"The Ferrari is exactly the same in the human context," says evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad, "as the peacock's tail is on the peacock."
Saad is an evolutionary behavioral scientist at Concordia University and author of the book The Consuming Instinct: What Juicy Burgers, Ferraris, Pornography, and Gift Giving Reveal about Human Nature, in which he argues that most consumer behavior can be explained by evolutionary psychology.
Reason.tv's Zach Weissmueller sat down with Saad to discuss why most Ferrari owners are men, whether or not advertising executives manipulate our minds, the strong political opposition to the evolutionary sciences from across the spectrum, and the evolutionary significance of Sir Mix-a-lot's "Baby Got Back."
About 10 minutes. Interview by Zach Weissmueller. Shot by Sharif Matar; edited by Weissmueller.
Visit Reason.tv for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.
Marketing BS justifications.
All this presupposes that all people consume unconsciously forever like sheep.
Maybe it applies to teenagers or idiot elite class morons who never had to gain self control over their unconscious urges.
But it does not apply to most.
I doubt this guy has ever held down a real job in his life and thus understands nothing of reality outside the cossetted surroundings of university life.
sidvidkid 2 weeks ago
@Licmycat I marvel at the fact that you can threaten hitting people on the head with a baseball bat while calling others 12 year olds. The irony is beyond hilarious.
365to173repubsPWNED 1 month ago
@365to173repubsPWNED I see you're only twelve yrs. old little bully. I'd take a baseball bat to ur head and shoulders if you talked disrespectfully to my face like that. Little coward. Go home to ur momee, I hear her calling you.
Licmycat 1 month ago
@Licmycat Ha, don't flatter yourself. I'm attracted to wisdom in women, and thusly not you. If you think men's hormones manifest themselves in similar ways to women just more profoundly....then you're smoking crack.
365to173repubsPWNED 1 month ago
@365to173repubsPWNED LMAO! Go get a sex book. I don't care to explain it to a man I don't go to bed with.
Licmycat 1 month ago
@Licmycat I think your premise is wrong. You seem to equate hormones with sex drive; that's a bit too facile. I'll admit, male hormones often manifest themselves as desiring sex. However I think female hormones don't drive them towards sex per se, but making themselves attractive and/or emotional during their cycle. You can't sit there and say they don't spend insane amounts of time buying make up, clothes, dieting, et cetera to make themselves pretty. They think about that so fucking much.
365to173repubsPWNED 1 month ago
@365to173repubsPWNED Just curious. It's a high-paid gossip dept. Men aren't more influenced by hormones??? LMAO!!!! What makes men 'Johns' that come down to hooker street and buy BJs from the street-walkers which is technically UNFAITHFULNESS. It's not hormones then just cold-blooded meanness that shows no human feelings or morals at all? I thought sex was ruled by hormones. So, what do u think rules it?
Licmycat 1 month ago
@Licmycat A learned sociologist? No. Certainly I have observed the world, and while my statement reasoned inductively from anecdotal evidence from my life, I believe it is valid for the most part in contemporary America. While I won't say females are MORE influenced by hormones, I will certainly refute your claim that males are more influenced by there's. Besides I don't see how that is necessarily related to sociology.
365to173repubsPWNED 1 month ago
@365to173repubsPWNED Are you a Sociologist?
Licmycat 1 month ago
@Licmycat I think you are wrong. Females today are the driving force behind consumerism. They do everything they can to be pretty on the outside
365to173repubsPWNED 1 month ago