tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post2324974188611148865..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Scientists and PoetsLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-3428674328275162392011-10-11T02:50:54.594-04:002011-10-11T02:50:54.594-04:00Wavefunction,
Are you saying that every disciplin...Wavefunction,<br /><br />Are you saying that every discipline of evolutionary science has to find a way to come up with this kind of hard data except evo psych?<br /><br />What if scientists working in disciplines like archaeology, paleontology, or criminal forensics just complained about how hard it is to get the data. Would they still be legitimate sciences?<br /><br />Science is hard. Stop complaining.Mike in Bcnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-67523054573939781222011-10-10T10:38:39.664-04:002011-10-10T10:38:39.664-04:00Cayazzo: Are you suggesting that evidence for past...Cayazzo: Are you suggesting that evidence for past human behavioral traits is as direct as that for molecules, bird feathers and quarks?Wavefunctionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14993805391653267639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-88453786888408103922011-10-09T04:16:41.031-04:002011-10-09T04:16:41.031-04:00"Evo psych faces a particular challenge becau..."Evo psych faces a particular challenge because you are trying to draw conclusions about past human behavioral traits for which little or no material evidence is available. "<br /><br />One word calls attention to this whiny bullshit: genetics. <br /><br />The great sin of evo psycho is over-reach. The field seems unwilling to gather the hard evidence in support its wild hypotheses--it's stuck in sci-fi phase. For that would require doing evolutionary functional genomics (or something like that), which is time consuming and costly.caynazzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11263280738905977688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-64806617047875414782011-10-09T04:03:32.556-04:002011-10-09T04:03:32.556-04:00Moran: "If real scientists want to study the ...Moran: "If real scientists want to study the evolution of human behavior then they are going to have to come up with a new name for their discipline and they are going to have to enforce rigorous scientific standards to eliminate the non-scientists."<br /><br />The name for this is neurogenetics. <br /><br />Moran: "Modern genetics has identified many loci that appear to have been recently selected. Are any of them involved in behavior?"<br /><br />Why doesn't the FOXP1 and autism count?caynazzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11263280738905977688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-25137176536479617752011-10-07T13:02:47.341-04:002011-10-07T13:02:47.341-04:00There once was a man name of Buss
Who caused such ...There once was a man name of Buss<br />Who caused such a terrible Fuss<br />For whatsoever he Studied<br />He with ultra-adaptationism Muddied<br />Leaving science to deal with the MussAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-33462086334391062892011-10-07T11:36:19.681-04:002011-10-07T11:36:19.681-04:00anonymous asks,
However you surely appreciate tha...anonymous asks,<br /><br /><i>However you surely appreciate that evo psych is not like physics, chemistry or even evo biol where more or less direct evidence is available.</i><br /><br />I disagree. Surely there can be evidence that a particular set of alleles predisposes men to beat their wives under certain circumstances?<br /><br />Surely there can be evidence that all, or most, modern men possess those alleles? (i.e. selection) <br /><br />Can we never find evidence that the behavior is adaptive? <br /><br />Can we look at modern hunter-gatherer societies to see if wife beating (under certain circumstances) is common?<br /><br />Modern genetics has identified many loci that appear to have been recently selected. Are any of them involved in behavior?<br /><br />We know a lot about population genetics. Why can't evolutionary psychologists assign probable selection coefficients to their presumed adaptations and show us how they could have become fixed in a scattered population of small hunter-gatherer groups?<br /><br />There's a ton of work being done on presumed adaptations in the hominid lineage and all of it qualifies as science. Evidence is gathered and presented and subjected to the intense scrutiny of colleagues who are knowledgeable about evolution.<br /><br />Correction ... not quite all of it. Evolutionary psychology is a notable exception. Why is that?<br /><br />What's different about the alleles for skin color, lactose intolerance, ability to speak, and blood types? Why do we demand scientific evidence for the adaptive value of those alleles but not the alleles of the evolutionary psychologists?<br /><br /><i> ... do you think all evolutionary psychologists should just give up studying this discipline?</i><br /><br />I think the discipline has been so discredited that it can't be saved. If real scientists want to study the evolution of human behavior then they are going to have to come up with a new name for their discipline and they are going to have to enforce rigorous scientific standards to eliminate the non-scientists.<br /><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-88666170124344849912011-10-07T10:40:38.635-04:002011-10-07T10:40:38.635-04:00Mr. Moran, you keep on complaining that assertions...Mr. Moran, you keep on complaining that assertions in evolutionary psychology lack evidence. However you surely appreciate that evo psych is not like physics, chemistry or even evo biol where more or less direct evidence is available. Evo psych faces a particular challenge because you are trying to draw conclusions about past human behavioral traits for which little or no material evidence is available. Since this state of affairs will likely always persist, what would you say would be satisfactory AND easily obtainable evidence that would convince you about some of these assertions? If there is no such evidence that you think could directly validate evo psych's assertions, do you think evo psych will never become an actual science? If so, do you think all evolutionary psychologists should just give up studying this discipline?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com