We are typing in parallel I see. So yes:https://twitter.com/irisvanrooij/status/943423617089654785 …
-
-
I think — again I may be wrong — that the criticism was more than just treating things as binary, but it's great to see work that doesn't do that!
-
For me personally, what worries me is that sometimes people (not just in evo psych but in general) think many things are either/or.
-
For example hearing the trite and pointless phrase "nature versus nurture" instead of realising juxtaposing them is inherently misguided.
-
Where I think these issues become evo psych ones is when a theory needs to be formulated that explains what is being studied. E.g., what aspect of "Male Bisexuality" [from article] is, claimed to be, evolved, what aspect is cultural, what aspect is personal preferences?
-
Does evo psych, because of the evo in the name, always turn to evolutionary-based theories to explain such findings? If yes, I think that's where issues start to make sense for me, since there are other factors in determining, e.g., orientation.
-
If not, then is the work still in the field of evo psych?
-
Oops, I forgot a word above! TYPO: If yes, I think that's where issues start to **NOT** make sense for me, since there are other factors in determining, e.g., orientation.
-
It depends how you define ev psych (which is why these discussions often go round in circles, imo). To me, ev psych includes factors like culture, experience, environmental factors etc.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.