this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
22 points (75.0% liked)

Skeptic

1365 readers
18 users here now

A community for Scientific Skepticism:

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

Things we don't like:

Other communities of interest:

"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
acosmichippo
kabe
22
Why Smart People Believe Stupid Things (youtu.be)
submitted 7 months ago by Streetlights to c/skeptic
88 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Steven Pinker explains the cognitive biases we all suffer from and how they can short-circuit rational thinking and lead us into believing stupid things. Skip to 12:15 to bypass the preamble.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (24 children)

That’s the same as saying darwinism is garbage because it led to eugenics.

Quantum mechanics isn’t a garbage field because Deepak Shopra thinks it can cure baldness.

Evolutionary psychology at its core twists the concept of genetic inheritence into justifications for racism and sexism, like phrenology before it. These two examples are people taking existing science and misapplying them to things they don't have anything to do with.

[–] Streetlights 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (23 children)

Evolutionary psychology at its core twists the concept of genetic inheritence into justifications for racism and sexism, like phrenology before it.

That is not evopysch "at its core".

Again, you may as well describe darwinism as racist at its core.

These two examples are people taking existing science and misapplying them to things they don't have anything to do with.

Misapplying science doesn't make the science wrong.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Your reading comprehension is lacking.

[–] Streetlights 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

There's no need to be impolite. You seem to basing your opposition to the premise of evopsych entirely on exames where it has been applied badly.

If you accept that behaviour is subject to evolutionary pressures then we are on the same page.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Name one time evo psych was used correctly and wasn't just reinforcing stereotypes.

[–] Streetlights 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Well I'm not sure what counts as "used correctly" but I can direct you to some highly cited respectable papers

Barrett and Kurzban 2006 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16802884/

Provides an intro to fundamental disagreements around the scope and the mechanisms of adaptions. Long but comprehensive.

(You should he able to find a pdf of it if you don't have journal access)

Curtis et Al 2004

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1810028/

Evidence that disgust evolved to protect from disease.

Edit:

I'll add this essay from Laith Al-Shawaf as well. It covers some of the misconceptions and changes the field has gone though over the last 20 years.

https://areomagazine.com/2019/08/20/seven-key-misconceptions-about-evolutionary-psychology/

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)