3 ms·

Always good to keep in mind when this kinda "evo-psych" stuff is brought up: http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2010/06/30/mr-10-09/ http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.c

Always good to keep in mind when this kinda "evo-psych" stuff is brought up: http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2010/06/30/mr-10-09/ http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2010/06/30/mr-10-09/

Dewie 12y ago
evo-psych needs studies? It seems more that the armchair evo-psych people have just decided on a set of axioms beforehand that sound sufficiently "common sense" and are making deductions based on that.
- cpr 12y ago
  Evo-* people have always pretty much relied on "just-so" stories. Evolutionary biologists who claim that feathers evolved from scales by snakes jumping off trees for millions of years are falling into the same trap.
  - FD3SA 12y ago
    And thus evolutions is of course false by your perfect mathematical deduction? I recommend you broaden your understanding of science. Scientific hypotheses are always one iteration in a series of increasingly accurate models of the known universe. Evolution, being a very young science, is understandably very far behind Physics in its life cycle. This does not mean that all evolutionary theory is "nonsense" because it cannot be instantly falsified with a perfectly designed experiment in real time. The beauty of evolution, just like any other law of the universe, is that it does not care much for one's disbelief.
- barry-cotter 12y ago
  > It seems more that the armchair evo-psych people have just decided on a set of axioms beforehand that sound sufficiently "common sense" and are making deductions based on that. You mean they're using their knowledge of humanity to make testable hypotheses to test and refine their implicit theories? Say it ain't so! Forgive the snark but armchair dismissal of evolutionary psychology from people who have never read an intro psychology textbook.
  - bradleyjg 12y ago
    That'd be fair if what was being dismissed were the results of scientific studies. But what is instead being dismissed are the wildly extrapolated fancies of people who themselves who never read a peer reviewed study on evo-* but instead got it third or fourth hand, with exaggeration about what the data is suffiecient to show at every step. Then lo and behold all of sudden plain old traditional gender stereotypes are okay again because science (but please don't ask for citations). There's plenty of blame to go around for this effect, but science popularizers are probably the lead villains of the piece.

Always good to keep in mind when this kinda "evo-psych" stuff is brought up: http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2010/06/30/mr-10-09/ http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2010/06/30/mr-10-09/

Dewie 12y ago

evo-psych needs studies? It seems more that the armchair evo-psych people have just decided on a set of axioms beforehand that sound sufficiently "common sense" and are making deductions based on that.

cpr 12y ago
Evo-* people have always pretty much relied on "just-so" stories. Evolutionary biologists who claim that feathers evolved from scales by snakes jumping off trees for millions of years are falling into the same trap.
- FD3SA 12y ago
  And thus evolutions is of course false by your perfect mathematical deduction? I recommend you broaden your understanding of science. Scientific hypotheses are always one iteration in a series of increasingly accurate models of the known universe. Evolution, being a very young science, is understandably very far behind Physics in its life cycle. This does not mean that all evolutionary theory is "nonsense" because it cannot be instantly falsified with a perfectly designed experiment in real time. The beauty of evolution, just like any other law of the universe, is that it does not care much for one's disbelief.
barry-cotter 12y ago
> It seems more that the armchair evo-psych people have just decided on a set of axioms beforehand that sound sufficiently "common sense" and are making deductions based on that. You mean they're using their knowledge of humanity to make testable hypotheses to test and refine their implicit theories? Say it ain't so! Forgive the snark but armchair dismissal of evolutionary psychology from people who have never read an intro psychology textbook.
- bradleyjg 12y ago
  That'd be fair if what was being dismissed were the results of scientific studies. But what is instead being dismissed are the wildly extrapolated fancies of people who themselves who never read a peer reviewed study on evo-* but instead got it third or fourth hand, with exaggeration about what the data is suffiecient to show at every step. Then lo and behold all of sudden plain old traditional gender stereotypes are okay again because science (but please don't ask for citations). There's plenty of blame to go around for this effect, but science popularizers are probably the lead villains of the piece.