Talk:INAH 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
Stub This page has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality assessment scale
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance assessment scale


Contents

[edit] So uh.

What does it do? Think that might be important to mention. Ric | opiaterein 20:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disagreements

Please do not edit the page to say that "It has been suggested..." or interpret the findings. First of all, this was not a case study, it involved many subjects. Variables were not controlled in the way they are in experiments in the physical sciences because that is impossible in the social sciences. However, they were accounted for as best they could be. The source that is used states that the findings implicate the area as a substrate with regards to sexual orientation. I never claimed it was the sole source, so your anti-Gay POV is not needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.108.236.222 (talk) 05:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

You are interpreting the findings by saying that some scientific finding 'suggests' something. Scientific discoveries cannot 'suggest' anything by themselves. Only the people who interpret them 'suggest' anything. So what you want the article to say is wrong as a matter of logic. Skoojal (talk) 05:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Levay quote

'Since I looked at adult brains, we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later."' It's there on the page about LeVay. Skoojal (talk) 05:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My objection to LeVay's interpretion?

The person who recently undid my latest edit seemed to think that I was 'objecting to LeVay's interpretation.' Well, no. I was doing nothing of the kind. I was simply pointing out that it was an interpretation. That doesn't mean I think it's necessarily incorrect. You just don't seem to understand the point of what I did, although I am trying to explain. Skoojal (talk) 05:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

For a specific admission by LeVay that INAH3 size could be an effect rather than a cause of sexual orientation, see his book Queer Science, page 144. I have added a mention of this to the article on LeVay. Skoojal (talk) 05:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I have developed a compromise in the wording. Happy? C0h3n (talk) 05:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
It's OK basically. It might still be better if the article made clear that the exact importance of INAH3 size is an open question, even according to LeVay. Skoojal (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)