary, Neural, and Fuzzy"

Aesop's "The Ant and the Grasshopper" gives us a splendid analogy for the contrasting styles of Guardian and Artisan. In the fable, Ant is dutifully transporting large crumbs of bread from site to storage while Grasshopper reclines on a blade of grass near Ant's path, playing the fiddle, chewing tobacco, and singing "The World Owes Me a Living." Ant, without losing stride, scolds Grasshopper for not preparing for the upcoming winter months: "Join me," he urges, "and we will fill the storehouse, thus ensuring that none will suffer cold or hunger." Grasshopper replies, "Ant, if you keep up this feverish pace, you won't make it to winter." Join me on my blade of grass, and we will enjoy together the warm summer, the food that abounds, and celebrate the world's debt to us in song." Each, of course ignores the other's warning and goes his own way. When it turns out to be a long, cold, hungry winter, Grasshopper must knock at Ant's door and stand there frostbitten and starving. Ant, snug in his storehouse of goodies, can't help but say "I told you so," then shakes his head and lets Grasshopper in.

-- David West Keirsey

from "Please Understand Me II: Temperment, Character, Intelligence"

One reason that computers are slow is that their hardware is used extremely inefficiently. [...] The reasons for the inefficiency are partly technical but mostly historical. The basic forms of today's architectures were developed under a very different set of technologies, when different assumptions applied than are appropriate today. [...]

A modern computer contains about one square meter of silicon. This square meter contains approximately one billion transistors which make up the processor and memory of the computer. The interesting point here is that both the processor and memory are made of the same stuff. This was not always the case. When von Neumann and his colleagues were designing the first computers, their processors were made of relatively fast and expensive switching components such as vacuum tubes, whereas the memories were made of relatively slow and inexpensive components such as delay lines or storage tubes. The result was a two-part design which kept the expensive vacuum tubes as busy as possible. This two-part design, with memory on one side and processing on the other, we call the von Neumann architecture, and it is the way that we build almost all computer today. This basic design has been so successful that most computer designers have kept it even though the technological reason for the memory / processor split no longer makes sense.

The Memory / Processor Split Leads to Inefficiency

In a large von Neumann computer almost none of its billion or so transistors are doing any useful processing at any given instant. Almost all of the transistors are in the memory section of the machine, and only a few of those memory locations are being accessed at any given time. The two-part architecture keeps the silicon devoted to processing wonderfully busy, but this is only two or three percent of the silicon area. The other 97 percent sits idle. [...] [T]his is an expensive resource to waste. If we were to take another measure of cost in the computer, kilometers of wire, the results would be much the same: most of the hardware is in memory, so most of the hardware is doing nothing most of the time.

As we build larger computers the problem becomes even worse. It is relatively straightforward to increase the size of memory in a machine, it is far from obvious how to increase the size of the processor. The result is that as we build bigger machines with more silicon, or equivalently, as we squeeze more transistors into each unit of area, the machines have a larger ratio of memory to processing power and are consequently even less efficient. This inefficiency remains no matter how fast we make the processor because the length of the computation becomes dominated by the time required to move data between processor and memory. This is call the "von Neumann bottleneck." The bigger we build machines, the worse it gets.

-- William Daniel Hillis

from "The Connection Machine"

This study builds on the notion that cognition has a domain-specific structure (Barkow, Cosmides & Tooby, 1992; Gelman & Hirschfield, 1994), i.e., that cognitive domains exist in the human brain, as a result of natural selection. Two such basic cognitive domains are folk psychology (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Gergely, Nadasdy, Gergely & Biro, 1995) and folk physics (Baillargeon, Kotovsky & Needham, 1995; Leslie & Keeble, 1987). These domains are thought to reflect inborn attentional biases in the infant brain to particular classes of information (social vs inanimate events, respectively). Such attentional biases facilitate the infant brain learning about these specific aspects of the environment.

[...]

Evidence that the broader phenotype of autism may be characterised in terms of folk physics being more advanced than folk psychology comes from a recent study of the occupations of the first and second degree relatives of children with autism. Both fathers and grandfathers of such children were disproportionately represented in occupations linked to engineering. In a sample of 919 families with a child with autism, 28.4% had either a father or grandfather who was an engineer, vs only 15% of control group families (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Stott, Bolton & Goodyer, 1997). In the present study, we investigated if autism was more common in the families of those people who work in fields which demand good folk physics but which do not necessarily demand good folk psychology. Specifically, we tested the prediction that autism would be more common in the families of those working in the object-centred fields of engineering, physics, and mathematics, relative to those working in the humanities.

[...]

