Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Human Studies
Erschienen in: Human Studies 4/2007

01.12.2007 | Research Paper

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

verfasst von: Jean Suplizio

Erschienen in: Human Studies | Ausgabe 4/2007

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

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.
Vorheriger Artikel Accomplishing Meaning in a Stratified World: An Existential-Phenomenological Reading of Max Weber’s ‘Class, Status, Party’
Nächster Artikel Husserl’s Way to Authentic Being

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
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.
 
Literatur
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.
Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6(1), 1–30.CrossRef
Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
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. (2000). Metatheories, evolution, and psychology: Once more with feeling. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 23–26.
Ceccarelli, L. (2001). Shaping science with rhetoric: The cases of Dobzhansky, Schrodinger and Wilson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Random House.
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.
Cody, A. B. (1998). How the mind works. Commentary, 105, 69(5), Retrieved November 1, 2001 from InfoTrac OneFile database.
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.
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., & 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.
Darwin, C. (1952/1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Chicago: University of Chicago.
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.
Elman, J., Bates, E., Turner, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Gilbert, G. N. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113–22.CrossRef
Gottlieb, G. (1997). Synthesizing nature-nurture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaun Associates.
Gottlieb, G. (2000). Environmental and behavioral influence on gene activity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 93–97.CrossRef
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.
Hardcastle, V., & Buller, D. (2000). Evolutionary psychology, meet developmental neurobiology: Against promiscuous modularity. Brain and Mind, 1, 307–25.CrossRef
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.
Horgan, J. (1995). The new social Darwinists. Scientific American, 273, 150–157.
James, W. (1890/1952). The principles of psychology. In R. M. Hutchins (Ed.), Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
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. (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.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kennair, L. E. O. (2003). Essay review: An alternative paradigm after all? The Human Nature Review, 3, 24–35.
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
Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1968). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lewontin, R., Rose, S., & Kamin, L. (1984). Not in our genes: Biology, ideology and human behavior. New York: Pantheon.
Lickliter, R., & Honeycutt, H. (2003). Developmental dynamics: Toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 129(6), 819–835.CrossRef
McDougall, W. (1908/1917). Introduction to social psychology. Boston: John W. Luce.
Mithen, S. (1996). The prehistory of the mind. New York: Thames & Hudson.
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.
Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. New York: W. Morris and Company.
Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Pinker, S. (2000a). Mind, morality, and evolution: An interview with Steven Pinker. Free Inquiry, 20(2), 55.
Pinker, S. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking Press.
Plotkin, H. (1998). Evolution in mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations. New York: Routledge.
Richards, R. J. (1987). Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary theories of mind and behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Robinson, D. (1995). An intellectual history of psychology. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Rose S., & Rose, H. (Eds.). (2000). Alas, poor Darwin. New York: Harmony Books.
Samuels, R. (1998). Evolutionary psychology and the massive modularity hypothesis. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49(4), 575–602.CrossRef
Segerstråle, U. (2000). Defenders of the truth: The sociobiology debate. New York: Oxford University Press.
Staats, A. W. (1975). Social behaviorism. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
Staats, A. W. (1983). Psychology’s crisis of disunity: Philosophy and method for a unified science. New York: Praeger Publishers.
Staats, A. W. (1987). Unified positivism: Philosophy for the revolution to unity. Annals of Theoretical Psychology, 5, 11–54.
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.
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.
Thayer, V. T. (1965). Formative ideas in American education. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc.
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. (1995). Foreword. In S. Baron-Cohen (Ed.), Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind (pp. xi–xviii). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
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.
Metadaten
Titel
On the Significance of William James to a Contemporary Doctrine of Evolutionary Psychology
verfasst von
Jean Suplizio
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2007
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Human Studies / Ausgabe 4/2007
Print ISSN: 0163-8548
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-851X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-007-9063-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2007

Human Studies 4/2007 Zur Ausgabe

Research Paper

Enrolling the Citizen in Sustainability: Membership Categorization, Morality and Civic Participation

Research Paper

Technology and Intimacy in the Philosophy of Georges Bataille

Commentary

Scholar’s Symposium: The Work of Angela Y. Davis

Research Paper

Husserl’s Way to Authentic Being

Research Paper

Accomplishing Meaning in a Stratified World: An Existential-Phenomenological Reading of Max Weber’s ‘Class, Status, Party’

Commentary

Scholar’s Symposium: The Work of Angela Y. Davis

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise