The Countless Controversies of Evolutionary Psychology

Рет қаралды 48,213

Күн бұрын

Time Stamps:
0:00 What is evolutionary psychology?
2:34 EP has few clinical applications
3:33 The naturalistic fallacy
6:27 Support from bigoted circles
10:15 EP hyper-focuses on sex differences
12:40 These alleged sex differences are used to justify human rights violations
15:08 EP often gets used as manosphere ammunition
18:36 EP often ignores the role of social factors
23:12 We know very little about our ancestors
25:06 Just-so stories
26:40 Neural plasticity threatens the modularity hypothesis
27:35 The time machine argument: we cannot know these changes came from adaptation
28:40 EP is too predeterministic and reductionistic
29:45 Conclusions
References:
Cannito, & Ferrero Camoletto, R. (2022). The Rules of Attraction: An Empirical Critique of Pseudoscientific Theories about Sex in the Manosphere. Sexes, 3(4), 593-607. doi.org/10.339...
Van Valkenburgh. (2021). Digesting the Red Pill: Masculinity and Neoliberalism in the Manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 24(1), 84-103. doi.org/10.117...
Petersen, & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A Meta-Analytic Review of Research on Gender Differences in Sexuality, 1993-2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 21-38. doi.org/10.103...
www.unm.edu/~ty...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D. M. G., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65(2), 110-126. doi.org/10.103...
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
link.springer....
slate.com/tech...
www.cell.com/t...
web.archive.or...
joelvelasco.net...
thisviewoflife...
religiondispat...
www.theguardia...
jezebel.com/ri...
ui.adsabs.harv...
alumni.berkele...
anweshsatpathy...
www.chicagotri...
www.theguardia...
fair.org/extra...
www.nytimes.co...
labs.la.utexas...

Пікірлер: 374

@fyfoh Жыл бұрын

I don't have a problem with any of your criticisms of ep, but I think it's possible to arrive at a well-researched and tested conclusion that many people would find distasteful. These kinds of discussions remind me of the Machiavelli quote, “How we live is so different from how we ought to live that he who studies what ought to be done rather than what is done will learn the way to his downfall rather than to his preservation.”

@bluebutterfly5062 Жыл бұрын

How do we determine how we are "ought" to live though? She actually touched on that a bit in the video. I think you're right that sometimes we're afraid of reality because we don't always like it, but how do we determine what is actual reality and what is us just deciding things should be a certain way "cuz I say so"

@fyfoh Жыл бұрын

@@bluebutterfly5062 We can observe the actions of people. "Ought" is the disparity between what people actually do and social norms, platitudes, morals, etc. There is no single ideal way to live. What you and I agree is the proper way to live might be considered outmoded, outdated, or even barbaric in the future.

@jacobwumbo827 Жыл бұрын

@Truth Balm You are just supposing the is:ought connection when there is no way of making such a leap. How things are does nothing to tell us as to how they ought to be. That we have the ability to question how the world is and change it accordingly makes the is:ought argument not only circular but useless. We ought not live like X but we are in the process of coming to live like X so how can we say we really aren't suppose to live like X? The argument destroys itself.

@gabrielmeth4844 Жыл бұрын

@Truth Balm And that clearly, observably, happens far less than it should, so it can not be ignored.

@lifeunderthestarstv Жыл бұрын

Yes. This is why capitalism is doomed to fail.

@mikamika8445 Жыл бұрын

I’m so glad you touch this topic. I feel like these theories need more counter arguments because a lot of it leads to a very narrow mindset.

@heightdevil Жыл бұрын

@Truth Balm thinking science isn't susceptible to the same human errors seen in religion/politics is naive however.

@Firecelebi Жыл бұрын

@@LNVACVAC What does that even mean? Can you explain that second sentence in simple language?

@stevo7220 Жыл бұрын

@truthbalm1875 That science that you talk will always have its political biases, especially social studies and social sciences so don't tell me shit because i know how harsher are filters in biochem compared to Social scis .

@nicbarth3838 10 ай бұрын

@@stevo7220he didnt say anything outragouse here why are you so defensive

@onieyoh9478 3 ай бұрын

Narrow mindset= correctly understanding reality.

@moonsweater Жыл бұрын

Maybe this is my inner mathematician coming out, but it makes me sad to see the idea that something with few practical applications can't be worthwhile. Isn't it enough to help expand our knowledge on a topic for its own sake, and be confident that practical applications will eventually flow outward from knowing the truth about things?

@seribelz Жыл бұрын

I mean wasn't bowlby's attachment theory inspired by evolutionary theory? of course ep has indirict clinical applications and there are many researchers (like nesse, del giudice etc) that focus their work on psychopathologies personality disorders etc-

@damonspiano5219 Жыл бұрын

@@seribelz yes, really good point!

@_____J_____ Жыл бұрын

That and it actually has a lot of real life "applications" for the individual. Especially when it comes to understanding things like gender dynamics. I think for that topic specifically it is very hard to gain insight through scientific studies because what people say vs what they deep down want (consciously or subconsciously) can be two completely different things

@liladuran8733 Жыл бұрын

I agree that something can be worthwhile despite having no practical applications (especially because sometimes decades and centuries pass before we realize something DOES have an application). That doesn't mean I value EP though, especially because of the way it's impossible to test hypotheses (she discusses this in "just-so stories" and "time machine argument" sections).

@okamikatze863 Жыл бұрын

I agree with you.

@PikUpYourPantsPatrol Жыл бұрын

Why is calling something bigoted an argument? Things are either true or they aren't

@SteveSteve7590-di2dn 10 ай бұрын

Cause she pushes an agenda.

@leoniep9231 2 ай бұрын

No, because EP is unsubstantiated and it has problematic implications. Münecat recently made a great video about it where she talks about the individual studies about the topic in detail, and how and why they were disproved. EP seeks to oversimplify a complex reality, reenforcing sexist stereotypes in the process, and presents certain correlations as causations even when the data does not really back that.