To minimize the risk of statistically significant results occuring due to multiple testing, two tests were carried out of first: autism (predicted to be more common in the engineers/maths/physics families); and manic depression (predicted to be more common in the English/French families, based on earlier findings (Andreasen, 1987; Claridge, Pryor & Watkins, 1990). Both predictions were confirmed.

[...]

Subject studied	Autism	Lang Delay	Schizophrenia	Manic Depress	Anorex	Down’s	No. of 1st deg relatives	No of 2nd deg relatives	No of 3rd deg relatives	Total No of relatives
Maths, Engineer or Physics (n=641)	6*	32	17	50	24	6	2238	2880	4310	9428
English or French Literature (n=652)	1	43	20	100*	21	4	2401	3007	4421	9829

* Maths/Engineering/Physics significantly higher than English/French
** Maths/Engineering/Physics significantly lower than English/French

[...]

This shows that, as predicted, there is a significant association between individuals whose cognitive strengths lie in the domain of folk physics (indexed by working in the fields of mathematics, engineering, and physics) and having a biological relative with autism. This result could reflect reporting biases between the two groups, but this is far-fetched. Rather, the association fits the prediction derived from a theory of the broader cognitive phenotype of autism.

-- Simon Baron-Cohen , Patrick F. Bolton , Sally Wheelwright , Victoria Scahill , Liz Short , Genevieve Mead , Alex Smith

from "Autism occurs more often in families of physicists, engineers, and mathematicians."

The AQ was designed to be short, easy to use, and easy to score. [...] It comprises 50 questions, made up of 10 questions assessing 5 different areas: social skill (items 1,11,13,15,22,36,44,45,47,48); attention switching (items 2,4,10,16,25,32,34,37,43,46); attention to detail (items 5,6,9,12,19,23,28,29,30,49); communication (items 7,17,18,26,27,31,33,35,38,39); imagination (items 3,8,14,20,21,24,40,41,42,50). [...] Approximately half the items were worded to produce a “disagree” response, and half an “agree” response, in a high scoring person with AS/HFA. This was to avoid a response bias either way. Following this, items were randomized with respect to both the expected response from a high-scorer, and with respect to their domain.

[...]

Scoring the AQ

“Definitely agree” or “slightly agree” responses scored 1 point, on the following items: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 33, 35, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46. “Definitely disagree” or “slightly disagree” responses scored 1 point, on the following items: 3, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50.

[...]

The Autistic-Spectrum Quotient

1. I prefer to do things with others rather than on my own.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
2. I prefer to do things the same way over and over again.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
3. If I try to imagine something, I find it very easy to create a picture in my mind.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
4. I frequently get so strongly absorbed in one thing that I lose sight of other things.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
5. I often notice small sounds when others do not.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
6. I usually notice car number plates or similar strings of information.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
7. Other people frequently tell me that what I’ve said is impolite, even though I think it is polite.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
8. When I’m reading a story, I can easily imagine what the characters might look like.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
9. I am fascinated by dates.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
10. In a social group, I can easily keep track of several different people’s conversations.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
11. I find social situations easy.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
12. I tend to notice details that others do not.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
13. I would rather go to a library than a party.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
14. I find making up stories easy.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
15. I find myself drawn more strongly to people than to things.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
16. I tend to have very strong interests, which I get upset about if I can’t pursue.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
17. I enjoy social chit-chat.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
18. When I talk, it isn’t always easy for others to get a word in edgeways.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
19. I am fascinated by numbers.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
20. When I’m reading a story, I find it difficult to work out the characters’ intentions.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
21. I don’t particularly enjoy reading fiction.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
22. I find it hard to make new friends.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
23. I notice patterns in things all the time.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
24. I would rather go to the theatre than a museum.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
25. It does not upset me if my daily routine is distubed.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
26. I frequently find that I don’t know how to keep a conversation going.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
27. I find it easy to “read between the lines” when someone is talking to me.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
28. I usually concentrate more on the whole picture, rather than the small details.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
29. I am not very good at remembering phone numbers.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
30. I don’t usually notice small changes in a situation, or a person’s appearance.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
31. I know how to tell if someone listening to me is getting bored.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
32. I find it easy to do more than one thing at once.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
33. When I talk on the phone, I’m not sure when it’s my turn to speak.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
34. I enjoy doing things spontaneously.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
35. I am often the last to understand the point of a joke.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
36. I find it easy to work out what someone is thinking or feeling just by looking at their face.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
37. If there is an interruption, I can switch back to what I was doing very quickly.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
38. I am good at social chit-chat.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
39. People often tell me that I keep going on and on about the same thing.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
40. When I was young, I used to enjoy playing games involving pretending with other children.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
41. I like to collect information about categories of things (e.g. types of car, types of bird, types of train, types of plant, etc.).	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
42. I find it difficult to imagine what it would be like to be someone else.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
43. I like to plan any activities I participate in carefully.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
44. I enjoy social occasions.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
45. I find it difficult to work out people’s intentions.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
46. New situations make me anxious.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
47. I enjoy meeting new people.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
48. I am a good diplomat.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
49. I am not very good at remembering people’s date of birth.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree
50. I find it very easy to play games with children that involve pretending.	definitely agree	slightly agree	slightly disagree	definitely disagree

