Discussion point

[nadriel]

Are all evolutionary psychologists pretentious, narcissistic, apologist tossers?

Comments

[miss-s-b.livejournal.com]

No. Some of them are worse.

[nocturne-uk.livejournal.com]

Yes.

And that's often their more endearing list of traits...

[davegodfrey.livejournal.com]

Most of them are just wrong, writing "just-so-stories" that can't be tested. Were you thinking of anyone in particular- or any particular theory?

[nadriel.livejournal.com]

Maaaybe...*looks innocent*

But they can't read this, so it's not fair to slag them off.

[davegodfrey.livejournal.com]

It is however perfectly reasonable to reference a paper, with a theory you disagree with.

[thexphial.livejournal.com]

If it's David Buss, I want first crack.

[ginasketch.livejournal.com]

No. It's my ex.

[siroswold.livejournal.com]

Just think, if this is the evolutionary stage that they are currently at, what they will evolve in to?

[blackmetalbaz.livejournal.com]

I think it's fair to say that that's a bit of a sweeping statement. Evolutionary psychology is still very much a proto-science, and not everything said in its name is necessarily good science. Telling just-so stories is a dangerous pit-fall for all branches of evolution and we should be careful to avoid doing it. On the other hand, I'm quite a fan of the likes of Steven Pinker and E. O. Wilson. On the other hand, I also like Lewontin and Gould, who weren't such big fans of the field. Much work needs to be done on the subject.

[ginasketch.livejournal.com]

I think it's fair to say that that's a bit of a sweeping statement.

But we did research on a live subject and everything!

I even lived with said live subject for 5 years.

*facepalm*