@PikUpYourPantsPatrol 2 ай бұрын

@@leoniep9231 I'm not talking about EP. I agree it's nonsense. I'm talking about the notion that any differences between race and gender is totally enviornmental. It being sexist or problematic is irrelevant to the truth. The munecat video has it's own issues. She debunks unsubstantiated claims with unsubstantiated claims. Such as internalized mysogyny.

@hahayes4016 Жыл бұрын

I feel like EP is a powerful tool to describe our fundamental emotions, but not so good at describing/observing our societies. But with that said, you have to use the right tool for the right occasion.

@abhiklovesbadbitches Жыл бұрын

good observation

@tmtb80 11 ай бұрын

Human emotions aren't universal. Societies have different emotions/feelings.

@covfefe_drumpfh 9 ай бұрын

No. Not at all.

@Anastazka00 4 ай бұрын

@tmtb80: The Basic emotions Are same - Joy, anger, surprise, etc.

@abbliee5439 3 ай бұрын

@@Anastazka00Do you even know other languages? Because I do, and it's true. English emotion concepts are not universal at all

@Trapping_ackbar7 Жыл бұрын

27:37 You'e right not all traits evolve because they were adaptive, some may occur because of random chance, also called genetic drift. Or a trait can "hitchhike" with another due to proximity on a particular locus. But there are means of determining whether a trait is adaptive or not and to handwave the whole field is the same tactic of young earth creationists who say we weren't alive so we can't know. Also your justification for saying the big bang is okay to theorize but not EP being "it can be used to justify human rights violations" is very dangerous and unscientific. We know science can be used for horrible reasons but to shut down the pursuit of scientific truth because of bad actors is a terribly slippery slope.

@heightdevil Жыл бұрын

Yeah Ana is at her weakest when discussing EP, her aversion towards it seems really personal and kinda cherry-picked

@darkcreatureinadarkroom1617 Жыл бұрын

@Sackhaarspalter by that token, it would be in the EPs' best interests to distance themselves from the bigots and public figures who want to weaponize their work. But they love the attention... Maybe they could study why that's the case 🤔

@gabrielmeth4844 Жыл бұрын

@@heightdevil It is clearly personal, and it is obvious why. Science trumps ideologies, and ideologues hate science for it.

@brianmeen2158 Жыл бұрын

@@heightdevilAna seems downright offended by EP which I find bizarre

@theprogressivemichigander6588 9 ай бұрын

It's also just wrong. The Big Bang Theory absolutely has been used to attempt both to justify or oppositely invalidate religions. So was the discovery of the atom. And the idea of natural selection to start with. Science is misused all the time. It doesn't invalidate the science.

@kevintse2870 Жыл бұрын

Regarding destroying the planet and substance abuse, I know two evolutionary biologists say that these are the effect of humans facing a completely different set of problems than they were evolved to deal with: that we weren’t exactly evolved to “survive and reproduce” per se, but our behaviors worked in the past and therefore they were passed along whether they’re useful or not. It’s like how in GoT, the commander of the City Watch was sent to The Wall with a set of skills, and these skills turned out to be completely irrelevant at his new location. So in a way, you’re right in that the way we act shouldn’t be guided by the way we’re programmed to act.

@heightdevil Жыл бұрын

@Truth Balm If people minimized themselves quite a bit then that would work out well enough imo. Keep in mind that a lot of the reason we take so many resources from our environemnt is simply because our current population isn't taught much about basic soil/ecosystem health. Realistically, every person on Earth could allocate enough time/energy in their day towards work related to it.

@catleaf Жыл бұрын

yes, also modern human problems like identity politics and eating disorders just virtually did not exist a thousand+ years ago. so i don’t really understand how these could be used as examples to prove how humans have inherent traits that go against our biological programming to survive and reproduce. however these do serve as a testament to the high influence of socialization

@heightdevil Жыл бұрын

@@catleaf EP does not really argue that at all: most people who subscribe to the idea of EP focus more on the way that nature and nurture interact with each other, and conclude that by the nature of how we evolved and the nurture of how our cultures/tech evolved, we live out-of-sync with the traits we've adapted.

@kevintse2870 Жыл бұрын

@@heightdevil I think catcorn was referencing Ana’s argument for overweighting the strength of socialization against the strength of our prehistoric brain.

@tdwebste Жыл бұрын

Everyone fails to see societies as organisms that seeks to grow and expand. Psychologists who don't consider societies as organisms are missing the big picture.

@heightdevil Жыл бұрын

Ecosystems as well, as societies are essentially human ecosystems

@zs9652 Жыл бұрын

Basically everything is an organism comprised of smaller organisms of some sort. Except maybe the smallest of things lol

@marcodallolio9746 Жыл бұрын

Seeing society as an organism, or "body politic", is a core component of any right wing authoritarian ideology. It presupposes a natural order to society, and it resolves the tensions that emerge from class and power relations by blaming "parasites" and other infectious external contaminations, be them other ethnic groups or cultural infections, since those tensions cannot possibly emerge from a naturally ordered healthy body, there must be an external factor causing them. I guess it's no surprise this view of society is gaining ground, as we are entering a fascist phase in America

@jorb1903 2 ай бұрын

There is no seeking to grow or expand in evolution it’s literally just natural selection lol

@quintboredom 2 ай бұрын

How is society an organism? An organization I see, but an organism?? Society doesn't breathe, doesn't eat. Individuals do. I believe it makes much more sense to see societies as an emergent quality of many humans interacting with each other if you want to see the bigger picture.

@UnashamedlyHentai Жыл бұрын

For that last point, I think it would be more like EP provides a baseline, that is then colored by socialization, personality, lived experience and whatever else, rather than contributing any specific probability to a given behavior. It is fully possible for these other contributors to completely erase the influence of EP, or reinforce it. Ultimately, it comes down to EP is a small contributing factor amongst many other factors. I think this is basically what you were saying, but I wanted to say this because it seems like coming away with something like "EP gives you a 1% greater likelihood of committing SA if you're a guy" or a "3% greater likelihood of seeking a monogamous relationship because you're a girl" is a misunderstanding that can lead to the kinds of justifications that are discussed in this video. In the long run, EP probably has something to it, but it certainly not the only or even the largest influence.

