Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Human Studies 4/2007

01-12-2007 | Research Paper

On the Significance of William James to a Contemporary Doctrine of Evolutionary Psychology

Author: Jean Suplizio

Published in: Human Studies | Issue 4/2007

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Academic popularizers of the new field of evolutionary psychology make notable appeals to William James to bolster their doctrine. In particular, they cite James’ remark that humans have all the “impulses” animals do and many more besides to shore up their claim that people’s “instincts” account for their flexibility. This essay argues that these scholars misinterpret James on the instincts. Consciousness (which they find inscrutable) explains cognitive flexibility for James. The evolutionary psychologists’ appeal to James is, therefore, unwarranted and, given the conditions relevant to the public and professional audiences they address, also ineffective as a rhetorical tool for enlisting new recruits.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Footnotes
1
This group of researchers is associated with the Center for Evolutionary Psychology at the University of California at Santa Barbara. Their fundamental tenets are that the mind is (1) massively modular (2) shaped by the processes of natural selection over evolutionary time and (3) adapted to the Pleistocene conditions of our past.
 
2
Linnda R. Caporael and Marilynn B. Brewer make a similar point while taking issue with evolutionary psychology’s reliance on inclusive fitness theory. Caporael and Brewer state that “the transition from evolutionary theory to evolutionary psychology is not a simple derivative process” because evolutionary theory cannot be equated with inclusive fitness theory (1995, p. 33; 2000, p. 26).
 
3
The reason is that developmental systems thinkers have been able to establish that non-obvious prenatal experiences canalize species-typical behaviors and that gene expression can be stimulated (Gottlieb 1997, p. 144).
 
4
Indeed, Richards urges that it also saved the man James himself whose plummet into suicidal despair was due in part to ruminating over the problem of free will eclipsed by Lamarck’s thinking (1987, pp. 414–422).
 
5
For the evolutionary psychologists, other modules cannot derail a module’s internal deliberations. However, conflict among their various outputs can and, as a normal matter of course, does occur (Pinker 1997, p. 42). This means that more than one module frequently is triggered in response to environmental inputs. Nevertheless, unless the upshot of the modularized mind, as conceived by the evolutionary psychologists, solves the problem of combinatorial explosion (and does not merely relocate the problem from the inputs to the outputs of modules) their essential role in facilitating decision-making holds.
 
6
This interview with Steven Pinker conducted by staff of the evolutionist can be retrieved at http://​www.​lse.​ac.​uk/​collections/​darwin/​evolutionist/​pinker.​htm. It is listed in the Reference Section under “Pinker.”
 
7
Darwin supposed that language is ``certainly not a true instinct, for every language has to be learnt.” He also stated that it differed from the arts because “man has an instinctive tendency to speak, as we see in the babble of our young children; whilest no child has an instinctive tendency to brew, bake, or write” (Darwin, 1871/1952, p. 298).
 
9
See Ceccarelli (2001) for an excellent discussion of how scientists motivate other scientists to embark on research beyond their home fields.
 