-- Simon Baron-Cohen , Sally Wheelwright , Richard Skinner , Joanne Martin , Emma Clubley

from "The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger Syndrome/High-Functioning Autism, Males and Females, Scientists and Mathematicians"

Asperger’s disorder is one of autistic spectrum disorders; sharing clinical features with autism, but without developmental delay in language acquisition. [...] [W]e investigated abstract reasoning ability, whose form of intelligence has been labeled fluid intelligence in the theory of Cattell [Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1–22.], in children with Asperger’s disorder. [...] The results showed that children with Asperger’s disorder outperformed on the test of fluid reasoning than typically developing children. We suggest that individuals with Asperger’s disorder have higher fluid reasoning ability than normal individuals, highlighting superior fluid intelligence.

[...]

General fluid intelligence (gF) is a major dimension of individual differences and refers to reasoning and novel problem-solving ability (Cattell, 1963; Gray & Thompson, 2004). Empirically, fluid intelligence is strongly associated with frontal executive function (Duncan, Burgess, & Emslie, 1995), attentional control and working memory (Conway, Cowan, Bunting, Therriault, & Minkoff, 2002; Gray, Chabris, & Braver, 2003; Kane & Engle, 2002), and the core function of fluid intelligence is the abstract reasoning ability, which has been a component of most formal theories of intelligence (Sternberg, 1985; Thurstone, 1938). On the other hand, general crystallized intelligence is distinct from gF, referring to overlearned skills and static knowledge such as vocabulary, and there is empirical evidence for a distinction between the psychological processes and the neural substrates that subserve fluid reasoning and crystallized knowledge (Cattell, 1963; Duncan et al., 1995).

[...]

It is possible to assume that individuals with Asperger’s disorder would show low fluid intelligence, as in the case of autistics who showed poor fluid reasoning (Blair, 2006; Pennington & Ozonoff, 1996) and poor performance on the tests of high-level integration or abstraction (Courchesne & Pierce, 2005; Just, Cherkassky, Keller, & Minshew, 2004). However, a recent study by Dawson and colleagues (2007) provided us with empirical evidence that autistic children showed high scores on the test of fluid intelligence using the RSPM. Such an empirical study has never been documented in Asperger’s disorder or high-functioning autism. Here, we aimed to examine fluid intelligence in children with Asperger’s disorder [...]

[...]

Seventeen participants with Asperger’s disorder (10 boys and 7 girls, ages 6 to 12 years) were recruited from the out-patient’s clinic of one children’s hospital and took part in this study.

[...]

Mean numbers of correct responses on the RSPM in the Asperger’s disorder (AD) and normal controls (NC) groups are shown in Fig. 1. The number of matrices correctly solved in both groups were analyzed as a dependent variable, and two-tailed t tests revealed that the AD group (41.1 ± 9.3) made significantly more correct responses than the NC group (30.7 ± 10.3) [t(32) = À3.08, p < .01, Cohen’s ds = 1.05].

Fig. 1. Mean numbers of correct responses on the RSPM for control (NC)and Asperger’s disorder (AD) groups. Open (left) and filled (right) columns represent numbers of correct responses in NC and AD groups, respectively. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean.

[...]

The present study demonstrates that participants with Asperger’s disorder made more correct responses on the RSPM than did normal controls. The results of this study suggest that Asperger’s disorder involves superior abstract reasoning ability or higher general fluid intelligence. [...] In order to solve the problems on the RSPM, it is necessary to induce rules from the relationship between elements in matrices, and to generate and maintain goals in working memory until a target satisfies a theorem as a whole. As compared to normally developing children, the performance on the RSPM in children with Asperger’s disorder was critically different and was significantly better, implying the superiority in fluid intelligence in Asperger’s disorder.

