Archive for March, 2013

The evolutionary theory, like all theories, is an attempt to make sense of what we see around us. It is simply another doorway that was opened with the intent of leading us to truth. Evolution’s impact on psychology is simply a reflection of what may have happened with our behavior that branches from the evolution of our bodies. I do not think evolutionary psychology is the key to understanding behavior, but it may explain why some phenomena occur. For instance, National Geographic release a documentary on babies’ development in the for 12 months of life, and they found that when you stand an infant up on its feet, it begins to walk. It seemingly loses the ability to do so around 3 or 4 months, but if you put it in water, it starts to walk again. It could be that the baby has some innate idea that it should walk, which could be explained through evolution. But like many other things, evolution still only explains “how,” but never gets to the core idea of “why.” Personally, I think some concepts in evolution could be helpful if they are accurate, but since no one can prove any theory of origin, for now, the theory evolution is just another possibility of life.

I thought that the concept of Evolutionary Psychology has a lot of merit, but that it lacks in other areas. The best example that I noticed came from last classes reading. My article said, “Evolution may explain our capacity to hold these principles [systems of morality and meaning and purpose] and beliefs, but it does not explain the principles and beliefs themselves. This was an important explanation for me, because it gave up the idea that the theory was perfect. Plus, it is an easier way to explain and understand the idea of what Evolutionary Psychology is and what is has to offer. Knowing the evolution of the brain and how it developed is critical, but understanding that it does not explain the evolution of thoughts, which adapted from different times, cultures, and races, is just as crucial. As psychology continues to advance, then maybe someday thoughts can be integrated into Evolutionary Psychology in a way that is both logical and rational. But for now, we must suffice for the current state of EP.

Evolutionary psychology is a field of thought that has tendrils reaching into many other fields, although it is questionable how applicable evolutionary theory really is to some of those fields. An example of an issue that many feel evolutionary psychology does not have anything reasonable to say is religion. Although I do believe that evolutionary psychology, in congruence with social evolution, implies and explains many things relevant to religion, I do have a few questions regarding some of the conclusions people occasionally arrive at, as well as the steps they take to reach those ends.

One specific question I have is in relation to the idea that people act selfless and moral in order to gain approval from potential mates and society as a whole. This idea leads fairly directly down a logical path to the explanation of religion as just an organized example of that evolutionary trait, as do other ideas. However, I see evolutionary theory as completely incapable of explaining most religions, especially those with strict moral codes. For example, in Islamic traditions, cowardice is heavily frowned upon – which makes sense from the perspective that prioritizes the benefit of society, but not at all from a personal genetic standpoint. Similarly, Christian views hold that a man should have only one wife, and vice-versa. This could not have developed from an evolutionary basis, as the goal of a male from the evolutionary stand-point is to have as many mates as possible.

I am not saying that the existence of these moral codes disproves evolutionary psychology, far from it. I just think that if evolution were all that guides our behaviors, these religious traditions would never have developed. Therefore, there must be something else going on as well.

In class today while we were discussing the articles we read, I thought it was interesting that many of the authors addressed how evolutionary theory and psychology applied to “real life.” The author of the article I read, Joan Roughgarden, stated that “social behavior develops as individuals acquire experience with one another.” Later in the article, she criticized a theoretical biologist’s discussion of the evolutionary outcome of competition between “altruists” who interact with “selfish” individuals. This biologist, John Maynard Smith, believed that those traits were permanent characteristics, much like skin color or height. Personally, I do not really see the point in a study of characteristics that are ever-changing or circumstantial.

If all of the time spent studying the outcome of competition in “permanent” characteristics was focused on something that (I think) matters more, like research to cure cancer or ways of preventing malnutrition in third-world countries, the work and outcomes would be beneficial and have a lasting impact. I do believe that many of the theories and findings from evolutionary biology are significant. I think it is a stretch to ask evolutionary science to explain things like morality or spirituality when those features of human behavior exist and thrive without explanations. Why not put that time and energy and money into something that really matters and will change lives?

From the purely psychological point of view, nature plays a crucial role in our mental development which cannot be over looked or overstated. It is undeniable traits and genes inherited have an effect on us it is an undeniable scientific fact. And to an extent evolutionary psychologists are right in the belief in the primal and breed instincts that drive us towards survival and propagation.
However I do not believe in evolutionary Psychology or take its views and beliefs as my own. I do this not because it “disproves” or undermines God, or because it lowers us to little more than animals that is not the case or the question and to hold these beliefs is to be affected by bias. I do not support evolutionary Psychology because it almost completely ignores or dismisses the Nurture side of psychology. Our ability to learn and infer from the environment is a crucial and un-ignorable part of our psyche and in my opinion developed through personal experiences plays a greater role in our development than biology. Even monkeys are proven to develop and learn new behaviors and social reactions simply through the personal experiences of the individual or group and learn to interact with the world in a different way. As psychologists and scientists we are required to analyze information and reach a conclusion biased off information and findings not on bias and superstition. Though our opinions may guide our research and direct our lives, we must not dismiss sound logic in favor of a side that is simply more to our liking.

