2 ms·
EDIT -- In reference to The Blank Slate: I read it awhile back, and while there are some stretches in his usage of evolution to explain every form of behavior,
by aswanson 19y ago
EDIT -- In reference to The Blank Slate:
I read it awhile back, and while there are some stretches in his usage of evolution to explain every form of behavior, e.g., people sat around fires for millenia therefore storytelling ability evolved, his explanations concerning adaptations for general survival utility are well supported.
I would recommend reading it with a grain of salt, and take evolutionary psychology for what it is, with the same level of skepticism you would apply to get data from any social "science".
EDIT--Some suggestive guideposts when reading in this field:
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003817.html http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003817.html
http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~hagen/papers/Controversies.pdf http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~hagen/papers/Controversies...
http://www.badscience.net/?p=518 http://www.badscience.net/?p=518
Be on the lookout for handwaving, but certainly investigate. Don't make it the only book you read in this area...
- Tichy 19y ago"people sat around fires for millenia therefore storytelling ability evolved" I've read "How the Mind Works" before and really liked it, so I have good expectations of Pinker. But in general, that kind of use of evolution theory is really tiresome. No matter what you want to "prove", you can always make up a story and then tag it with "therefore xyz evolved".