Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 59–75 | Cite as

Neither Adaptive Thinking nor Reverse Engineering: methods in the evolutionary social sciences

Article

Abstract

In this paper I argue the best examples of the methods in the evolutionary social sciences don’t actually resemble either of the two methods called “Adaptive Thinking” or “Reverse Engineering” described by evolutionary psychologists. Both AT and RE have significant problems. Instead, the best adaptationist work in the ESSs seems to be based on and is aiming at a different method that avoids the problems of AT and RE: it is a behavioral level method that starts with information about both the trait in question and knowledge of the EEA. I describe some examples from the literature, and suggest how a behavioral level ESS might still contribute to the discovery and understanding of human psychology. Finally, I describe some remaining problems for adaptationist reasoning of this kind.

Keywords

Evolutionary psychology Human behavioral ecology Adaptive Thinking Reverse Engineering Optimality models Adaptationism 

References

  1. Blurton Jones NG (1987) Tolerated theft, suggestions about the ecology and evolution of sharing, hoarding and scrounging. Soc Sci Inf 26:31–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowles S (2006) Group competition, reproductive leveling, and the evolution of human altruism. Science 314:1569–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowles S (2009) Did warfare among ancestral hunter-gatherers affect the evolution of human social behaviors. Science 324:1293–1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowles S, Gintis H (2011) A cooperative species: human reciprocity and its evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton and OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brandon R (1990) Adaptation and environment. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. Buller DJ (2005) Adapting minds. MIT press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Camerer C (2003) Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  8. Camerer C, Thaler RH (1995) Ultimatums, dictators and manners. J Econ Perspect 9(2):209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cosmides L, Tooby J, Barkow JH (1992) Introduction: evolutionary psychology and conceptual integration. In: Barkow JH, Cosmides L, Tooby J (eds) The adapted mind. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 3–15Google Scholar
  10. Davies PS (1999) The conflict of evolutionary psychology. In: Hardcastle VG (ed) Where biology meets psychology: philosophical essays. MIT press, Cambridge, pp 67–81Google Scholar
  11. Dennett DC (1995) Darwin’s dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. Touchstone/Simon and Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Driscoll C (2004) Can behaviors be adaptations? Philos Sci 71:16–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fehr E, Gachter S (2000) Fairness and retaliation: the economics of reciprocity. J Econ Perspect 14(3):159–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gintis H (2000) Strong reciprocity and human sociality. J Theor Biol 206:169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grafen A (1984) Natural selection, kin selection and group selection. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell scientific publications, Oxford, pp 62–84Google Scholar
  16. Grantham T, Nichols S (1999) Evolutionary psychology: ultimate explanations and Panglossian predictions. In: Hardcastle VG (ed) Where biology meets psychology: philosophical essays. MIT press, Cambridge, pp 47–66Google Scholar
  17. Griffiths PE (1996) The historical turn in the study of adaptation. Br J Philos Sci 47:511–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guala F (2012) Reciprocity: weak or strong? What punishment experiments do (and do not) demonstrate. Behav Brain Sci 35:1–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gurven M (2004) To give and to give not: the behavioral ecology of human food transfers. Behav Brain Sci 27:543–583Google Scholar
  20. Gurven M, Hill K (2009) Why do men hunt? A reevaluation of “man the hunter” and the sexual division of labor. Curr Anthropol 50:51–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J Econ Behav Organ 3:367–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hawkes K, Bliege Bird R (2002) Showing off, handicap signaling, and the evolution of men’s work. Evol Anthropol 11:58–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hawkes K, O’Connell JF, Coxwoth JE (2010) Family provisioning is not the only reason men hunt. Curr Anthropol 51:259–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Henrich J, Boyd R (1998) The evolution of conformist transmission and the emergence of between-group differences. Evol Hum Behav 19:215–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Henrich J, Gil-White FJ (2001) The evolution of prestige: freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evol Hum Behav 22:165–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Henrich N, Henrich J (2007) Why humans cooperate: a cultural and evolutionary explanation. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Henrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S, Camerer C, Fehr E, Gintis H (2004) Foundations of human sociality: economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-scale societies. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hrdy SB (2009) Mothers and others: the evolutionary origins of mutual understanding. Belknap press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaplan H, Gurven M (2005) The natural history of human food sharing and cooperation: a review and a new multi-individual approach to the negotiation of norms. In: Gintis H, Bowles S, Boyd R, Fehr E (eds) Moral sentiments and material interests: the foundations of cooperation in economic life. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaplan H, Hill K, Lancaster J, Hurtado AM (2000) A theory of human life history evolution: diet, intelligence, and longevity. Evol Anthropol 9:156–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marlowe FW (2005) Hunter-gatherers and human evolution. Evol Anthropol 14(2):54–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marr D (1982) Vision: a computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  33. O’Connell JF, Hawkes K, Lupo KD, Blurton Jones NG (2002) Male strategies and plio-pleistocene archaeology. J Hum Evol 43:831–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Richardson RC (2003) Evolutionary psychology as maladapted psychology. MIT press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith EA, Bird RB (2005) Costly signaling and cooperative behavior. In: Gintis H, Bowles S, Boyd R, Fehr E (eds) Moral sentiments and material interests: the foundations of cooperation in economic life. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 115–148Google Scholar
  36. Sperber D (2000) An objection to the memetic approach to culture. In: Aunger R (ed) Darwinizing culture: the status of memetics as a science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 163–173Google Scholar
  37. Sterelny K (2010) Moral nativism: a sceptical response. Mind Lang 25(3):279–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sterelny K (2012) The evolved apprentice. MIT press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Sterelny K, Griffiths P (1999) Sex and death. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  40. Turke PW (1990) Just do it. Ethol Sociobiol 11:445–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Religious StudiesNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations