Analyzing evolutionary social science and its popularizations—A review of The Caveman Mystique: Pop-Darwinism and the Debates Over Sex, Violence, and Science

Frederick, David A.; Pillsworth, Elizabeth G.; Galperin, Andrew; Gildersleeve, Kelly A.; Filossof, Yael R.; Fales, Melissa R.; Lopez, Christy; Lurye, Felix S.; Phuphanich, Melissa E.; Snider, Josephine B.

doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.04.001

Cited by 34 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Terleph (2000) and Holcomb (2001) claim that communication to general public about evolutionary psychology is done in a loose and simplified manner, fit for popular consumption. To this, we can add the sensationalism that often revolves around the approach, with eye-catching headlines, inappropriate from a theoretical point of view, as Frederick et al (2009) pointed out. Examples of inaccurate and inappropriate news headlines can be: "When men go to war, blame their sex drive: Males evolved to be 'aggressive to outsiders', says psychology study", or "Why suicide bombers are Muslim (lack of sex) and liberals are more intelligent: A controversial psychologist's VERY politically incorrect 'truths' about human nature".…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly this media tendency fits right into the cognitive bias pointed out by Young and Persell (2000) and can contribute to originate misunderstandings related to cognitive and theoretical causes. Frederick et al (2009) points out that some evolutionary researchers are sometimes careless and sensational when communicating with the lay public. Rossano (2003) also state that mistakes happen when "scientists communicate their ideas and theories to the general public.…”

Section: A) Science Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Misunderstandings in applying evolution to human mind and behavior and its causes: A systematic review

2013

EvoS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In spite of the increasing influence and acceptance of the evolutionary approach in psychology, misunderstandings continue to occur and a systematized approach to cope with its diversity and causes is needed. We have analyzed content of evolutionary psychological literature published from 1992 to 2011, in which misunderstandings were explicitly mentioned. We identified 22 different misunderstandings, which we categorized into 3 dimensions (individual, social and evolutionary), and we identified 6 types of attributed causes. By discussing definitions and inter-relations of the identified misunderstandings, we hope to contribute to a more precise approach to teaching and scientific communication. The first step in overcoming misconceptions and decreasing the barriers between areas of knowledge is to comprehend their diversity and their causes. Advices on how to better address and combat misunderstandings in the classroom are given.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A) Science Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Misunderstandings in applying evolution to human mind and behavior and its causes: A systematic review

2013

EvoS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

How Conservative Are Evolutionary Anthropologists?

Lyle

Smith

2012

Hum Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The application of evolutionary theory to human behavior has elicited a variety of critiques, some of which charge that this approach expresses or encourages conservative or reactionary political agendas. In a survey of graduate students in psychology, Tybur, Miller, and Gangestad (Human Nature, 18, 313-328, 2007) found that the political attitudes of those who use an evolutionary approach did not differ from those of other psychology grad students. Here, we present results from a directed online survey of a broad sample of graduate students in anthropology that assays political views. We found that evolutionary anthropology graduate students were very liberal in their political beliefs, overwhelmingly voted for a liberal U.S. presidential candidate in the 2008 election, and identified with liberal political parties; in this, they were almost indistinguishable from non-evolutionary anthropology students. Our results contradict the view that evolutionary anthropologists hold conservative or reactionary political views. We discuss some possible reasons for the persistence of this view in terms of the sociology of science.

show abstract

The Building Blocks of Thought

Laurence,

Margolis

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human mind is capable of entertaining an astounding range of thoughts. These thoughts are composed of concepts or ideas, which are the building blocks of thoughts. This book is about where all of these concepts come from and the psychological structures that ultimately account for their acquisition. We argue that the debate over the origins of concepts, known as the rationalism-empiricism debate, has been widely misunderstood—not just by its critics but also by researchers who have been active participants in the debate. Part I fundamentally rethinks the foundations of the debate. Part II defends a rationalist view of the origins of concepts according to which many concepts across many conceptual domains are either innate or acquired via rationalist learning mechanisms. Our case is built around seven distinct arguments, which together form a large-scale inference to the best explanation argument for our account. Part III then defends this account against the most important empiricist objections and alternatives. Finally, Part IV argues against an extreme but highly influential rationalist view—Jerry Fodor’s infamous view that it is impossible to learn new concepts and his related radical concept nativism, which holds that essentially all lexical concepts are innate. Throughout the book, our discussion blends philosophical and theoretical reflection with consideration of a broad range of empirical work drawn from many different disciplines studying the mind, providing a thorough update to the rationalism-empiricism debate in philosophy and cognitive science and a major new rationalist account of the origins of concepts.

show abstract

Analyzing evolutionary social science and its popularizations—A review of The Caveman Mystique: Pop-Darwinism and the Debates Over Sex, Violence, and Science

Cited by 34 publications

References 7 publications

Misunderstandings in applying evolution to human mind and behavior and its causes: A systematic review

Misunderstandings in applying evolution to human mind and behavior and its causes: A systematic review

How Conservative Are Evolutionary Anthropologists?

The Building Blocks of Thought

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About