@UnashamedlyHentai Жыл бұрын

@sethorly if you think it says otherwise, then you missed the whole video.

@rexqt5337 Жыл бұрын

Thats why you or the girl in the video isnt an evolutionary psych 😂

@Kswhajakky Жыл бұрын

I really like the overall conclusions you've drawn from this. Even though there may be some truths behind some hypothesis proposed by evolutionary psychology, the overall aplications of them are rare and unsubstantiated and they tend to reduce people to some sort of mechanistic robot driven solely by instinct. It ignores the ability of people to generate insight, it ignores the ability of people to modulate their behavior, and it ignores the ability of people to have will outside of their most primal instincts. Great video Ana!

@Exostin Жыл бұрын

There’s a nice book called “Survival of the friendliest”, which challenges the popular belief of aggression as the driving factor of our success as a species

@anona2017 11 ай бұрын

Yes! I've been kinda mad to find out I've been totally lied to by our culture that humans are just violent and that's how we are and that's that, nothing will ever change, blah blah blah. Same with greed and humans. No! Turns out that hunter gatherer groups are almost always egalitarian, sharing things equally, not really even having leaders or any social hierarchy and there's also immediate return hunter gatherers who don't even cache any food for the next day. The hadza are a living group like this. And they are nice to their kids! They talk to them nicely and teach them. They don't hit them. I think people justify child abuse by saying this is just how it's always been done but that's not true at all.

@RuanMei_SocietyGenius 9 ай бұрын

That title could explain the capybaras

@ettinakitten5047 11 ай бұрын

A scientific field doesn't need to have direct practical applications in order to be worth studying. Not all psychologists are clinical psychologists, nor should they be. The pursuit of knowledge for its own sake is a part of science. And we often don't know how data might be practically relevant before we've gathered it and analyzed it, anyway.

@KingOfHeroes1996 Жыл бұрын

Great video, so glad I finally found something to act as an outlet for my gripes with this way of thinking, heck, I didn’t even know it had a name like EP in the first place. In recent times I’ve really struggled as a guy when my new friends are dudes who say shit like ‘men cheat because it’s natural, us men are scumbags’, it becomes easy to feel like I’m alone in this world in holding onto a moral compass and a set of values, a sense of right and wrong.

@dandykuma Жыл бұрын

Being a respectable human being and treating others with kindness is it’s own reward 😊. Your not alone in that mentality

@Firecelebi Жыл бұрын

@Truth Balm Yeah but it sounds like it sucks to be around people who have that mentality, like lowering your own image to tacitly justify cheating? That's pretty pathetic, I'd rather hang out with someone who goes something like "yeah people cheat, but it's a wrong action, and I wouldn't do that." It's a general truth that cheating happens, but it sounds like OP's friends just don't care about it, which raises lots of questions. I wouldn't hang with them.

@bluebutterfly5062 Жыл бұрын

@truthbalm1875 a general truth also does not justify crappy behavior

@Oreantear96 Жыл бұрын

I'd be down to see if we have any friend chemistry, I'm on discord if you play anything on pc.

@Herosoyyo2 Жыл бұрын

@@Firecelebi "Toxic" people can twist any ideology or philosophy into self-indulgence, violence, or let's say, pointless suffering in general. A lot of the most damaging forms of human error involve misappropriation of some deeply important and useful truth.

@ceaderf Жыл бұрын

Your conclusion that says if the outcomes of a science lead to bad politics then we need to stop, tells us a lot about your socialization.

@garydrago Күн бұрын

Ooooh nice one

@uniqueusername22337 8 ай бұрын

EP explains why misogyny or sexual assault exists. It doesn't justify it at all imo

@Achrononmaster 17 күн бұрын

Not really. EP can explain under some assumptions why misogyny or sexual assault _might evolve_ among many other things. It would also tell a story about how it could be mostly eliminated. If you can tell stories about the past using abstract principles, then you can tell stories about the possible future.

@ollielon5926 Жыл бұрын

Well, if EP is true, then it is useful. Knowing ourselves is the first step in personal development.

@trinketmage8145 Жыл бұрын

If it's true it's very useful as it lets us draw inferences about ourselves from approximate species as well.

@catheriney6209 Жыл бұрын

Yes, it’s just that, evolutionary, meaning we can continue to evolve.

@themasstermwahahahah Жыл бұрын

It is definitely true to some extent, the real question is to what extent. The fact that most people are heterosexual is almost certainly due to evolutionary factors (nature), but societal conditioning (nurture) or random chance can play a much larger role in other sex-linked traits.

@seribelz Жыл бұрын

b-b-but.. truth can be ethically questionable amd problematic

@trinketmage8145 Жыл бұрын

@@themasstermwahahahah That some people are homosexual in nature is most likely due to evolutionary pressures as well. Since it isn't necessary for every single member of the species to reproduce to sustain a population having some members opting of intersex competition helps with intertribal cooperation.

@fidelkva4810 Жыл бұрын

There are real, genetic differences between humans that influence behavior. Personality and intelligence are largely genetic.

@brianfarmer7449 Жыл бұрын

To take your point about the limited clinical application of EP, there is plenty of evidence that they way ancient humans lived has tremendous benefits to our mental health. Being outside, socializing, eating a balanced diet, exercise, etc. Some medical responses to fever and blood loss have now been adjusted due to evolutionary theory being applied clinically. A great book about depression by Stephen Ilardi is based on EP.