Literature
go back to reference Anastasi, A. (1992). Are there unifying trends in the psychologies in the 1990s? In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp. 29–48). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Anastasi, A. (1992). Are there unifying trends in the psychologies in the 1990s? In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp. 29–48). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
go back to reference Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6(1), 1–30.CrossRef Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6(1), 1–30.CrossRef
go back to reference Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
go back to reference Caporael, L. R., & Brewer, M. (1995). Hierarchical evolutionary theory: There is an alternative, and it’s not creationism. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 31–34.CrossRef Caporael, L. R., & Brewer, M. (1995). Hierarchical evolutionary theory: There is an alternative, and it’s not creationism. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 31–34.CrossRef
go back to reference Caporael, L. R., & Brewer, M. (2000). Metatheories, evolution, and psychology: Once more with feeling. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 23–26. Caporael, L. R., & Brewer, M. (2000). Metatheories, evolution, and psychology: Once more with feeling. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 23–26.
go back to reference Ceccarelli, L. (2001). Shaping science with rhetoric: The cases of Dobzhansky, Schrodinger and Wilson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ceccarelli, L. (2001). Shaping science with rhetoric: The cases of Dobzhansky, Schrodinger and Wilson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
go back to reference Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Random House. Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Random House.
go back to reference Chomsky, N. (1978). The ideas of Chomsky: Dialogue with Chomsky. In B. Magee (Ed.), Talking philosophy (pp. 173–193). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Chomsky, N. (1978). The ideas of Chomsky: Dialogue with Chomsky. In B. Magee (Ed.), Talking philosophy (pp. 173–193). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Cody, A. B. (1998). How the mind works. Commentary, 105, 69(5), Retrieved November 1, 2001 from InfoTrac OneFile database. Cody, A. B. (1998). How the mind works. Commentary, 105, 69(5), Retrieved November 1, 2001 from InfoTrac OneFile database.
go back to reference Cornwell, R. E., Palmer, C., Guinther, P. M., & Davis, H. P. (2005). Introductory psychology texts as a view of sociobiology/evolutionary psychology’s role in psychology. Human Nature Review, 3(2005), 355–374. Cornwell, R. E., Palmer, C., Guinther, P. M., & Davis, H. P. (2005). Introductory psychology texts as a view of sociobiology/evolutionary psychology’s role in psychology. Human Nature Review, 3(2005), 355–374.
go back to reference Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1994). Beyond intuition and instinct blindness: Toward an evolutionarily rigorous cognitive science. Cognition, 50, 41–77.CrossRef Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1994). Beyond intuition and instinct blindness: Toward an evolutionarily rigorous cognitive science. Cognition, 50, 41–77.CrossRef
go back to reference Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., & Barkow, J. (1992). Introduction: Evolutionary psychology and conceptual integration. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 3–15). New York: Oxford University Press. Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., & Barkow, J. (1992). Introduction: Evolutionary psychology and conceptual integration. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 3–15). New York: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Darwin, C. (1952/1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Chicago: University of Chicago. Darwin, C. (1952/1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Chicago: University of Chicago.
go back to reference Dewsbury, D. A. (1992). William James and instinct theory revisited. In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpeting the legacy of William James (pp. 263–292). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Dewsbury, D. A. (1992). William James and instinct theory revisited. In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpeting the legacy of William James (pp. 263–292). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
go back to reference Elman, J., Bates, E., Turner, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness. Cambridge: MIT Press. Elman, J., Bates, E., Turner, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness. Cambridge: MIT Press.
go back to reference Gilbert, G. N. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113–22.CrossRef Gilbert, G. N. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113–22.CrossRef
go back to reference Gottlieb, G. (1997). Synthesizing nature-nurture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaun Associates. Gottlieb, G. (1997). Synthesizing nature-nurture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaun Associates.
go back to reference Gottlieb, G. (2000). Environmental and behavioral influence on gene activity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 93–97.CrossRef Gottlieb, G. (2000). Environmental and behavioral influence on gene activity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 93–97.CrossRef
go back to reference Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 205(1161), 581–598. Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 205(1161), 581–598.
go back to reference Hardcastle, V., & Buller, D. (2000). Evolutionary psychology, meet developmental neurobiology: Against promiscuous modularity. Brain and Mind, 1, 307–25.CrossRef Hardcastle, V., & Buller, D. (2000). Evolutionary psychology, meet developmental neurobiology: Against promiscuous modularity. Brain and Mind, 1, 307–25.CrossRef
go back to reference Heyes, C. (2000). Evolutionary psychology in the round. In C. Heyes, & L. Huber (Eds.), The evolution of cognition (pp. 3–22). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Heyes, C. (2000). Evolutionary psychology in the round. In C. Heyes, & L. Huber (Eds.), The evolution of cognition (pp. 3–22). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
go back to reference Horgan, J. (1995). The new social Darwinists. Scientific American, 273, 150–157. Horgan, J. (1995). The new social Darwinists. Scientific American, 273, 150–157.
go back to reference James, W. (1890/1952). The principles of psychology. In R. M. Hutchins (Ed.), Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica. James, W. (1890/1952). The principles of psychology. In R. M. Hutchins (Ed.), Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
go back to reference James, W. (1899/1905). Talks to teachers on psychology: And to students on some of life’s ideals. New York: Henry Holt and Company. James, W. (1899/1905). Talks to teachers on psychology: And to students on some of life’s ideals. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
go back to reference James, W. (1912/1967). Does consciousness exist? In P. Smith (Ed.), Essays in radical empiricism and a pluralistic universe (pp. 3–38). Gloucester, MA: David McKay Company, Inc. James, W. (1912/1967). Does consciousness exist? In P. Smith (Ed.), Essays in radical empiricism and a pluralistic universe (pp. 3–38). Gloucester, MA: David McKay Company, Inc.
go back to reference Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
go back to reference Kennair, L. E. O. (2003). Essay review: An alternative paradigm after all? The Human Nature Review, 3, 24–35. Kennair, L. E. O. (2003). Essay review: An alternative paradigm after all? The Human Nature Review, 3, 24–35.
