3 ms·
I understand that, just as I understand that there is value in religion, but that doesn't make it science. Yet evolutionary psychology poses as science. All of
by pron 9y ago
I understand that, just as I understand that there is value in religion, but that doesn't make it science. Yet evolutionary psychology poses as science. All of evolutionary psychology is "can we come up with an interesting interpretation to present quality X as adaptive?" Interesting, maybe, but not science.
- DoreenMichele 9y agoAh. Okay. I agree that most psychosocial stuff is on not very solid ground. To put it nicely, it is more art than science. Where I basically disagree is that this makes it not worthwhile to pursue and inherently inferior to religion.
- rwnspace 9y ago>not science. That's a brave position. I think it's not exactly Freudian dream theory. Though the 'just-so stories' characterisation can be fair... Saying that, behavioural biology is without question a scientific endeavour, with obvious connections to both evolution and human psychology - is that well-grounded evo psych or is evo psych poorly-grounded behavioural biology?
- pron 9y agoIt's not Freudian dream theory (which the virtually most psychologists happily agree is not science), but it's not experimental psychology, either. Unlike dream theory, though, it still claims to be science. I agree that the question is a scientific question, but there is a difference between a scientific question and a scientific endeavour. If we don't have the science to answer a scientific question (e.g. about multiple universes) we call our thought experiments and hypotheses pure speculation; we don't try to present them as carrying any sort of scientific validity.