@MrQuantumInc Жыл бұрын

The module theory really seems like it exists because it gives people an excuse to ignore the many ways that different human tendencies and the factors that influence them interact with each other. Human psychology is complicated and imagining you can focus on one module at a time is wishful thinking. Most of the people advocating for evolutionary psychology are NOT biologists. There needs to be a distinction between the people who simply study evolution and apply that logic to human behavior and those who try to use that idea to excuse their beliefs about gender. You can apply the logic and end up at very different conclusions. The most well know example is described by Christopher Ryan in "Sex at Dawn" and suggests that we are naturally polyamorous. The theories of promiscuous men and choosy women are the most popular because they line up with stereotypes and it suggests they are natural and inevitable.

@lyndsaybrown8471 3 ай бұрын

To me, I find ignorant of modern economics as well. What we do to survive has outpaced pure genetics and yet we are adapted to the world we invented. Suggests to me that humanity has been living in it's own mind for a long time now, and what is conceptual is very different from what is physical.

@idunusegoogleplus Жыл бұрын

Scientific truths should be pursued regardless of how bad actors might attempt to misuse such truths. Bad actors can be dealt with as and when they might pop up. Censoring and silencing scientists from doing research out of fear it might be misinterpreted is not something that can be easily reversed.

@elgabos99 Жыл бұрын

Great video. I could understand why you'd question the validity of EP based on its social utility, or lack thereof. However, you should consider that that in itself almost sounds like a pragmatic fallacy, in the sense the you'd assume that something ought to be encouraged and/or considered as true only (or mostly) because doing so benefits society's interests. I just wanted to point that out. Other than that, I agree with the gist of your criticism on EP. I'm coming from the perspective of philosophy. In that sense, you'd understand, for instance, how wrong it would be to argue that research in philosophy (or at least in some areas of it) ought not to be done because it is practically useless (or at least, that's how it's perceived by far too many people).

@Moshm4n Жыл бұрын

The EP dialogue misses the primary evolutionary superpower of human beings: adaptation. Our ability to survive and thrive under a multitude of environments and circumstances. There are things that keep us grounded as manifestly human, but we're flexible animals keeping us at the top of the food chain. When Manospherian content creators dive into EP, they speak along deterministic lines. EP is better as a predictor than a determiner of outcomes.

@nicadquartz Жыл бұрын

I'm so happy to hear evolutionary psychology be interrogated more. I remember when I was first learning about it, I would often hear things and think, "someone is gonna take this and use it to justify some bullshit" haha

@abhiklovesbadbitches Жыл бұрын

maybe we arent looking deep enough into our decisikns and what we consider to be inappropriate and appropriate

@anona2017 11 ай бұрын

I was curious, can this be said of almost anything though? Humans seem to be capable of some amazing mental gymnastics.

@nicadquartz 11 ай бұрын

@@anona2017 I don't know if it could be said for everything. I do think that there are people out there who will use a lot of things to justify a lot of things. That being said, from someone who tries to think scientifically, I would still recommend interrogating and challenging ideas especially if they might not be helpful in getting people closer to truth. As a person who understands how sexism works and doesn't want to encourage its reproduction, I would also recommend interrogating and challenging ideas that might set off that alarm. I think barriers to truth and wisdom will always exist. I also think that really big changes can take time, and that an individual who tries to contribute to that might not see the fruits of their labor fully in their lifetime. But thinking in a big picture / long-term way personally drives me still.

@principleshipcoleoid8095 Жыл бұрын

6:27 I think understanding why people have sertain instincts can help to manage them. Or at least seeing that there is evolutionary influence, seeing what it "pushes" people to do and then thinking about which ones and when should be done and which ones surpressed.

@maynardewm Жыл бұрын

A lot of EP to me seems like stuff that can’t even be proven. It’s just “I say it’s true because it seems like a reasonable conclusion based on what humans in the Stone Age would do.” But we have no way of knowing what life and social structures actually looked like back then. No way to perform studies that support hypothesis. It feels so much like Freudian thinking.

@danakruger Жыл бұрын

JP is going to lose his mind when he hears about nude lipstick...

@catheriney6209 Жыл бұрын

Right…red lipstick is pretty rare to see nowadays..

@joseviu969 3 ай бұрын

is not that natural = virtuous, is just that a sudden big change in enviroment can cause more adversities for us. doing what has worked before has a higher probability of working again

@jorb1903 2 ай бұрын

Bingo!!

@genauder 10 ай бұрын

So do I understand this correctly: A theory should not be created if it's potentially damaging to society, even if there is a lot of evidence for it to be true?

@blizzard1198 Ай бұрын

Yes that's what they want to hear. Like how the Church will arrest or burn you for making theories with some evidence that goes against them. You are 100% right.

@Nick-kf3io Жыл бұрын

Anytime I hear a man quoting Jordan Peterson I immediately start running before my brain cells start dying and their insecurity starts rubbing off on me.

@xueshi2887 11 ай бұрын

Why?

@Violaphobia 2 ай бұрын

Guys will literally invent an entire discipline instead of going to therapy

@Trapping_ackbar7 Жыл бұрын

26:41 I wish you flushed out this point more because I don't see how they conflict. It can be both true that our brain is modular and neuroplastic, while both being a product of natural selection. Take language acquisition for example: cognitive psychologists like chomsky have demonstrated that there is an overarching, innate structure for learning and producing language. That's a domain general ability. While at the same time the brain need to be plastic enough to adjust to whatever language the baby is brought up in. Evolution can produce meta structures of organization while also favoring the adaptability of the brain for variations in environment. To say it's one or the other is a false dichotomy.

@themasstermwahahahah Жыл бұрын

Yeah this point didn't make much sense to me either

@Jemima1010 Жыл бұрын

We are limited by our genes in terms of what we can do but not determined by them. Genes determine that we can acquire language but not whether I’ll speak French or English. However, just because our genes allowed us to develop language does not mean that it is inside an innate module. Just as we have been driving cars for decades doesn’t mean we must have a Stone Age module which allowed us to drive cars. It was learned in the environment and passed down socially. EP thus sometimes takes for granted that a lot of behaviour is merely learned on the job and likes to insist it’s innate.

