Agnostic.com

5 4

The Evolutionary Mismatch Hypothesis: Implications for Psychological Science . . .

"Human psychological mechanisms are adaptations that evolved to process environmental inputs, turning them into behavioral outputs that, on average, increase survival or reproductive prospects. Modern contexts, however, differ vastly from the environments that existed as human psychological mechanisms evolved. Many inputs now differ in quantity and intensity or no longer have the same fitness associations, thereby leading many mechanisms to produce maladaptive output. We present the precepts of this evolutionary mismatch process, highlight areas of mismatch, and consider implications for psychological science and policy."

[journals.sagepub.com]

.

skado 9 June 24
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

5 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

Some of this makes sense to me. I have come to see and believe one's mindset is often a reflection of the geography of their place.

1

Evolutionary psychology (EP) should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Gould and Lewontin had challenged an earlier sociobiology with their concept of spandrels which largely short circuits most EP approaches from the start. A huge hurdle to jump there.

Now Pinker makes good points in The Blank Slate about not adopting a wanton sui generis environmentalism. I think nature v nurture dichotomy should be scrapped.

But problems with EP aren’t the notion the mind is modular and emerges from an evolved brain. It’s with the specifics of their rhetoric, and well...polemic. Their master polemicist, Pinker, cut his teeth on a Chomsky derived language module, then not resting on his laurels, superseded the Hobbesian/Machiavellian basis of EP, by showing how social structure and historical framework seem to be more important to the human condition in two subsequent books detailing his somewhat problematic views that rates (vs absolute numbers) of violence have decreased over the generations and that the human condition has improved recently due to Enlightenment thinking. He doesn’t quite unpack the histories of the actual enlightenment. But his work does go well beyond EP adaptionist paeans to the Pleistocene.

A different way to approach this is the critique of the mismatching underpinnings of the fad paleo diet by Zuk in Paleofantasy. Some of the food choices may be fine on their own merits, but rationale dubious.

2

"Modern contexts, however, differ vastly from the environments that existed as human psychological mechanisms evolved. Many inputs now differ in quantity and intensity or no longer have the same fitness associations, thereby leading many mechanisms to produce maladaptive output. "

This is very interesting.. I assume it refers to the bombardment of information if the internet ..? And probably television too...

Yes, all of that and a lot more. Living arrangements, food supply, everything.

0

Sorry but what is new about any of this is hard to see. It may be news in creationist communities.

I'm not aware of a newness requirement. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of folks who haven't encountered this old material. Bits of it were new to me, and I'm a long way from a creationist.

@skado Yes true. Grumpy early morning sorry.

2

I haven't finished reading this but so far it sounds like an article about handling. Once Upon a Time the guys we're all looking for the gals that had the right curves, not much different than the way they do now. the gals we're looking for the guys that were dependable and could throw a rock the farthest, and now the ones with a shiny new Camaro. either way it's all about the handling.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:508952
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.