[FRIAM] the pseudoscience of evolutionary psychology?

[glen]

Nobody's talking about debunking an entire domain. As Nick argues in the 1st paper and the quote from the Wikipedia page argues, it makes the most sense to treat particular hypotheses.

So I asked for testable hypotheses involving the alpha male concept and, in particular, Peterson's evolutionary psychology justification for that concept. And as I said, Dave West's debunking of the alpha male concept is good but it would be best to combat an evolutionary psychology justification for "alpha male" with an evolutionary psychology debunking of "alpha male".

On February 16, 2018 12:53:03 AM PST, Pieter Steenekamp <pieters at randcontrols.co.za> wrote:
>IMO it's going to be difficult to debunk evolutionary psychology.  It
>is a
>valid part of the medley of components of psychology and sociology. But
>is
>it the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? No, certainly
>not.
>There is much more to human behavior than evolutionary psychology.
>What's coming out from the #MeToo movement is just horrible. Sure, it
>may
>be consistent with evolutionary psychology, but we as humans should not
>accept it and root out the abhorrent behavior of some of the male of
>the
>species. And our society has been protecting the perpetrators and thank
>god
>that's changing.
>But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Give credit to
>evolutionary psychology as part of the effort to understand human
>behavior.
>
>
>On 15 February 2018 at 22:08, uǝlƃ ☣ <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Since Peterson depends on (some bastardization of) evol. psych., then
>it
>> would be healthy to have an evol. psych. debunking.  *That's* what
>I'm
>> actually looking for.  Perhaps your "Oh no" paper contains that
>debunking.
>> I'll look.
-- 
glen