popular models these days tend towards one of reductionist materialism (it's a meat computer, the mind is software) or ahistorical/non-evolutionary fundamentalism (made in God's image, etc.). the former at least cares about evolution even if it fails to account for consciousness
-
-
don't know about only one. evo-psych is a very active field but they spent more time on the evo than the psych, as a rule. Peterson is fairly uncommon in having more emphasis on the psych while also caring a lot about the evo.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
a big problem is trying to account for evolution on short time frames, when there's no readily discernible fossil record or other material traces. something BIG happened fairly recently but why? why did symbolic thought structures (evidenced in e.g. cave art) emerge?
1:06 PM - 24 May 2018
1 reply
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.