Moreover, from clinical case records of children with Asperger’s disorder diagnosed by Hans Asperger and his team, it was revealed that some individuals with Asperger’s disorder had a special gift for abstract thinking and logical reasoning (Hippler & Klicpera, 2003). Hans Asperger contended, in his original paper, that the traits of this disorder were in fact necessary for high achievement in the arts and sciences (Wing, 2005). Logical reasoning ability is a premise for conducting scientific research, and in fact there have been some outstanding scientists who were the cases of Asperger’s disorder (Asperger, 1944; Frith, 2004). Such clinical characteristics could be in correspondence to the superior performance on abstract reasoning problems of the RSPM in the present study.

[...]

Although we demonstrated new cognitive characteristics in Asperger’s disorder, there are some limitations in our study. The major one is the small number of participants with Asperger’s disorder. [...] Another limitation is the lack of multiple measures of general fluid intelligence in this study. Although we suppose that the RSPM would be a good and convincing enough measure, it would be hard to clearly articulate the types of cognitive processes that the RSPM taps into.

-- Mika Hayashi , Motoichiro Kato , Kazue Igarashi , Haruo Kashima

from "Superior fluid intelligence in children with Asperger’s disorder"

Marxists in the Soviet Union and its aftermath were called conservatives; Reagan and Thatcher were called revolutionaries. Liberals [in the U.S.] are liberal about sexual behavior but not about business practices; conservatives [in the U.S.] want to conserve communities and traditions, but they also favor the free market economy that subverts them. People who call themselves "classical liberals" are likely to be called "conservatives" by adherents of the version of leftism known as political correctness.

-- Steven Arthur Pinker

from "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature"

Liberal and conservative political attitudes are largely, though far from completely, heritable. When identical twins who were separated at birth are tested in adulthood, their political attitudes turn out to be similar, with a correlation coefficient of .62 (on a scale from -1 to +1).² Liberal and conservative attitudes are heritable not, of course, because attitudes are synthesized directly from DNA but because they come naturally to people with different temperaments.

[...]

2. Personal communication, D. Lykken, April 11, 2001. Other estimates of the heritability of conservative attitudes are typically in the range of .4 to .5: Bouchard et al., 1990; Eaves, Eysenck, & Martin, 1989; Holden, 1987; Martin et al., 1986; Plomin et al., 1997, p.206; Scarr & Weinberg, 1981.

-- Steven Arthur Pinker

from "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature"

The Keirsey Temperament Sorter II

There are no right or wrong answers since about half the population agrees with whatever answer you choose.

