View Single Post
Old 05-18-2010, 12:36 PM   #9 (permalink)
Brutha
Family Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 8,749
Brutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud ofBrutha has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Here's an article I find compelling: The neuroscience delusion -- obviously it's about neuroscience, not evo psych, but it brings up evo psych and a lot of the criticisms apply to both.
It criticizes literature people who want to use neuroscience. The problem doesn't lie with neuroscience but with those literature people who don't understand neuroscience.
Literature theory is about just so stories about stories.
Quote:
I'm wondering how much of evo psych is theory and how much is evidence.
Then how about reading evolutionary psychology articles?
Quote:
I've heard that up until very recently, our genes were thought to be set in stone. This was a hypothesis but was treated as dogma. Then along came the epigenetics theory and it seems that it has obliterated that former theory/dogma... or?
Epigenetics isn't about change in genes but about change of gene expression.

It's also no new theory but it's older than natural selection. In general experiments haven't found much evidence of inheritable epigenetic factors.
Brutha is offline   Reply With Quote