I think many people, even self-described rationalists, use “evolutionary psychology” as attire. They explain outcomes by appealing to natural selection, but they don’t explain how the trait du jour would logically be selected for, nor do they consider whether the same evidence would appear if genes were not the cause. It’s certainly more entertaining to sell a story about prehistoric apes’ way of life and how it completely explains human society, but I would prefer a story about specific genetic factors or at least a reasonable process of selection which we could theoretically trace from an ancestor to the present.
I think many people, even self-described rationalists, use “evolutionary psychology” as attire. They explain outcomes by appealing to natural selection, but they don’t explain how the trait du jour would logically be selected for, nor do they consider whether the same evidence would appear if genes were not the cause. It’s certainly more entertaining to sell a story about prehistoric apes’ way of life and how it completely explains human society, but I would prefer a story about specific genetic factors or at least a reasonable process of selection which we could theoretically trace from an ancestor to the present.