3 ms·
She's explaining why she doesn't think the "fundamental assumption behind evolutionary psychology" is valid - that is a wholly legitimate critique. After all, "
by tannhauser23 6y ago
She's explaining why she doesn't think the "fundamental assumption behind evolutionary psychology" is valid - that is a wholly legitimate critique. After all, "shape of a person's skull informs his mental and emotional characteristics" is a fundamental assumption of phrenology, but we certain argue against it.
- tgv 6y agoBut we only can argue against it, because we can verify it isn't true. Hypotheses generated by the phrenological assumptions simply don't hold. Heck, even astrology can be tested. She's free to attack shoddy papers, of course: the harder, the better, I say. But that doesn't disprove anything.