quote:
The paper is: Evolutionary Psychology: A New Paradigm for Psychological Science, David Buss, Psychological Inquiry 1995, Vol6No1, 1-30
Anyone familiar with the broad field of psychology knows that it is in theoretical disarray. The different branches... proceed in relative isolation from one another, at most
I recognized that.
quote:
An important new theoretical paradigm called evolutionary psychology is emerging that offers to provide this metatheory.
That opener had me reeling from the get go.
the object of your post.
quote:
I tend to view science as a fact based enterprise which picks up or introduces new and larger concepts
basis of any empirical psychology
quote:
Essentially we have the brain which is the physical portion or the "hardware" of any mechanism, as well as the mind which is the nonphysical or "software" of any mechanism. While the software may boil down to physical-neural responses, the neurons grow and integrate in nets which provide a greater than the sum of its parts response system which does involve choice of action and indeed changes within neural nets based on additional experience. This makes the response system like software which is limited or constricted by the parameters of the hardware.
the notion of a DIFFERENCE in soft and hard ware is traditionally associated with Von Neuman's notion of magnetic memory (aka floopy disk, memory stick, hard drive etc) but what is required psychologically need not be this instantiation as to what specific computer notions apply to what particular brain anatomy (what percent is in or out the study underquestioning)
quote:
I hope we are in agreement up to this point.
I was pretty much with you up to here. so all is well in cyber talk space...
quote:
Some parts of psychology treat the mind or software issues, while other parts investigate the brain or hardware issues. How much the mind collapses into purely brain phenomena is open to debate. Their techniques are obviously different and this seems to be of concern to the author.
see % interalia above.
quote:
However I am hard pressed to understand how this indicates "theoretical disarray".
It doesnt and many evolutionary biologists at Cornell make this same problem where there is only perhaps not an empirical psychology but only a "mind", yours or mine say.But it is possible to think in THIS evolutionary mindset process within a purely psychological dimension within mind that already believes in evolution of the soma. And this is what goes on at Cornell etc but I think your point about PE and speciation to be well taken. I wish that would stop the theorizing but instead it leads to 'disarry' precisely thing in question. This is how it was possible for me to find that evolutionary psychology is not really on any better footing that sociobiology.
Nonetheless it is studied that way at Cornell even though the only issue was a question put as to the biology by Tinbergen when the laboratory of ornithology opened as to ASK A QUESTION in the animals "perspective". Now it is not a bird but a human who already believes in evolution.
I simply said that this only works if the OBJECT in Kant is not admitted existence in the same query. This is not hard to keep going on most campuses even Cornell just now.