Talk:Evolutionary psychology
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Evolutionary psychology article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2018 and 5 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Atomic1City*Blonde, ThePurpleButton.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
NPOV
[edit]This topic is misleading.
The "ethics" discussion revolves around political positions and concerns belonging to pure philosophy and to human sciences but not to natural sciences.
The discussion on ethics uses a fallacy fallacy to attack EP, and naturally since it is fallacious also the whole matter falls into infinite regression.
Editors are pushing views under the allegation a reliable source has not been presented to necessary edits, when it was, however initially mischaracterized.
Prescriptive, not descriptive, ethical positions do not concern natural sciences. EP doesn't make or promote prescriptive ethics or values.
If third parties make prescriptive claims utilizing EP the third parties themselves should be addressed, an not EP on malicious, unrelated and incompatible philosophical grounds. ApoliticalFactChecker (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moralistic_fallacy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope ApoliticalFactChecker (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- Instead of continually making vague complaints like this, both here and at Talk:Criticism of evolutionary psychology, you need to get specific. Either add reliably sourced material - and no unsourced commentary - or else make a case that existing material misrepresents relevant sources or uses unreliable sources. I am by no means anti-evolutionary psychology; but you need to stick to what sources say. Editors' personal opinions are not relevant. Crossroads -talk- 22:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 May 2022 and 6 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Whitb05 (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Joyb3 (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone
[edit]This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2024 and 6 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Carlysoenksen (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Bells7, Evynnh76, Kayedwards0, Kpatel0820.
— Assignment last updated by Rahneli (talk) 23:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Unsupported assertions seem inaccurate or misleading
[edit]In the following paragraph taken from the Scope>Principles section of this article:
"Evolutionary psychology adopts an understanding of the mind that is based on the computational theory of mind. It describes mental processes as computational operations, so that, for example, a fear response is described as arising from a neurological computation that inputs the perceptional data, e.g. a visual image of a spider, and outputs the appropriate reaction, e.g. fear of possibly dangerous animals. Under this view, any domain-general learning is impossible because of the combinatorial explosion."
Seems to make a number of what seem clearly overstated or dubious claims about Evolutionary Psychology:
1) That EP believes all behavior is based in a computational theory of mind.
2) That computational procedures are deterministic
3) That domain-general learning is incompatible with EP
My (lay-informed) understanding of EP is that while some researchers with extreme views might believe some of this, it is by no means a widespread view in the field. In particular, the idea that domain-general learning is incompatible with EP seems preposterous. The fact that these statements are all uncited with evidence makes me want to strike the entire set of sentences from the article. Thoughts? Advice? Stevemidgley (talk) 19:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class Evolutionary biology articles
- High-importance Evolutionary biology articles
- WikiProject Evolutionary biology articles
- C-Class psychology articles
- Top-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Low-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class philosophy of science articles
- Low-importance philosophy of science articles
- Philosophy of science task force articles
- C-Class Anthropology articles
- High-importance Anthropology articles
- C-Class neuroscience articles
- Mid-importance neuroscience articles
- Old requests for peer review