Hacker News Reader

Comment by StavrosK | Hacker News Reader

Oh come on, surely many things are social? There are societies who don't even play (what we believed to be) fundamental games like the ultimatum game the same way we do. Many of the evolutionary psychology theories are post hoc rationalizations.

View on HN

I don't mean to say that the theories are correct, but that there should be a reason why something is the way it is. Including social. That is something that evolved too. How else could it exist? I also think not everyone must have evolved the same way. Separate for thousands of years, some people MUST be different, right?

Evolutionary psychology isn't the study of how societies evolve, it's the study of how actual genetic evolution has shaped psychological responses. The claim that women prefer pink because their brains evolved to specialize in trichromacy when gathering fruits should probably not be given too much credence.

I don't think they should be given credence, either. But I think everything looks like a nail because everything is a nail. That is, every behavior can be explained by evolution. We just might not have the right one for a specific behavior.

Maybe you just evolved to think that.

I certainly believe that I have!

Then we can never convince each other of anything! But, since we know people convince each other of things routinely, the original premise P is a contradiction, therefore not P.

I'm glad we agree, let's go for drinks.

I wish I weren't a logician!

Your wish has been granted.

The Theory of Evolution does not say this. In fact, the Theory is predicated on the existence of randomness and adaptation. What you're suggesting is that every behavior has a reason for existence, which is almost the opposite of the Theory of Evolution.

Where else would a behavior come from if it weren't purely molecular? The reason for a behavior might be that it is from a random mutation that even survived by random chance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com