@brodies2494 Жыл бұрын

This video felt like it had a lot of shallow points of argument bought up against ideas before quickly moving on the next with a general goal of dismissing EP for reasons of "bad vibes" it was cringe and disappointing to see her do this.

@ledgnr197gaming5 Жыл бұрын

@@brodies2494 yeah her political views clearly got in the way of reason here. She basically implied that right wingers are bigoted which is not a good (or smart) thing for someone who (at least I believe) works in therapy and sees patients. And most of her “critiques” of EP weren’t really critiques of EP but rather how people use it.

@jorb1903 2 ай бұрын

What do you mean by evolution producing meta structures of organizations? Could you be more specific? Also I wouldn’t say Chomsky demonstrated universal grammar exists, it’s still a theory, though a widely held one, at least as a framework. There’s definitely no evidence connecting it to genetics if it does exist however. The poverty of the stimulus is debated logical argument, but there’s no actual proof. So I wouldn’t say it’s the best counter example

@SoVidushi Жыл бұрын

I don't have anything to contribute to the convo so I'm just commenting for the algorithm. But thanks for this video, it'll come in handy to educate a lot of people or just make them think more criticically about the information they are being presented. Have a great one Ana :)

@carbon1479 Жыл бұрын

6:15 - A couple thoughts on the value of ev psych and ev game theory: 1) putting a context around stresses, pressures, and even unconscious / covert agendas that tend to initiate human behaviors often with the person themselves backfilling rationalizations which tend toward increased mate value or other proxies such as power and status, 2) it's a antithesis to 'blank slate' ideas which typically make a mess of the world when pulled into political theories by ignoring pitfalls and dangers inherent in their express goals. I'd also suggest that there's a difference between naturalistic fallacy such as saying certain things 'should' be a certain way vs. insolubility such as that certain problems, like inequality, result the moment you have two limited conscious agents interacting which aren't precisely identical. It's good to try to reduce the negative impacts of inequality and give people a wider variety of positive-sum games where they can focus on applying their strengths, OTOH trying to manually wring out all inequality from the human species would be as bad an idea as trying to wring out all carbon, oxygen, or nitrogen from human biology, that's not because inequality 'should' exist but because it's insoluble.

@gachzedek Жыл бұрын

Thank you.

@jorb1903 2 ай бұрын

That’s a whole lot of arguments id need to see robust evidence of. And it doesn’t seem to be an unbiased view or what natural selection is. It’s not a “real force.” It’s just evaluating the things that made us survive up until this point. The whole focus on mate selection is odd to me. It’s irrelevant to natural selection whether you’re powerful or attractive to mates, it’s whether or not you take on traits that guarantee your survival and the propagation of those traits to sufficient offspring that it spreads to the rest of or a subset of the species inherently.

@brezgatnik Жыл бұрын

I always get stuck on evolutionary psychology despite hating it, and it always makes me hate being human and feel like the world will never be a better place. i needed this video.

@galek75 Жыл бұрын

What do you mean "better" in a non-self-serving way

@brezgatnik Жыл бұрын

@@galek75 not necessarily. I mean "better" in a less short-sighted self serving sort of way. I don't think there are many of us who can be very happy ourselves when so many people around us are suffering more than they need to.

@galek75 Жыл бұрын

@@brezgatnik It seems like you don't know what I mean. How do you define "better" such that it doesnt already confirm your prejudices?

@brezgatnik Жыл бұрын

@@galek75 i'm not sure what your asking me, stranger. i was just saying thanks to a youtuber for posting a video, i'm not really looking for a philosophy debate or word definition debate.

@galek75 Жыл бұрын

@@brezgatnik So you feel mad because a scientific discipline exists which could change the way we think about humanity? Surely you have actual reasons for this.

@uncanalmenor Жыл бұрын

If we are going to judge theories primarly by what awful people do with them, where does that leave nuclear physics (and most of science and engineering when you think about it)?

@IshaSidi Жыл бұрын

incredible point!

@truthseeker8844 Жыл бұрын

Oh that’s a good one

@neomagneto84 Жыл бұрын

Dawkins and Pinker are...awful people?

@honeyrose7663 Жыл бұрын

Missed the point

@OskarMC-ez8ve 10 ай бұрын

EP have a lot of methodological flaws

@JRay.R Жыл бұрын

Very informative, useful, and unique content…as usual. Also…I was kind of preoccupied by how many doors that room has lol.

@KLayjump Жыл бұрын

Hi Ana! Can you please make a video about attachment styles? P.s: love your work thanks so much ❤️❤️

@dsavkay Жыл бұрын

I greatly admire the topic selection, your opinions and the way you support your opinions by research & listing those references

@botanicalitus4194 Жыл бұрын

@@LNVACVACIn what way? What parts of her critique are wrong and how?

@stevengotts Жыл бұрын

Well researched and argued. Thanks for sharing. you changed my opinion. Keep up the good work.

@TheTariqibnziyad Жыл бұрын

EP is really useful, specifically to help us become aware of the possibilities in which we exhibit behavior while not understanding its origins, this will help you understand that you are just being guided and should take command of your behavior, not conclude that its natural therefore its right And i don't like the argument of : its used by the redpilled therefore its bad, why should we condone a field just because its being misused? And i agree that the "just so story" is the biggest kock against EP, or its us to justify current behavior atleast

@anona2017 11 ай бұрын

I agree that just because it's natural doesn't mean it's ethical. One thing people should learn in every school in my opinion is that humans are great at maladaptive behaviors. I try to teach kids about it and have them think about if something is adaptive and going to help them and others in the long run.

@anona2017 11 ай бұрын

And I also agree that probably any field or anything can be used in someone's mental gymnastics.

@jorb1903 2 ай бұрын

So you’re saying by understanding EP we can know when we’re doing a behavior just because we’re programmed to do it? Ok, is that a bad thing? Say I’m living a happy and altruistic life and it happens to be in line with all of the intended traits from natural selection. What’s wrong with that? Why do I have to “take control” and go against those programmed traits?

