Is evolutionary psychology merely a way of excusing outdated behaviours? Is it instead culture which really defines how we behave?
As with the animal kingdom, we see human behaviour as the product of elemental drives to survive and reproduce. Evolutionary psychology has taken this a stage further - seeing violence, social hierarchy, and sexual promiscuity as a product of evolutionary drives. But might this be a misleading and dangerous approach? Murder rates have fallen seventy-fold since the Middle Ages, and across the globe birth rates are a fraction of what they were a hundred years ago. Fathers are actively involved in child care and we've radically changed our outlook on social issues like gender identity - suggesting ideas and culture drive behaviour rather than evolution.
Should we conclude that evolutionary psychology is a blind alley with no predictive power? Are we capable of overcoming behavioural traits and therefore wholly responsible for our actions? Or is evolution an inescapable force and behavioural change a result of altered circumstances while our core nature remains identical?
Critic of evolutionary psychology Subrena E. Smith, philosopher of mind Keith Frankish, and clinical psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen debate the significance of evolutionary psychology. Hosted by Güneş Taylor.
Don't hesitate to email us at podcast@iai.tv with your thoughts or questions on the episode!
To witness such debates live buy tickets for our upcoming festival: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/
And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/
You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimes
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
