Debate Proposal: The Merits of Evolutionary Psychology

[Samuel Waite]

Debate Proposal: The Merits of Evolutionary Psychology
Length per Statement: 5,000 words
Turns: tentatively 4.
Scope: participants shall argue for or against evolutionary psychology from scientific, social, and philosophical perspectives.
Format: concurrent presentation and rebuttal.
Maximum duration between statements: 2 weeks.
Quotations and references: be able to cite sources where it seems appropriate.
Starting date: whenever convenient.

I will argue that EP in its present form is deeply flawed and that the attention given it far exceeds its actual merit, which approaches zero. I’m sure there are many capable IIDB participants who would argue the opposite case, and I invite them to do so.

[Nameless]

I'm surprised, and even more disappointed, that nobody responded to this challenge. I think it would have been a great debate had someone been willing and qualified to step up. :(

[cuziamthecaptain]

I'm surprised, and even more disappointed, that nobody responded to this challenge. I think it would have been a great debate had someone been willing and qualified to step up. :(

I might be up to the challenge. I'm in graduate school in psychology and would be willing to debate in favor of the merits of evolutionay psychology. E-mail me-- at cuziamthecaptain (at) hotmail.com

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

I might be up to the challenge. I'm in graduate school in psychology and would be willing to debate in favor of the merits of evolutionay psychology. E-mail me-- at cuziamthecaptain (at) hotmail.com

You may want to send Samuel an email (via his profile). It's been a while since Samuel's logged on to the forum.

Otherwise, if Samuel doesn't show, perhaps someone else would be willing to take up the anti-EP gauntlet. You may wish to subtly mention your challenge in a thread related to EP in E/C forum.

- NS, FD Moderator

[cuziamthecaptain]

You may want to send Samuel an email (via his profile). It's been a while since Samuel's logged on to the forum.

Otherwise, if Samuel doesn't show, perhaps someone else would be willing to take up the anti-EP gauntlet. You may wish to subtly mention your challenge in a thread related to EP in E/C forum.

- NS, FD Moderator

Meh. Honestly I see EP as such an extension of evolution, it would really be a debate between nature and nurture.

I'd love to see a debate and would participate in:

"An old earth, and by exentionsion, evolution necessiarly contradicts and disproves the bible."

[wiploc]

... evolution necessiarly contradicts and disproves the bible."

To defend that position, you would have to prove that there is a right way to interpret the bible (all other ways are wrong) and that that the right way of reading the bible makes the Earth young. I don't believe anyone could prove that.

crc

[Tigers2B1]

...I will argue that EP in its present form is deeply flawed and that the attention given it far exceeds its actual merit, which approaches zero. I’m sure there are many capable IIDB participants who would argue the opposite case, and I invite them to do so.

Well to start a debate why not state your position --- a little of why do you consider evolutionary psychology "deeply flawed." No one really knows what you're talking about - and -- it's difficult to muster much passion when confronted with such a dry challenge.

Also -- I, for one, tend to see a lot of politics in the arguments when reading discussions regarding the "flaws" of evolutionary psychology - so others may start with the assumption, right or wrong, that this isn't going to be an enlightening debate as much an unyielding, unsatisfying argument - IMHO

[Kalkin]

Also -- I, for one, tend to see a lot of politics in the arguments when reading discussions regarding the "flaws" of evolutionary psychology - so others may start with the assumption, right or wrong, that this isn't going to be an enlightening debate as much an unyielding, unsatisfying argument - IMHO

Of course it's political - it has significant or massive political implications, depending on how dogmatic a version is adopted.

I suspect his argument would be that it consists of just-so stories with no empirical backing - possible explanations for various observed human traits with no way of proving that they are the real explanations, given alternate, social explanations and the lack of strong enough evidence about the environmental conditions of human evolution and the ways in which we responded to them to justify our saying evolution would have had to mandate the traits without appealing to our actual observation of them, which again has alternate explanations.

I'm not offering to step up in his stead, though!

[cuziamthecaptain]

To defend that position, you would have to prove that there is a right way to interpret the bible (all other ways are wrong) and that that the right way of reading the bible makes the Earth young. I don't believe anyone could prove that.

crc


Yeah. You're right. I can't prove that in the sense of a scientific or mathmatical 'proof.' but I believe I could aruge beyond a reasonable doubt.

Are there any debates like that?

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Tigers2B1,

I split off your discussion of evolutionary psychology to the E/C forum found here (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=113314).

Just a reminder folks, that the FDP forum is meant for setting up debates on topics, not the actual debate of the topic itself.

- NS, FD Moderator

[Will I Am]

An interesting topic that I'm, er, interestied in, But not "eight weeks, 20 000 words" -worth, interested in.

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

An interesting topic that I'm, er, interestied in, But not "eight weeks, 20 000 words" -worth, interested in.

Hello Will,

Were you interested in debating for the anti-EP view, opposing the captain?

Feel free to suggest different debate criteria if you'd prefer the debate to be shorter.

- NS, FD Moderator

[Will I Am]

Hehe.. I'd be pro EP.

But the formal format is... as I said.

[satur9poet]

Ok, here goes: I'm pro-EP. I'm studying it in my Educational Psychology class, and EP makes sense because:

Darwin's theory of evolution has been proven to have much credibility, at least in the sense of bodily evolution, so it should follow that the mind has its own history of evolution.

The evolution of individual primates into hominids, into groups of hominids, and finally into humans, whose social structure evolved in complexity and quantity--first bands, then tribes of hunter-gatherers, then progressively larger chiefdoms, city-states, and eventually, whole civilizations.

Human psychology is adaptive and is evolving even now, as social climates change. For every major change in social structure (ex: tribes into city-states), it must follow that cognitive processes evolved before the change could take place

The growth in size of the human brain through history--it follows that modern medicine can now locate centers in the brain responsible for every emotion, and predictable patterns of cognitive development in children have been documented, regardless of race, ethnicity, geographic location. Larger cerebral cortexes directly correlate to a greater range of psychological phenomenon.

Ok, that's my two cents in the matter :)

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Hi satur9poet,

Do you wish to formally debate this issue? Otherwise, it's best to take the discussion to Evolution/Creation (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/forumdisplay.php?f=66).

- NS, FD Moderator

[Aegeri]

I'll have a think about it, but I'm only a microbiologist and I don't have any real formal training in the area. I would need a few suggestions on reading material and who to look at to 'start' formulating an argument about this.

More for the interest of just learning something rather than professing an opinion that I hold.

[Read:In Tooth & Claw]

While not strictly EP, Matt Ridley's book The Red Queen is a good read. I just finished it for the second time; it deals mostly with evolutionary theory and its relation to complex sexual behavior, drawing from examples throughout the animal kingdom, and leading to the ultimate conclusion that human sexuality explains human intelligence. While the conclusion may or may not follow from the evidence, it is an excellent introduction to how evolution effects behavior.