@AnimalManA Жыл бұрын

It feels like at the end of the day, we can't know how much of our behavior is determined by our culture and how much of our behavior is determined by our evolved psychology. The only way we could really test it out would be to isolate a child from culture and see how much of his behavior is nature vs how much of it is nurture... but that kind of test wouldn't be ethical obviously, so I don't know if we'll be learning anytime soon how reliable evo-psych really is. Wanted to hear your thoughts on evo-psych for a while now and glad this video finally came out! Thanks for the extra insight.

@holypavonis382 Жыл бұрын

what about identical twins (so with identical DNA) who grew up in totally different environments but ended up to be somwhat if not exactly the same persons ?

@Bilelogist Жыл бұрын

I had concluded this as soon as Evol Psy became popular. So glad you've dropped a fire video on this.

@ollielon5926 Жыл бұрын

Also, a trait may be a by product and had no real evolutionary purpose.

@botanicalitus4194 Жыл бұрын

it doesnt do the field any favors that 99% of the people who are fans of it would not even be able to pass a highschool level biology test

@only_starbrope Ай бұрын

What's the proof of this statistical data?

@vedanshagarwal-rs1fs Жыл бұрын

I am so thankful for the time and effort you put in your videos because personally I don't have that sort of time outside of my work life to dedicate to learning this stuff but I really want to learn it at the same time so a condensed summary + explanation of research is the perfect thing that I can watch. Thanks

@sebastianlassig1247 Жыл бұрын

Well, I'm also appalled by anyone justifying violence or inequality through science. But apart from that I do think, EP can deliver useful insights. The way our mind works is a result of evolution after all, just like the rest of our body. And pointing out, that humans have certain tendencies (i.e. being aggressive) does not mean that those are "right" or ethical. EP can also contribute to explain the etiology of mental disorders, like anxiety e.g. However, I agree that EP hypotheses tend to be pretty fragile, as they can never really be tested.

@Ben-pj8rt Жыл бұрын

I really needed this video, always thought there was something fishy about EP, now I have some good arguments to back up my intuitions. Thanks!

@idonnow2 Жыл бұрын

EP null hypothesis: The observed human behavior is merely the result of a random mutation during human evolution which was not advantegous in any way shape or form, but wasn't detrimental in the long run either and thus simply carried on in the human genome. It's fully impossible to debunk this hypothesis, because EP literally has _nothing_ but hypotheses that require _more_ evidence than the above

@quincygunnerson5670 Жыл бұрын

If it hurts to hear it, look for the truth in it. If it is comforting to hear, look for the lie in it.

@shanereynolds8651 Жыл бұрын

Sometimes things feel icky cus they're wrong!

@shanereynolds8651 Жыл бұрын

@Nomen Nescio it's OK to be gay bro just accept yourself you'll be happier. Promise ❤️

@Rachel-uq1bn Жыл бұрын

So glad you talked about this, I’ve only just come accros all this stuff and it’s kind of concerning 😅

@estehadala9210 Жыл бұрын

Hi Ana, just wondering if you have heard about Chris Williamson channel? He has many podcast interviews on different theories in ep and normally seems very open to conversations on the subject matter. Maybe it would be worth reaching out to him in order to discuss ep critiques in order to expand both your viewers knowledge base on the subject.

@markprothero2666 Жыл бұрын

Epigenetics. Our behaviour is a complex interplay of evolutionary and adaptive factors. Ignoring either is foolish.

@ethanjohnson228 Жыл бұрын

True

@Jemima1010 Жыл бұрын

(I posted this as a reply to someone else but thought it was interested and would love to hear other people’s comments!) We are limited by our genes in terms of what we can do but not determined by them. Genes determine that we can acquire language but not whether I’ll speak French or English. However, just because our genes allowed us to develop language does not mean that it is inside an innate module. Just as we have been driving cars for decades doesn’t mean we must have a Stone Age module which allowed us to drive cars. It was learned in the environment and passed down socially. EP thus sometimes takes for granted that a lot of behaviour is merely learned on the job and likes to insist it’s innate.

@aanghedonia9751 Жыл бұрын

This is excellent timing! I'm currently working on a psychoeducation project on masculinity, and this video lays out many of the necessary critiques for essentialism that I've been looking for. Thank you very much for your work here, Ana!

@tmtb80 11 ай бұрын

I like your name , Aang H. I hope your project worked out!😊

@Crossa Жыл бұрын

I hope you get to interview David Buss! That would be awesome!

@djimrle 8 ай бұрын

Dr. Ana seems like she is honestly trying to argue both sides, but some of the conclusions she comes to I find worrying for a scientist. Condemning someone for trying to better understand science and using the scientific method is wrong in my opinion. Yes EP can be used with malicious intent, but so can a knife. Yet we are still making knives. And just because you cant see the application for something today doesn t make it wrong to explore. And while EP is used by horrible people to justify horrible things, so are many other things. I think that scientists should speak openly about the misuse of their theories and papers and distance themselves from some of the crowd using their work. My final point is that even tho EP deserves a lot of criticism and Ana tried to make an unbiased video with scientific critique, the final product seems ideologically colored in the end. That being said, I appreciate the videos keep it up! Cheers

@apollocabrera1917 8 ай бұрын

Now your using the authority logical fallacy. Just because people who support a theory does not support your political belief system does not mean that the theory is wrong. Math is math. Just because right wing people use math does not mean that math is not correct... eeek. Where's the science?

@sunyl5724 Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for this video. I always hate it when I'm arguing with sexists or homophobes for example and they go back to the stone age to justify their beliefs, while even getting information about that time wrong, which they are basing their entire argument on.