go back to reference Ketelaar, T., & Ellis, B. J. (2000). Are evolutionary explanations unfalsifiable? Evolutionary psychology and the Lakatosian philosophy of science. Psychological Inquiry, 11(1), 1–21.CrossRef Ketelaar, T., & Ellis, B. J. (2000). Are evolutionary explanations unfalsifiable? Evolutionary psychology and the Lakatosian philosophy of science. Psychological Inquiry, 11(1), 1–21.CrossRef
go back to reference Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1968). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1968). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
go back to reference Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
go back to reference Lewontin, R., Rose, S., & Kamin, L. (1984). Not in our genes: Biology, ideology and human behavior. New York: Pantheon. Lewontin, R., Rose, S., & Kamin, L. (1984). Not in our genes: Biology, ideology and human behavior. New York: Pantheon.
go back to reference Lickliter, R., & Honeycutt, H. (2003). Developmental dynamics: Toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 129(6), 819–835.CrossRef Lickliter, R., & Honeycutt, H. (2003). Developmental dynamics: Toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 129(6), 819–835.CrossRef
go back to reference McDougall, W. (1908/1917). Introduction to social psychology. Boston: John W. Luce. McDougall, W. (1908/1917). Introduction to social psychology. Boston: John W. Luce.
go back to reference Mithen, S. (1996). The prehistory of the mind. New York: Thames & Hudson. Mithen, S. (1996). The prehistory of the mind. New York: Thames & Hudson.
go back to reference Myers, G. E. (1992). William James and contemporary psychology. In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp. 49–64). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Myers, G. E. (1992). William James and contemporary psychology. In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp. 49–64). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
go back to reference Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. New York: W. Morris and Company. Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. New York: W. Morris and Company.
go back to reference Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
go back to reference Pinker, S. (2000a). Mind, morality, and evolution: An interview with Steven Pinker. Free Inquiry, 20(2), 55. Pinker, S. (2000a). Mind, morality, and evolution: An interview with Steven Pinker. Free Inquiry, 20(2), 55.
go back to reference Pinker, S. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking Press. Pinker, S. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking Press.
go back to reference Plotkin, H. (1998). Evolution in mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Plotkin, H. (1998). Evolution in mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
go back to reference Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations. New York: Routledge. Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations. New York: Routledge.
go back to reference Richards, R. J. (1987). Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary theories of mind and behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Richards, R. J. (1987). Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary theories of mind and behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
go back to reference Robinson, D. (1995). An intellectual history of psychology. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Robinson, D. (1995). An intellectual history of psychology. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
go back to reference Rose S., & Rose, H. (Eds.). (2000). Alas, poor Darwin. New York: Harmony Books. Rose S., & Rose, H. (Eds.). (2000). Alas, poor Darwin. New York: Harmony Books.
go back to reference Samuels, R. (1998). Evolutionary psychology and the massive modularity hypothesis. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49(4), 575–602.CrossRef Samuels, R. (1998). Evolutionary psychology and the massive modularity hypothesis. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49(4), 575–602.CrossRef
go back to reference Segerstråle, U. (2000). Defenders of the truth: The sociobiology debate. New York: Oxford University Press. Segerstråle, U. (2000). Defenders of the truth: The sociobiology debate. New York: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Staats, A. W. (1975). Social behaviorism. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press. Staats, A. W. (1975). Social behaviorism. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
go back to reference Staats, A. W. (1983). Psychology’s crisis of disunity: Philosophy and method for a unified science. New York: Praeger Publishers. Staats, A. W. (1983). Psychology’s crisis of disunity: Philosophy and method for a unified science. New York: Praeger Publishers.
go back to reference Staats, A. W. (1987). Unified positivism: Philosophy for the revolution to unity. Annals of Theoretical Psychology, 5, 11–54. Staats, A. W. (1987). Unified positivism: Philosophy for the revolution to unity. Annals of Theoretical Psychology, 5, 11–54.
go back to reference Symons, D. (1995). Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: The evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. In P. Abramson & S. Pinkerton (Eds.), Sexual nature/sexual culture (pp. 80–118). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Symons, D. (1995). Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: The evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. In P. Abramson & S. Pinkerton (Eds.), Sexual nature/sexual culture (pp. 80–118). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
go back to reference Taylor, E. (1992). The case for a uniquely American Jamesian tradition in psychology. In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp. 3–28). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Taylor, E. (1992). The case for a uniquely American Jamesian tradition in psychology. In M. E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp. 3–28). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
go back to reference Thayer, V. T. (1965). Formative ideas in American education. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc. Thayer, V. T. (1965). Formative ideas in American education. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc.
go back to reference Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1995). Foreword. In S. Baron-Cohen (Ed.), Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind (pp. xi–xviii). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1995). Foreword. In S. Baron-Cohen (Ed.), Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind (pp. xi–xviii). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
go back to reference Whitley, R. (1985). Knowledge producers and knowledge acquirers: Popularisation as a relation between scientific fields and their publics. In T. Shinn, & R. Whitley (Eds.), Expository science: Forms and functions of popularisation (pp. 3–30). Boston, MA: D. Reidel Publishing Company. Whitley, R. (1985). Knowledge producers and knowledge acquirers: Popularisation as a relation between scientific fields and their publics. In T. Shinn, & R. Whitley (Eds.), Expository science: Forms and functions of popularisation (pp. 3–30). Boston, MA: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Metadata
Title
On the Significance of William James to a Contemporary Doctrine of Evolutionary Psychology
Author
Jean Suplizio
Publication date
01-12-2007
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Human Studies / Issue 4/2007
Print ISSN: 0163-8548
Electronic ISSN: 1572-851X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-007-9063-8

Other articles of this Issue 4/2007

Human Studies 4/2007 Go to the issue