1. When the phone rings do you

___(a) hurry to get to it first

___(b) hope someone else will answer

2. Are you more

___(a) observant than introspective

___(b) introspective than observant

3. Is it worse to

___(a) have your head in the clouds

___(b) be in a rut

4. With people are you usually more

___(a) firm than gentle

___(b) gentle than firm

5. Are you more comfortable in making

___(a) critical judgments

___(b) value judgments

6. Is clutter in the workplace something you

___(a) take time to straighten up

___(b) tolerate pretty well

7. Is it your way to

___(a) make up your mind quickly

___(b) pick and choose at some length

8. Waiting in line, do you often

___(a) chat with others

___(b) stick to business

9. Are you more

___(a) sensible than ideational

___(b) ideational than sensible

10. Are you more interested in

___(a) what is actual

___(b) what is possible

11. In making up your mind are you more likely to go by

___(a) data

___(b) desires

12. In sizing up others do you tend to be

___(a) objective and impersonal

___(b) friendly and personal

13. Do you prefer contracts to be

___(a) signed, sealed, and delivered

___(b) settled on a handshake

14. Are you more satisfied having

___(a) a finished product

___(b) work in progress

15. At a party, do you

___(a) interact with many, even strangers

___(b) interact with a few friends

16. Do you tend to be more

___(a) factual than speculative

___(b) speculative than factual

17. Do you like writers who

___(a) say what they mean

___(b) use metaphors and symbolism

18. Which appeals to you more:

___(a) consistency of thought

___(b) harmonious relations

19. If you must disappoint someone are you usually

___(a) frank and straightforward

___(b) warm and considerate

20. On the job do you want your activities

___(a) scheduled

___(b) unscheduled

21. Do you more often prefer

___(a) final, unalterable statements

___(b) tentative, preliminary statements

22. Does interacting with strangers

___(a) energize you

___(b) tax your reserves

23. Facts

___(a) speak for themselves

___(b) illustrate principles

24. Do you find visionaries and theorists

___(a) somewhat annoying

___(b) rather fascinating

25. In a heated discussion, do you

___(a) stick to you guns

___(b) look for common ground

26. Is it better to be

___(a) just

___(b) merciful

27. At work, is it more natural for you to

___(a) point out mistakes

___(b) try to please others

28. Are you more comfortable

___(a) after a decision

___(b) before a decision

29. Do you tend to

___(a) say right out what's on your mind

___(b) keep your ears open

30. Common sense is

___(a) usually reliable

___(b) frequently questionable

31. Children often do not

___(a) make themselves useful enough

___(b) exercise their fantasy enough

32. When in change of others do you tend to be

___(a) firm and unbending

___(b) forgiving and lenient

33. Are you more often

___(a) a cool-headed person

___(b) a warm-hearted person

34. Are you prone to

___(a) nailing things down

___(b) exploring the possibilities

35. In most situations are you more

___(a) deliberate than spontaneous

___(b) spontaneous than deliberate

36. Do you think of yourself as

___(a) an outgoing person

___(b) a private person

37. Are you more frequently

___(a) a practical sort of person

___(b) a fanciful sort of person

38. Do you speak more in

___(a) particulars than generalities

___(b) generalities than particulars

39. Which is more of a compliment:

___(a) "There's a logical person"

___(b) "There's a sentimental person"

40. Which rules you more

___(a) your thoughts

___(b) your feelings

41. When finishing a job, do you like to

___(a) tie up all the loose ends

___(b) move on to something else

42. Do you prefer to work

___(a) to deadlines

___(b) just whenever

43. Are you the kind of person who

___(a) is rather talkative

___(b) doesn't miss much

44. Are you inclined to take what is said

___(a) more literally

___(b) more figuratively

45. Do you more often see

___(a) what's right in front of you

___(b) what can only be imagined

46. Is it worse to be

___(a) a softy

___(b) hard-nosed

47. In trying circumstances are you sometimes

___(a) too unsympathetic

___(b) too sympathetic

48. Do you tend to choose

___(a) rather carefully

___(b) somewhat impulsively

49. Are you inclined to be more

___(a) hurried than leisurely

___(b) leisurely than hurried

50. At work do you tend to

___(a) be sociable with your colleagues

___(b) keep more to yourself

51. Are you more likely to trust

___(a) your experiences

___(b) your conceptions

52. Are you more inclined to feel

___(a) down to earth

___(b) somewhat removed

53. Do you think of yourself as a

___(a) tough-minded person

___(b) tender-hearted person

54. Do you value in yourself more that you are

___(a) reasonable

___(b) devoted

55. Do you usually want things

___(a) settled and decided

___(b) just penciled in

56. Would you say you are more

___(a) serious and determined

___(b) easy going

57. Do you consider yourself

___(a) a good conversationalist

___(b) a good listener

58. Do you prize in yourself

___(a) a strong hold on reality

___(b) a vivid imagination

59. Are you drawn more to

___(a) fundamentals

___(b) overtones

60. Which seems the greater fault:

___(a) to be too compassionate

___(b) to be too dispassionate

61. Are you swayed more by

___(a) convincing evidence

___(b) a touching appeal

62. Do you feel better about

___(a) coming to closure

___(b) keeping your options open

63. Is it preferable mostly to

___(a) make sure things are arranged

___(b) just let things happen naturally

64. Are you inclined to be

___(a) easy to approach

___(b) somewhat reserved

65. In stories do you prefer

___(a) action and adventure

___(b) fantasy and heroism

66. Is it easier for you to

___(a) put others to good use

___(b) identify with others

67. Which do you wish more for yourself:

___(a) strength of will

___(b) strength of emotion

68. Do you see yourself as basically

___(a) thick-skinned

___(b) thin-skinned

69. Do you tend to notice

___(a) disorderliness

___(b) opportunities for change

70. Are you more

___(a) routinized than whimsical

___(b) whimsical than routinized

Answer Sheet

Enter a check for each answer in the column for a or b.

	a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b
1			2			3			4			5			6			7
8			9			10			11			12			13			14
15			16			17			18			19			20			21
22			23			24			25			26			27			28
29			30			31			32			33			34			35
36			37			38			39			40			41			42
43			44			45			46			47			48			49
50			51			52			53			54			55			56
57			58			59			60			61			62			63
64			65			66			67			68			69			70
1			2 3			4 3			4 5			6 5			6 7			8 7			8
	↓			↳		→				↳		→				↳		→
↓						↓						↓							↓
1			2			3			4			5			6			7			8
	E	I					S	N					T	F					J	P

Directions for Scoring

1. Add down so that the total number of a answers is written in the box at the bottom of each column (see [... below ...] for illustration). Do the same for the b answers you have checked. Each of the 14 boxes should have a number in it.

2. Transfer the number in box No. 1 of the answer grid to box No. 1 below the answer grid. Do this for box No. 2 as well. Note, however, that you have two numbers for boxes 3 through 8. Bring down the first number for each box beneath the second, as indicated by the arrows. Now add all the pairs of numbers and enter the total in the boxes below the answer grid, so each box has only one number.