@szkyy5171 11 ай бұрын

Imo this doesn’t really explain or disprove anything in particular, it is pretty much just saying that EP theories can be interpreted in harmful or toxic ways

@dexteryousef2380 11 ай бұрын

as Dr Ana said, humans have evolved a frontal cortex that help us control our subconscious instincts and set new values. we can envision the shape of the society we would like to live in. forming new habits & familiarizing our selves with whatever we think is better for us can overwrite our oldest instincts.

@lyndsaybrown8471 3 ай бұрын

Yeah. Being able to communicate with each other and work together to survive is how we got where we are. Intrinsic to humanity's survival is the ability to understand and compromise.

@claudiac3129 Жыл бұрын

Leaving a comment to boost you in the algorithm. It's the least i can do after having watched so many of your videos. Thanks Ana ❤️

@TinRaTin Жыл бұрын

YES 🙌 YES YES! Now louder for the cheap sits in the back!! So refreshing to listen to a sane person on the internet!!

@abhiklovesbadbitches Жыл бұрын

i feel like you have a personal distaste towards people who support ep, and its kind of coming through in this video. i hope you continue to argue against ideas rather than individuals. if we’re going to talk about problems with EP lets not talk about the non relevant actions that the people referencing EP have done.

@siddhk3591 Жыл бұрын

One more thing that stuck out to me -- perhaps I wasn't listening well -- but she also seemed to be arguing against the conclusions and the implication of it rather than the methodology.

@abhiklovesbadbitches Жыл бұрын

@@siddhk3591 yes, youve put it quite well. implications and conclusions from the same data will differ from person to person

@ethorii 8 ай бұрын

Resistance to EP is almost entirely political. It's usefulness is understanding our motivations and choices. Not accepting EP because it reduces our choices to mostly unconscious programming or seems to be unfair to some groups, is like saying nuclear physics is wrong because you dont like atomic weapons. Reality is reality. It's hard to unravel our political opinions and emotions when taking in information but must be done to come close to understanding reality

@TT-mg1lx Жыл бұрын

Hi Ana compassion focused therapy is grounded in part in evolutionary psych regarding human brains. Curious to hear what your perspective is on how this is integrated within the compassion focused therapy model

@JR-bi9fk Жыл бұрын

This is some of the most impressive and insightful material I've seen on this topic and from your channel. For my part, I've not seen (I haven't looked very hard, to be fair) an EP proponent address the fact that we evolved to participate in socialization. Our evolution was a process of embracing the benefits of cultural and social influences superceding, complementing, augmenting or diminishing evolutionary/genetic influences. It seems like there's a poison pill built into the premise of EP itself, although I think it's still useful to explore those ideas in the context of theoretical anthropology or philosophy. My personal opinion is that EP is mostly an abstract thought experiment masquerading in the gravitas of science, pleading to be taken as canon.

@ryansisters1 11 ай бұрын

This video single handedly disentangled the crux of Jordan Peterson's main arguments. The naturalistic fallacy you describe is essentially what JP is obsessed with, particularly in Maps of Meaning. The thesis of the book is that there are naturally occurring, historical trends of civilizations across time and space, and that because these themes are so prevalent, that they must "ought to be." He also believes that young neoliberals are ignorant to these trends that have stood the test of time, and that they should not try to change the "natural order of things." Thank you for your work Dr. Ana.

@erosamurai 10 ай бұрын

It sounds like your problem with EP is because you are uncomfortable with what it could reveal. Who cares if it might have good or bad implication, but point of studying it is to uncover the truth even if it very uncomfortable and even if someone misuses it's research. It's an evolving study and to downplay it because you are uncomfortable with it is silly.

@carlostdied1184 8 ай бұрын

Call of Cthulhu's second paragraph comes to mind. "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age." Ultimately I think intellectually honest science, _the certain branch in question of which having a correlation to its direct impact on society,_ will be how easy it is for the average person to craft convenient lies and shy away from uncomfortable truths moving forward. Time demarcates the foolish from the wise.

@chiclesdefueg Жыл бұрын

this video is gonna make numbers, good work!

@BSingh-on4qr Жыл бұрын

I think it should still be researched even if we can't find a use in it, but with more disclaimers and stuff

@ngokko1151 Жыл бұрын

Hi Ana, thanks for another great video 😊 I’ve seen both of your book recommendations of the year videos, and I was wondering if you could make a video on your favorite psychology books, thank you! 😊

@trinketmage8145 Жыл бұрын

Supposing he were up for it, would you be willing to talk with Professor Gad Saad about this? I'm sure he'd love to rebut these criticisms if given an oppurtunity.

@trinketmage8145 Жыл бұрын

@@lordsneed9418 That's a leading question, mate. Ana is not a leftoid. That a person aligns more closely left politically does not always imply they do so without thinking.

@brianmeen2158 Жыл бұрын

I’m sure David bus or Gad Saad would love to talk to Ana about this but I don’t think Ana would be willing to do it for obvious reasons

@al.winfrancis Жыл бұрын

Did you say "Bing Bang"? 😂 Anyway, great video. It was really easy to understand which is unlike so many other videos that try to cover this topic.

@samco63 Жыл бұрын

Haven’t watched this yet, but evo psych was big when I was growing up as a teen, 15 years ago, so looking forward to hearing about it. I always felt so alone in my counter arguemeny a

@richmondaddai-duah 13 күн бұрын

Who can't reverse the is/ought falacy,the whole point of David Humes argument,is that ought's in a naturalistic universe can't exist.

@atreyuXx2 Жыл бұрын

Side note, did you see that you were featured on The Take KZfaq channel?!! 🥰

@rexqt5337 Жыл бұрын

30 min of coping 😂 it is what it is

@jaytsecan 25 күн бұрын

Thank you very much for a fantastic and very informative video!

@paullotto6403 9 ай бұрын

Hi Dr Ana. I'd really like to see you debate someone like Jen Howk on this subject. I don't agree with everything EP teaches, but it has helped me make sense of alot of things that no other psychological has and I think to overlook it completely is a mistake.

@stanleyklein524 Жыл бұрын

A clinical criterion of EP is asking it to answer to an unjustified standard. What is the clinical implications of the procedural/perceptual memory (sic) distinction?

