= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
cousin_it comments on Against the standard narrative of human sexual evolution - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (153)
The Sex at Dawn story is nice but the whole debate seems backwards.
Everyone picks their favorite modern social models and then molds citations and stories to support that it must be natural and even the ancient hunter gatherers...
Popularized evo-psych seems to be a lot like appealing that a certain way of life is "natural" and thus "good".
btw Is there a name to the "natural -> good" bias/fallacy?
It's called the naturalistic fallacy.
You're right that the debate seems backwards. Evo psych should be used to make correct predictions and find optimal actions, not create or justify moral norms.
N.B. This is the less common use of the phrase "naturalistic fallacy", and where possible "appeal to nature" might be preferred (when describing an argument).
No, "appeal to nature" is the much more common use of "naturalistic fallacy," unless you only count use by philosophers.
Touché