3. Now you have four pairs of numbers. Circle the letter below the larger numbers of each pair (see sample answer sheet below for an illustration). If the two numbers of any pair are equal, then circle neither, but put a large X below them and circle it.

	a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b		a	b
1	✔		2	✔		3	✔		4		✔	5		✔	6		✔	7		✔
8	✔		9	✔		10	✔		11	✔		12		✔	13	✔		14	✔
15	✔		16	✔		17	✔		18	✔		19		✔	20	✔		21	✔
22		✔	23	✔		24	✔		25		✔	26		✔	27	✔		28	✔
29	✔		30	✔		31		✔	32		✔	33		✔	34		✔	35	✔
36	✔		37	✔		38	✔		39		✔	40		✔	41	✔		42	✔
43		✔	44		✔	45	✔		46	✔		47		✔	48	✔		49		✔
50	✔		51	✔		52	✔		53		✔	54	✔		55	✔		56	✔
57	✔		58	✔		59	✔		60		✔	61		✔	62		✔	63		✔
64	✔		65	✔		66		✔	67	✔		68		✔	69	✔		70	✔
1	8	2	2 3	9	1	4 3	8	2	4 5	4	6	6 5	1	9	6 7	7	3	8 7	7	3	8
	↓			↳		→	9	1		↳		→	4	6		↳		→	7	3
↓						↓						↓							↓
1	8	2	2			3	17	3	4			5	5	15	6			7	14	6	8
	E	I					S	N					T	F					J	P

-- David West Keirsey

from "Please Understand Me II: Temperment, Character, Intelligence"

The tendency for a mother or infant to occasionally die in the process of childbirth appears to be, almost without exception, a uniquely human characteristic. The only readily apparent exceptions occur in certain domestic animals.

-- Roy, Robert P. MD, FRCSC

from "A Darwinian View of Obstructed Labor"

The limited scientific evidence that is available does support the fact that the Inuit appear to be virtually free of dystocia. Baskett, in 1978, observed that Inuit patients tend to have very efficient uterine action, endure labor well, and rarely have dystocia. He recorded only ten cesareans in a study of 622 Inuit deliveries, for a rate of only 1.6%, dramatically lower than the contemporaneous rate of 6.9% for the province of Manitoba and 10.5% for the Winnipeg teaching hospitals. Of these ten cesarean deliveries, only four were performed for cephalopelvic disproportion.

The anecdotal experience of many obstetricians in Canada seems to support the observation that the Inuit tend to have extraordinarily easy labors compared with other ethnic groups.

-- Roy, Robert P. MD, FRCSC

from "A Darwinian View of Obstructed Labor"

36. [...] [T]he capacity to develop expertise [...] would have been critical for the survival of early hunter-gatherers. Lee (1979) noted that in hunting the !Kung use in depth expert knowledge and reasoning. For example, hunters can spot from a particular track the animal which made it, its sex, age, whether alone or ill, what it was eating, and how long ago (to within 15 minutes) since the animal made the track. They can do this by reading the shape, depth and condition of tracks, whether they are alone, and how they are spaced and located. Tracks found to the east side of a tree might suggest that the animal rested there in the morning shade (Lee 1979, pp. 212-213). Such knowledge, like other forms of expertise, takes many years, indeed decades, to learn. Moreover, it is known to be more important than physical skill to hunting success: the individuals most successful at hunting are those in the over 39 age group (with decades of experience tracking), not the more physical able (but less experienced) individuals under this age (Lee 1979, pp. 242-244). Indeed, an old man in his fifties or sixties might go with a young man (usually his son), interpreting the tracks while the young man does the hunting.

37. This example suggests that among early humans the individuals with the brains that had the greatest capacity to acquire expertise would survive more successfully than those without their extensive knowledge. The reasons for this would not only include expertise in hunting but expertise in many other activities such as gathering, tool manufacture and social communication. Over time, the advantages conferred by success in these activities would result in the natural selection of brains with increased capacity for expertise.

-- Dr. John R. Skoyles

from "Human evolution expanded brains to increase expertise capacity, not IQ"

[The] internal combustion engine. [...] [W]e could readily infer that the engine's purpose is to produce torque in order to drive wheels. Along the way, we will also notice that the engine produces excess heat. We are entitled to regard this excess heat as a pure by-produce, a side effect: if the engine functioned to produce torque without excess heat, it would make little difference to us -- or might even be considered advantageous, since the excess heat of internal combustion engines normally requires a cooling mechanism, in most cases a water pump and radiator. So is the cooling system, then, a by-product of the engine? Not exactly. The cooling system is a feature intrinsic to the design of internal combustion engines: it functions to disperse excess heat, and our reverse-engineering understanding of it would see it as part of the whole functionally interconnected mechanism. It is as much an intrinsic part of the design of the engine as, for instance, the heating and cooling systems of the human body. These involve life-protecting homeostatic reactions such as perspiration, shivering, and fevers. They are intrinsic elements of the body's physiological system and not by-products of adaptations -- spandrels or epiphenomena. Like the body, internal combustion engines could not function at all without specialized cooling systems: on the engine analogy, cooling systems are adaptations.

