4 ms·
> If an explanation fit all current observations and predicted future experiments why is it not correct? In order for anything to count as a "future experiment
by kijin 12y ago
> If an explanation fit all current observations and predicted future experiments why is it not correct?
In order for anything to count as a "future experiment" with respect to something that takes as long as evolution does, the predicted phenomena would have to occur at least thousands of years from now, and you would have to control for all the socio-economic-cultural-political differences between now and then. Which would begin to sound like an impossible task, even you embarked on a millennia-long research project, because humanity is quickly approaching (and may already have gone beyond) the point where technology overtakes evolution.
Evolution of the regular type at least has billions of years' worth of fossil records to compensate for its lack of predictions for the future. The only thing EP has going for it, on the other hand, is a bunch of surveys, small-N experiments, and beloved-by-Cosmopolitan stereotypes about the contemporary courting behavior of affluent, predominantly white college students. That's like analyzing a tub of ice cream and then making bold claims about the fate of the Antarctic ice cap.
- JoeAltmaier 12y agoWith fast-mutating creatures your thousands of generations might only be months...
- kijin 12y agoUnfortunately, fast-mutating creatures tend not to have much of a psychology.
- tim333 12y ago>The only thing EP has going for it, on the other hand, is a bunch of surveys, small-N experiments, and beloved-by-Cosmopolitan stereotypes about the contemporary courting behavior of affluent, predominantly white college students. There is other evidence also. EP for example would suggest males would tend to massacre their neighbours and grab their females as this would be a genetic benefit. To study that experimentally you could look at the historic record of conquests and the genetic results, study uncontacted human societies, the stuff ISIS is doing now, chimp studies such as those recently in the news (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/science/lethal-violence-in-chimps-occurs-naturally-study-suggests.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/science/lethal-violence-in...) and such like. You could also run MRIs on people brains to try to understand the mechanisms and so on. It's not college surveys and just so stories. Indeed the fact that ISIS massacring the Yazidi's and rounding up women fits the evolutionary chimp style raiding hypothesis better than the loving God hypothesis is significant and might discourage the guys from doing if they realised that. Then maybe the massacres could stop through scientific enlightenment rather than us reluctantly having to go bomb them. Again it's more than Cosmo type stuff.
- kijin 12y agoIt's very difficult to avoid sampling bias and confirmation bias when you're looking for historical and contemporary events that seem to fit your curve. What about all the men throughout history who didn't massacre their neighbors? How do you control for massive confounding factors such as religious brainwashing, economic circumstances, poor education, and individual idiosyncrasies?
- dragonwriter 12y ago> It's very difficult to avoid sampling bias and confirmation bias when you're looking for historical and contemporary events that seem to fit your curve. "Looking for historical and contemporary events that seem to fit your curve" seems to be the definition of deliberate confirmation bias.
- tim333 12y agoTrue. Difficult but even if there's some bias you can still get useful data I think. There are things that do not fit well with the basic evolutionary psychology model such as homosexuality. You'd think, using the EP model, that genes corresponding to that would die out however there are a few gay guys out there which suggests you might look for other explanations. Just to say it's not the case that you can find experimental evidence for all EP type hypotheses. Some fit, some don't.