u know as much as me.

Also, I know I’m stating the obvious but Razib is incredibly erudite. So are probably most of the regular commenters. But there are a lot more ‘regular readers’ than there are ‘people who comment regularly’ and it’s at times like these that they (/we) come out of the woodwork. What about reader erudition in general? I’m very curious about this variable, but I have no idea how best to ask about this. Hours/week spent reading non-fiction not related to your (/primary) field? Number of textbooks you’ve read dealing with topics unrelated to your (/primary) field? I don’t know which is the best way to ask the question, but I’d love to know how people answer it..

2) Nationality of respondents. (you must have an idea of this from the web log?)

“When asked if they wanted genetically engineered foods to be labeled, about 9 in 10 Americans said that they did, according to a 2010 Thomson Reuters-NPR poll. “

1) You and your wife/husband are planning on having your first child. How important is it to screen for prenatal diseases?

2) Prenatal screening shows a 90% chance of Down Syndrome. Would you choose to abort?

3) Let’s pretend scientists have discovered hundreds of genes that affect intelligence test performance. Many couples are now starting to use embryo screening and in vitro fertilisation in order to have children with high intellectual abilities. How likely are you to use this method as well?

(same question for attractiveness or political orientation)

4) Prenatal screening shows there is a 90% chance of an IQ of 80. Would you choose to abort?

Not non-hereditarian thinkers, and not hereditarian thinkers who understand concepts like norm of reaction. So very few I hope. But getting the wording right is important, and quite tricky, on questions like this.

BTW, does the move by Kalmbach to move Discover magazine from New York to Wisconsin have any implications for you or other bloggers here?

Finally, off-topic, would you please ask the technical team to fix the CSS for the comments here (and in every other Discovery blog) so that it uses a single style for all comments, rather than the highly unusual uniquely-named style for _each_ comment.

If so, cannabis or tobacco?

Would you consider yourself a feminist?

I don’t know if it’s still the case, but AFAIK, the belief that animals were automatons tended to be closely linked with “blank slate” social science.

Basically the idea was that “instinct” described actions under no conscious control at all. Animals therefore operated on instinct, but humans (with the exception of a few things like pain reflexes) did not because they were conscious and able to control impulse.

In addition, it was popular in some quarters because assuming all animals lacked consciousness meant we were ensuring we weren’t falling for “anthropocentrism” – where we describe apparently analogous animal behavior to known human emotional and mental states. Thus it’s “bias” if we make an assumption that a frightened-appearing gorilla is actually experiencing fear.

FWIW, despite being a vegan for 16 years now, I don’t believe in animal rights. Something which can’t testify in court doesn’t have rights. To claim otherwise just makes it a pawn in the agenda of others. It doesn’t mean should be mistreated though.

How deeply can we understand the average Gene Expression reader? That’s all I’m interested in.

-How often do you drink alcohol (never, ~1/wk, 2-4/wk, >5/wk)?

-What type of alcohol do you drink? (Beer, wine, hard liquor (could break down into whisky/vodka/scotch/etc.)) Fill in the blank.

-Do you smoke?

-How much time do you spend online outside of work related activities?

Before we bother answering them, which of your other questions are veiled condemnations? All of them, or just the ones about race?

To stay on topic,
I would like to see questions on how seriously people take the singularity/transhumanism movement, and predictive questions like “By what year should we have strong AI?”
Also, ethical questions on that subject matter. AI rights, etc.

Then you have the philoso-heads who turn it into a discussion of philosophy, disregarding science and plain common sense.

And the religious who believe in Genesis or whatever (“dominion over animals”).

I really like it though.