| Line 8: |
Line 8: |
| | | | |
| | <blockquote>"In the distant future I see open fields for far | | <blockquote>"In the distant future I see open fields for far |
| − | more important researches. Psychology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary | + | more important researches. Psychology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation." <ref>[http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=F373&viewtype=text&pageseq=506&keywords=fields%20in%20distant%20see%20i%20open%20future%20the%20far%20for Quote from On the Origins of Species</ref></blockquote> |
| − | acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation." <ref>[http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=F373&viewtype=text&pageseq=506&keywords=fields%20in%20distant%20see%20i%20open%20future%20the%20far%20for Quote from On the Origins of Species</ref></blockquote> | |
| | | | |
| − | However, most of psychology took a very different path for the next 60 years focusing on [[behavioral psychology]], while [[evolutionary biology]] focused mainly on [[macroevolution | mechanisms of evolution]] and united [[genetics]] and evolution. Several important individuals in psychology and biology however tried to accomplish what Darwin had pointed to. | + | However, most of psychology took a very different path for the next 60 years focusing on [[behavioral psychology]], while [[evolutionary biology]] focused mainly on [[macroevolution|mechanisms of evolution]] and united [[genetics]] and evolution. Several important individuals in psychology and biology however tried to accomplish what Darwin had pointed to. |
| | | | |
| − | William James in his book ''[[Principles of Psychology]]'' focused a great deal on instincts and advocated a [[functionalism | functionalist]] approach to psychology. [[Ronald Fisher | RA Fisher]] the famous [[statistician]] and evolutionary biologist, as well as [[J. B. S. Haldane]], helped define a mathematical base for many of the ideas that would later come to dominate evolutionary psychology. | + | William James in his book ''[[Principles of Psychology]]'' focused a great deal on instincts and advocated a [[functionalism|functionalist]] approach to psychology. [[Ronald Fisher|RA Fisher]] the famous [[statistician]] and evolutionary biologist, as well as [[J. B. S. Haldane]], helped define a mathematical base for many of the ideas that would later come to dominate evolutionary psychology. |
| | | | |
| | During the peak of the [[cognitive revolution]] in psychology two very important works were published. The first was [[George C. Williams]]' ''[[Adaptation and Natural Selection]]'' in 1964. This was an extremely important book in evolutionary biology; it advocated a gene-centric view of evolution and used mathematical models to demonstrate that currently vogue theories of [[group selection]] were impossible. Two years later in 1966 [[W.D. Hamilton]] would use the concepts of gene-centric evolution to argue that evolution could support development of traits that did not directly favor the individual. This would become known as [[inclusive fitness]] and [[Hamilton's rule]] would later serve as bedrock for future work in evolutionary psychology. | | During the peak of the [[cognitive revolution]] in psychology two very important works were published. The first was [[George C. Williams]]' ''[[Adaptation and Natural Selection]]'' in 1964. This was an extremely important book in evolutionary biology; it advocated a gene-centric view of evolution and used mathematical models to demonstrate that currently vogue theories of [[group selection]] were impossible. Two years later in 1966 [[W.D. Hamilton]] would use the concepts of gene-centric evolution to argue that evolution could support development of traits that did not directly favor the individual. This would become known as [[inclusive fitness]] and [[Hamilton's rule]] would later serve as bedrock for future work in evolutionary psychology. |
| | | | |
| − | The 1970s brought about the first recognizably modern research in evolutionary psychology. One significant development was the publication by evolutionary biologist [[Robert Trivers]] on his theories of [[reciprocal altruism]], [[parental investment theory]], and [[parent-offspring conflict]]. All of these ideas made use of Williams' and Hamilton's work. Another important event was [[E.O. Wilson]]'s publication of ''[[Sociobiology]]''. Wilson's work attempted to explain such mysterious of evolution as the [[peacock's tail]] and the social structure of [[ants]]. He also advocated the explanations he found be applied to human behavior. His ideas were highly controversial and received a lot of political backlash, though the scientific community was mostly positive. | + | The 1970s brought about the first recognizably modern research in evolutionary psychology. One significant development was the publication by evolutionary biologist [[Robert Trivers]] on his theories of [[reciprocal altruism]], [[parental investment theory]], and [[parent-offspring conflict]]. All of these ideas made use of Williams' and Hamilton's work. Another important event was [[E.O. Wilson]]'s publication of ''[[Sociobiology]]''. Wilson's work attempted to explain such mysterious of evolution as the [[peacock's tail]] and the social structure of [[ant]]s. He also advocated the explanations he found be applied to human behavior. His ideas were highly controversial and received a lot of political backlash, though the scientific community was mostly positive. |
| | | | |
| | In many ways sociobiology is very similar to evolutionary psychology, but with the size of the political pressure and negative press surrounding sociobiology the term fell out of favor in the early 80s. Focus shifted from studying the evolutionary adaptiveness of specific behaviors, to studying the adaptiveness of the mechanisms which produce those behaviors. Many students and proponents started using the term evolutionary psychology. This would become the more accepted phrase. | | In many ways sociobiology is very similar to evolutionary psychology, but with the size of the political pressure and negative press surrounding sociobiology the term fell out of favor in the early 80s. Focus shifted from studying the evolutionary adaptiveness of specific behaviors, to studying the adaptiveness of the mechanisms which produce those behaviors. Many students and proponents started using the term evolutionary psychology. This would become the more accepted phrase. |
| Line 47: |
Line 46: |
| | ===Tinbergen's four questions=== | | ===Tinbergen's four questions=== |
| | | | |
| − | Evolutionary psychologist rarely claim that their ideas are in direct competition with other hypothesis in [[cognitive psychology | cognitive]] or [[behavioral psychology|behavioral]] or [[developmental psychology | developmental]] psychology. Instead they say that multiple causes are different levels of explanations. | + | Evolutionary psychologist rarely claim that their ideas are in direct competition with other hypothesis in [[cognitive psychology|cognitive]] or [[behavioral psychology|behavioral]] or [[developmental psychology|developmental]] psychology. Instead they say that multiple causes are different levels of explanations. |
| | | | |
| − | This idea comes from [[Tinbergen's four questions]]. The evolutionary psychologist addresses casual relationships in [[deep time]] and focuses on [[ultimate causation]]. Developmental psychologist, cognitive psychologist or even neurologist focus on [[proximate cause | proximate]] or [[ontogenetic cause | ontogenetic]] causes. | + | This idea comes from [[Tinbergen's four questions]]. The evolutionary psychologist addresses casual relationships in [[deep time]] and focuses on [[ultimate causation]]. Developmental psychologist, cognitive psychologist or even neurologist focus on [[proximate cause|proximate]] or [[ontogenetic cause|ontogenetic]] causes. |
| | | | |
| | ==See also== | | ==See also== |