Re: the pseudoscience of evolutionary psychology?

Posted by Roger Critchlow-2 on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/the-pseudoscience-of-evolutionary-psychology-tp7591207p7591305.html

Here's another take on Jordan Peterson from The Medium by a guy who also got the recommendation from YouTube.  Sounds like Peterson's campaign against the Canadian civil rights legislation was a bunch of hooey, too.  https://medium.com/s/story/a-field-guide-to-jordan-petersons-political-arguments-312153eac99a  Again there's no hint of pseudo-science, he's getting roasted by lawyers in this telling for simple factual errors.  There's an article in Time, too, haven't had the heart to look at that.

It seemed to me that all of this feeds back into the sustainable minority paper.  The alt-right is afraid of being swallowed up by the globalist majority, christian bakers afraid of enforced cakes, canadian psychologists afraid of non-binary pronouns, women afraid of male violence, blacks of white violence, back country tribes afraid of casual weekend genocides, gun owners of gun confiscation, & c..   So, is the fundamental question of the age who gets refuge and what kind of refuge do they get?  Because we're not addressing the question at all, we're still arguing about who gets to be the dominant group and what indignities they can impose on the rest of us.

-- rec --

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 6:31 PM, uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]> wrote:

That's a great way to phrase the question.  It highlights, I think, that evolutionary _psychology_ is a bit strange.  It's much stranger than, say, the article Roger posted, which refers to evolutionary anthropology.  In this question, there are 2 concrete things: 1) the extent to which poly[andry|gyny] is engaged vs. 2) the extent to which it is accepted, discussed, thought about, etc.  It (again) brings to mind the ubiquity of hypocrisy (a form of game playing) as a kind of falsification method for evolutionary psychological hypotheses. The preacher preaches against some behavior, but then is found to engage in that behavior.  Or, another example, an insecure male watches youtube videos which present rhetoric he can wear on his sleeve (Peterson) and how-to instructions on how to better *present* a persona, but deep down, in his physiology, he is insecure, the opposite of the affect presented.

So, if evopsych is *anything*, it should be about the *disconnect* between behavior and what we say/think about that behavior.


On 03/01/2018 03:07 PM, Prof David West wrote:
> Finally, and to the point of this thread, might the prevalence of polygyny and the rarity of polyandry among humans be an evolutionary adaptation" and/or an evolutionary psychology adaptaptation?
>
> Evidence suggests that women can accommodate the sexual needs of multiple husbands, but not the procreative needs. cultural evolution might allow for polyandrous relations within the context of cultural evolution but the procreative needs would dominate biological evolution.

--
☣ uǝlƃ

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove