Hacker News Reader

Evo psych is questionable to me for more basic reasons. It seems full of untestable just so stories to explain apparent biases that are themselves hard to pin down or prove are a result of nature not nurture.

It’s probably not all bullshit but I would bet a double digit percentage of it is.

View on HN

I'm conscious that this is a flame-bait topic. That said, no, dismissing the whole field as "questionable" is callous. Yes, there are many open questions, loaded landmines, and ethical concerns in evolutionary psychology research. But there's also copious evidence in its favour. (Reference: David Buss et al.)

Many people might spare themselves at least some misery by educating themselves about evolutionary psychology, including the landmines and open questions.

psych is questionable for basic reasons. It is a humanities science. It's purpose is not to figure out the world but to change it. Figure out how to end poverty for example.

Therefore it is not well suited to figure out the world.

You should treat all of it with extreme helpings of salt.

Can't this be applied to wide swaths of hard sciences as well? Lots of scientific work overlaps heavily with engineering, which is all about changing the world.

Also, I don't think ending poverty is a major stated goal of psychology research. . .

Reply on news.ycombinator.com