@justanothernick3984 Жыл бұрын

I've been listening a lot to Chris Williamson over the past few years and I think it started from a Jordan Peterson cult-thing. But to see these people blindly conforming to these values is fascinating to me. That is why I appreciate this video as a minute counteract to the rapidly growing red-pill ideology, not only online but in the world as well. I don't see any use in EvoPsych other than removing the responsibility of both partners in a relationship. And maintaining a healthy relationship is one of the most valuable things in a persons life but it's really easy to screw up and by owning up to one's own mistakes and trying to improve instead of pointing fingers is, in my opinion, the way to approach a two-way, mutual relationship, be it platonic or a romantic one.

@apollocabrera1917 8 ай бұрын

Regarding "SA" being an evolutionary advantage that makes offsprings stronger (?), it's a really narrow scope just like the ability to "erase" the reproductive competition, or having 100 partners as a survival advantage. There are other survival factors that would greatly or somewhat diminish certain behaviors especially within the group or social context.

@smu4242 Жыл бұрын

this was pretty eye opening, thank you

@carolinaaa99 Жыл бұрын

You're brilliant Ana, the just-so stories were so eye-opening!! Working backwards to find evidence to justify one's hypotheses does not fit the scientific method...

@ZePangsta Жыл бұрын

It sounds exactly like the scientific method(s), for its what they do in evolutionary biology for animals. But the key difference is that a biologist can actually do experiments to test their ‘just so’ story hypotheses. Meaning they can actually manipulate conditions to isolate what actually caused it, rather than having a tautological 50-50 hypothesis. That said, I don’t think evolutionary theory is the best fit for explaining humans, let alone their methods (for ethical reasons).

@rayleazle 11 ай бұрын

You are asking the wrong question. Just like nature vs nurture debate, EP and SP are highly interlinked and neither should be studied without in depth analysis and understanding of the other.

@BrianWilcox1976 Жыл бұрын

Dawkins and Pinkert are bad apples?! Get outta here!

@leucol 4 ай бұрын

EP helps me in managing relationships.

@luismartins2791 Жыл бұрын

Great video. Maybe my favourite so far

@dianabaca7901 Жыл бұрын

Hahaha I love your honesty at the end of the video. But also the great information you provide!

@jorb1903 2 ай бұрын

Just wanna say this is a great and well researched video and that most of the commenters don’t seem to understand that natural selection isn’t a progressive process working towards something. It’s literally just an explanation for how we as animals evolved to where we are, because they’re the ones that survived! They’re not better for it, they just happened to live and pass those traits on and here we are! There’s nothing worse or better about a trait that was born out of natural selection (assuming we could even directly link that which I’m dubious about), vs one we learned socially. It just seems like a basis for defending behaviors that are socially deviant behaviors because “genetics.” They’re not understanding WHY you bring up red pilled guys so much. It’s a prominent example of why EP doesn’t have a lot of real world value and what it can look like when misapplied. Even if we could prove that genetics wants me to catcall women, it doesn’t mean we should 🤷

@dingedetoi Жыл бұрын

hi, ana! I was recently talking to a friend about HSP(highly sensitive person). It turns out you can "self-diagnose" if you are an HSP or not. I know it is not in the DSM so it is not an illness per se, but isn't it dangerous for people to think that they are HSP but in reality, it might be something more serious?

@fabinhobighetti Жыл бұрын

Hey there, Ana! I really liked your video, although you did spend some time in its first part dealing a little too much on the scholars and not their theses (which could easily make many pull the "Ad Hominem" card and discard your video right away), and that might be a deal-breaker for some people that might stop watching the video right there and not see the real critique in the rest of it. Putting that aside, I'm actually here to say thank you for the video and give my perspective on something you brought up, which is: what would justify PE if it's purely theoretical, if you don't want to fall in the naturalistic fallacy and if you can't give it some clinical apolication? I think the answer might be anthropology. Although we lack many evidences of our ancestors and anthropologists are quite aware of it, I believe PE might be a helpful tool to shed some light on the origin of many cultures and primitive behaviours that are still unanswered in the field of exclusively social science.

@kunalchaudhari3784 Жыл бұрын

Subscribed ! 👍

@InSearchofManHOOD Жыл бұрын

Thank you for educating me on some of the criticisms of EP, I appreciate your detail analysis of the topic. Appreciate that you very transparent in your position as it related to the topic but I felt you were still fair and admitted were EP had some validity.

@charlescomely 6 ай бұрын

You lost me when you referred to pinker and Dawkins, two truly great thinkers by any estimation, as “a few bad apples” just because they don’t concur with your woke world view. Ridiculous.

@elie6769 11 ай бұрын

There are biological and hormonal differences but no evidence for behaviour. Humans are animals but we are also complex self harm etc. 20:20. We are less instinct driven. Cats want companionship and attachment not just food and money. Just so story

@DudeDesi07 8 ай бұрын

Hey thanks for making this video! As some one who has been suckered into the manospherian version of EP, i have been in search of materials that can academically criticize and scrutinize it.

@shescalledirina Жыл бұрын

So glad you did this video, growing up in Romania, I feel EP is ingrained in society. Have been in the UK for 12 years and I'm still trying to shake and unlearn some EP beliefs. Very helpful 😊

@NoNamesLeft0102 Жыл бұрын

I'm always suspicious when someone says that a particular observation, set of observations, or line of thought excuses an action without presenting anything from within that is agreed upon by the proponent which takes any action that is deemed reprehensible and would render it lacking in the qualities that make it reprehensible.

@extraordinarilyuglycouch9410 5 ай бұрын

I've always appreciated your light touch when it comes to culture war issues, but I do want to just caution a little bit: having appeared on JBP's podcast is not a fair indication of being "problematic", and being accused of various -phobias, or having an open letter written to you by a bunch of students over a culture war issue, are not necessarily indicators of moral failure either.