Evolutionary psychology is a interesting topic to discuss. This is especially true for a conservative christian school. This being said there are more and more people agreeing with this thought every day. The theory has some large holes but some very strong, positive arguments. The theory can not explain the small issues, as we discussed in class. Specifically things that apply to a small precent of the population such as homosexuality have week argument. The theory works on standardized behavior. I believe that some of the arguments for evolutionary psychology can not apply to mental disorders. The biggest problem with the theory to me is the lack of individuality. The theory states that we act certain ways based on evolutionary traits to procreate. This takes away from individuality of people. This was a the biggest problem to me. I believe a lot of the principles in the theory are true its just a little invasive.

Evolutionary psychology resonates with me on many levels, yet i still am not entirely convinced. It seems easy to say that our preferences all hearken back to the days of the cavemen, saying that much like any species we have merely adapted in the ways that allow us to pass on our genes. I have heard very convincing arguments that explain modern sexual preferences (such as wide hips and large chests in women, which evolutionarily speaking would have indicated a higher ability to survive/succeed at childbirth) or even the way we eat   (our love of fatty sugary foods, which evolutionarily speaking would have only been available from fruits and other desirable snacks that would have been scarce during most of our evolution.) These arguments seem to make perfect sense, but it almost seems as if we are taking the easy way out. I agree with the criticism that we discussed in class that said that we could make up an evolutionary explanation for just about any phenomenon in life. I cant think of a single exception. Empiricism runs strong in my veins, and so i have to ask “where is the proof?” We are guessing so much about our evolutionary paths and have very little actual data or experimental studies to support these theories. I find that evolutionary psychology, while great to toss around the coffee table over a beer with some friends for some scholarly debate, is nothing more than pointless theorizing, with no applications seemingly for modern day science.

I’m going to have to follow the lead of many of my peers as I reiterate that the topic of evolution has the potential to cause a variety of emotions to surface based on what you believe, and where you are in your own personally understanding and development. For a both Christians and Evolutionists, anger can arise as this debate has been ongoing for centuries now between “Science v. Religion”. Growing up in the Church of Christ, I can’t help but feel as if the theory of evolution was presented to me with extreme bias against it, as it was supposed to serve as a theory with the sole purpose to disprove Christianity. From as early as I can remember, without even forming my own opinions on the topic, I believed that the theory of evolution meant that there was no God. In my ignorance I believed that for quite some time as I continued to hear sermons on disproving evolution and other people talk about the topic. It wasn’t until I began to look into the theory of evolution that I realized that God and the theory of evolution co-exist, and that I believe there to be truth from both perspectives.

Plato and Aristotle both did not believe in evolution. They believed that God’s creation was fixed, never to improve and never to degenerate. The only way for creation to ever vary would be by the act of God changing it. Charles Darwin, on the other hand, believed and endorsed human evolution. My thought is, “why can they not co-exist and both be correct”? As a believer, I truly believe that God created the world the way it is described in Genesis, but I also believe he created is with the capacity to change, to adapt, and to evolve as part of his creation. It is important to be aware of this truth when dealing with the idea of evolution. As a race we have evolved from a people who used to light up our houses by candles, to people who can flip a switch to provide an entire city electricity. As we continue to learn and explore and find new discoveries about our brains and our capabilities, we also continue to adapt as a result.

Although I do not agree with all that comes with the evolutionary theory, I still think that it is something that is important to look at and be aware of as it affects every human being in some form or fashion.

Evolutionary Psychology is a very interesting topic. The definition of evolutionary psychology given to us in class was that it is the application of principles and knowledge of evolutionary biology to psychological research and theory. In other words, it’s a theory that integrates pieces of information that psychologists have studied that have shown some correlation throughout the years. I myself do not completely agree with evolutionary psychology. I feel like our behaviors and thinking patterns derive from what we see and learn growing up. It’s not something that is innate and there from the beginning. On the other hand, I cannot deny that humans have come a long way. We have advanced and adapted due to the things that we have available to us. We are able to learn more and understand more, but I do not believe that our underlining behaviors and thoughts came from our ancestors. The articles we read today in class brought up some very interesting points. The article my group evaluated was written by Simon Conway Morris. He said, “We could not have arrived where we are except by evolution….” His statement is true in the fact that we could not have gotten this far without making technological changes and advances, but, I do not believe that applies to the way humans think and behave.

Many questions arise when we discuss questions concerning Evolutionary Psychology. My conservative political, religious, and education background give me all the drive, argument, and desire to completely dismiss this branch of science and psychology. However, I do not want to do that. In fact, I believe Evolutionary Psychology to hold multiple important insights. My question, however, is how far does this go? I would venture to say that most of us are very comfortable with certain ideas surrounding evolutionary psychology. Parental instincts is one possibility. We all pretty universally agree that humans, over time, have developed a more refined way of raising and protecting children. But what about evolutionary psychology’s impact on things like emotions, and how they are produced and expressed. At what point do we say we smile because we are happy and not because we have been biologically and behaviorally conditioned to do so? And while we are asking that question, let’s ask this one “What is happy? Why is that happy?” At what point are we more than tissue and chemicals and nerves? At what point do we become people with souls? At what point do responses cease to be biological and become your personality? How far does this go?