Let us push the analogy a step farther. Suppose water used to cool a car engine is diverted into a second, smaller radiator with a fan in order to heat the driver/passenger compartment. Are we now justified at least in calling the car heater a by-product of the system? The answer again is no: rather than being an extraneous epiphenomenon, the heater is an entirely calculated way of using what really is a by-product (excess engine heat) for the benefit of the driver, satisfying his desire to stay warm. The mobility human beings want from cars and the desire for warmth are in any event neither parts nor design features no by-products of the engine: they explain rather very existence of the car, with its engine and heater. The car heater, like any designed artifact that makes use of and depends on a by-product, does not itself necessarily become for that reason a by-product. That engines give of heat is an inconvenient contingent fact, which in this case human ingenuity turns into an asset. (If engines gave off light instead of heat, engineers might well figure out how to make productive use of the excess light, and devise alternative methods to heat cars in cold weather.) It is true that people do not design and manufacture cars in order to create car heaters, but that is like saying that evolution did not produce eyes in order to produce eyelids. Eyelids are an adaptation too (a further man-made enhancement of the eye would be spectacles). When the parts of a whole mechanism -- artifact of evolved system -- are functionally interconnected, understanding the machine, or the organ, becomes a matter of seeing how and why the parts are interrelated and what they accomplish.

-- Denis Dutton

from "The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution"

[Many artificial neural] networks are "neural" in the sense that they may have been inspired by neuroscience, but not necessarily because they are faithful models of biological neural or cognitive phenomena. In fact, [... many artificial neural networks ...] are more closely related to traditional mathematical and/or statistical models such as non-parametric pattern classifiers, clustering algorithms, nonlinear filters, and statistical regression models than they do with neurobiological models.

-- Mohamad H. Hassoun

from "Fundamentals of Artificial Neural Networks"

Artificial neural networks are viable computational models for a wide variety of problems. These include pattern classification, speech synthesis and recognition, adaptive interfaces between humans and complex physical systems, function approximation, image compression, associative memory, clustering, forecasting and prediction, combinatorial optimization, nonlinear system modeling, and control.

-- Mohamad H. Hassoun

from "Fundamentals of Artificial Neural Networks"

The number of layers and number of neurons in the hidden layer [of a feedforward neural network] has been selected experimentally, as there is really no easy way of determining these values. It helps, however, to remember that the ANN [Artificial Neural Network] learns by adjusting the weights, so if an ANN contains more neurons and thereby also more weights it can learn more complicated problems. Having too many weights can also be a problem, since learning can be more difficult and there is also a chance that the ANN will learn specific features of the input variables instead of general patterns which can be extrapolated to other data sets. In order for an ANN to accurately classify data not in the training set, this ability to generalise is crucial – without it, the ANN will be unable to distinguish frequencies that it has not been trained with.

-- Steffen Nissen

from "Neural Networks Made Simple"

[T]here's another powerful obstacle to randomised trial approach. This is the existence of 'fundamentally unidentified questions', or as the econometrician Josh Angrist indelicately puts it, "questions that are completely FUQed". A FUQed question is one that cannot be answered by an experiment -- for instance, the effect of carbon dioxide emissions on the world's climate. We can measure and calculate, extrapolate from our existing knowledge, but one thing we can't do is run a controlled experiment. We won't know exactly what our carbon dioxide emissions will do to the climate until they've already done it; even then we won't know for sure whether a different course of action would have had a different effect.

-- Tim Harford

from "Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure"

The Big Five Inventory (BFI)

Here are a number of characteristics that may or may not apply to you. For example, do you agree that you are someone who likes to spend time with others? Please write a number next to each statement to indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with that statement.

Disagree strongly 1

Disagree a little 2

Neither agree nor disagree 3

Agree a little 4

Agree strongly 5

I see Myself as Someone Who...

