Steven Pinker explains the cognitive biases we all suffer from and how they can short-circuit rational thinking and lead us into believing stupid things. Skip to 12:15 to bypass the preamble.

  • acosmichippo@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    is the only accepted explanation for the origin of animal behaviour.

    This is not true. Ethology is the general study of animal behavior. Evolutionary Psychology is specific to human behavior and is not the only approach to studying it either. Sociobiology an example of a less criticized field studying human behavior based on evolution.

    • streetlights@lemmy.world
      cake
      OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 days ago

      This is not true. Firstly, Evolutionary Psychology is not involved with “animal” behavior in general, it is specific to human psychology.

      Most of the field focuses on primates because, unsurprisingly, that’s where we find most of psychology. It is wrong to say it has nothing to do with animals.

      Ethology is the general study of animal behavior.

      And botany is the study of plants? Every field in biology overlaps with evolution.

      Also Evolutionary Psychology is not the only approach to studying human behavior either.

      That’s not a challenge to the premise of evopsych. If anything it sort of supports it.

      • acosmichippo@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 days ago

        That’s not a challenge to the premise of evopsych. If anything it sort of supports it.

        It was in response to your claim that Evolutionary Psychology is the “the only accepted explanation for the origin of animal behaviour.” If you want to make that claim you need to support it with some kind of reference.

        • streetlights@lemmy.world
          cake
          OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 days ago

          It was in response to your claim that Evolutionary Psychology is the “the only accepted explanation for the origin of animal behaviour.”

          Well it doesn’t refute that.

          If you want to make that claim you need to support it with some kind of reference.

          Well ok, perhaps “only accepted explanation” was claiming too much given that a large proportion of the population believe in souls or pure blank-slatism for human behavior.

          For the non-human animals though, it certainly isn’t controversial to say evolution is the only explanation for the origin of behaviour. What else could it be?

          • acosmichippo@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 days ago

            it certainly isn’t controversial to say evolution is the only explanation for the origin of behaviour. What else could it be?

            there’s a lot to unpack here. firstly, there is more to human behavior than genetics/evolution, hence nature vs nurture. in other words our human experience determines our behavior in addition to genetics.

            Secondly, that’s not the only claim or assumption of Evolutionary Psychology. There is lots of other stuff besides that statement that is controversial at best.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_evolutionary_psychology

            • streetlights@lemmy.world
              cake
              OP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 days ago

              Careful you almost misquoted me there

              For the non-human animals, it certainly isn’t controversial to say evolution is the only explanation for the origin of behaviour. What else could it be?

              there’s a lot to unpack here. firstly, there is more to human behavior than genetics/evolution, hence nature vs nurture.

              It’s a jolly good thing I was talking about non-human animals then.

              in other words our human experience determines our behavior in addition to genetics.

              It’s a common fallacy to suppose that because an behavioural adaption has a genetic basis that therefore having the genes determines the behaviour.

              https://areomagazine.com/2019/08/20/seven-key-misconceptions-about-evolutionary-psychology/

              Misconception #3 in the above.

              Secondly, that’s not the only claim or assumption of Evolutionary Psychology. There is lots of other stuff besides that statement that is controversial at best.

              Evolutionary Psychologists make claims, some of which yes are clearly lacking in explanatory power, evidence and predictions.

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_evolutionary_psychology

              Yes I’m familiar with Wikipedia, if I’m just going to be talking to a search engine here I’m not terribly invested in continuing.