___ 1. Is talkative

___ 2. Tends to find fault with others

___ 3. Does a thorough job

___ 4. Is depressed, blue

___ 5. Is original, comes up with new ideas

___ 6. Is reserved

___ 7. Is helpful and unselfish with others

___ 8. Can be somewhat careless

___ 9. Is relaxed, handles stress well

___ 10. Is curious about many different things

___ 11. Is full of energy

___ 12. Starts quarrels with others

___ 13. Is a reliable worker

___ 14. Can be tense

___ 15. Is ingenious, a deep thinker

___ 16. Generates a lot of enthusiasm

___ 17. Has a forgiving nature

___ 18. Tends to be disorganized

___ 19. Worries a lot

___ 20. Has an active imagination

___ 21. Tends to be quiet

___ 22. Is generally trusting

___ 23. Tends to be lazy

___ 24. Is emotionally stable, not easily upset

___ 25. Is inventive

___ 26. Has an assertive personality

___ 27. Can be cold and aloof

___ 28. Perseveres until the task is finished

___ 29. Can be moody

___ 30. Values artistic, aesthetic experiences

___ 31. Is sometimes shy, inhibited

___ 32. Is considerate and kind to almost everyone

___ 33. Does things efficiently

___ 34. Remains calm in tense situations

___ 35. Prefers work that is routine

___ 36. Is outgoing, sociable

___ 37. Is sometimes rude to others

___ 38. Makes plans and follows through with them

___ 39. Gets nervous easily

___ 40. Likes to reflect, play with ideas

___ 41. Has few artistic interests

___ 42. Likes to cooperate with others

___ 43. Is easily distracted

___ 44. Is sophisticated in art, music, or literature

Please check: Did you write a number in front of each statement?

BFI scale scoring (“R” denotes reverse-scored items):

Extraversion: 1, 6R, 11, 16, 21R, 26, 31R, 36

Agreeableness: 2R, 7, 12R, 17, 22, 27R, 32, 37R, 42

Conscientiousness: 3, 8R, 13, 18R, 23R, 28, 33, 38, 43R

Neuroticism: 4, 9R, 14, 19, 24R, 29, 34R, 39

Openness: 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35R, 40, 41R, 44

-- Oliver P. John , Sanjay Srivastava

from "The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Theoretical Perspectives"

The Empathizer-Systemizer scale (adapted from Baron-Cohen, 2004) measures the tendency to empathize, defined as "the drive to identify another person's emotions and thoughts, and to respond to these with an appropriate emotion." and to systemize, or "the drive to analyze the variables in a system, and to derive the underlying rules that govern the behavior of the system." In short, empathizing is about understanding the social world whereas systemizing is about understanding the world of inanimate objects and nature. We selected 20 items from the full 40-item empathizer scale, and 20 items from the full 75-item systemizer scale to create a single survey that could be completed in less than 10 minutes. The measure was completed by 9,634 participants (5,067 men, 7,854 liberals, 1,010 conservatives, and 770 libertarians).

Results. Figure 10 shows that libertarians score the lowest of any group on empathizing, and the highest on systemizing. In fact, libertarians are the only group that scored higher on systemizing than on empathizing. Given that these traits are known to differ between men and women, it is important to examine these effects in each sex separately. Table 2 shows that the same effects hold when looking only at men, or when looking only at women.

Interpretation. Research by Baron-Cohen (2004) has shown that relatively high systemizing and low empathizing scores are characteristic of the male brain, with very extreme scores indicating autism. We might say that liberals have the most “feminine” cognitive style, and libertarians have the most “masculine.” These effects hold even when men and women are examined separately, as can be seen in Table 2. These differences have many obvious connections to gendered political issues, such as women’s rights, animal rights, and social welfare policies. Indeed, the “feminizing” of the Democratic party in the 1970s (Winter, in press) may help explain why libertarians moved increasingly into the Republican party in the 1980s.

[...]

Table 2: Cohen's d-scores for scales in Study 2

	Libertarians Compared to Liberals				Libertarians Compared to Conservatives
Scale	Overall	Men	Women		Overall	Men	Women
[...]
Empathizer	-0.73 **	-0.57 **	-0.62 **		-0.41 **	-0.35 **	-0.36 **
Systemizer	0.50 **	0.23 **	0.44 **		0.31 **	0.15 *	0.42 **
[...]

Note: * p<.01, ** p<.001 (two tailed)

[...]

Figure 10: Baron-Cohen Empathizer-Systematizer Scale

Compared to liberals and conservatives, libertarians score higher on systemizing and lower on empathizing. This is consistent among both men and women sub-samples. (N=7,854 liberals, 1,010 conservatives, and 770 libertarians).

-- Ravi Iyer , Spassena Koleva , Jesse Graham , Peter H. Ditto , Jonathan Haidt

from "Understanding Libertarian Morality: The Psychological Roots of an Individualist Ideology"