Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:01:51.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Confronting Variation in the Social and Behavioral Sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Stephen M. Downes
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I pose problems for the views that human nature should be the object of study in the social and behavioral sciences and that a concept of human nature is needed to guide research in these sciences. I proceed by outlining three research programs in the social sciences, each of which confronts aspects of human variation. Next, I present Elizabeth Cashdan and Grant Ramsey’s related characterizations of human nature. I go on to argue that the research methodologies they each draw on are more productive resources for social scientists than their competing characterizations of human nature.

Type
Putting Pressure on Human Nature
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 83 , Issue 5 , December 2016 , pp. 909 - 920
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I would like to thank the participants at our PSA 2014 Symposium session for helpful comments on the presentation this paper was based on, especially Matt Haber, Maria Kronfeldner, Tim Lewens, Edouard Machery, and Grant Ramsey. My colleague Jim Tabery and three anonymous referees also made very helpful comments on the manuscript, for which I am very grateful.

References

Barrett, H. C. 2015. The Shape of Thought: How Mental Adaptations Evolve. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D. E. 1991. Human Universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Buller, D. 2005. Adapting Minds: Evolutionary Psychology and the Persistent Quest for Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cashdan, E. 2008. “Waist-to-Hip Ratio across Cultures: Trade-offs between Androgen- and Estrogen-Dependent Traits.” Current Anthropology 49 (6): 1099–1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashdan, E. 2013. “What Is a Human Universal? Human Behavioral Ecology and Human Nature.” In Arguing about Human Nature, ed. Downes, S. M. and Machery, E., 71–80. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. J. 1981. “Can Human Irrationality Be Experimentally Demonstrated?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4:317–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. M., and Carlson, J. A.. 1970. “A Cross-Cultural Study of the Strength of the Müller-Lyer Illusion as a Function of Attentional Factors.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 16 (3): 403–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dresser, R. 1992. “Wanted Single, White Male for Medical Research.” Hastings Center Report 22 (1): 24–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dupre, J. 1998. “Normal People.” Social Research 65 (2): 221–48.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. 1983. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Futuyma, D. J. 1998. Evolutionary Biology. 3rd ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.Google Scholar
Griffiths, P. E. 2011. “Our Plastic Nature.” In Transformations of Lamarckism: From Subtle Fluids to Molecular Biology, ed. Gissis, S. B. and Jablonka, E., 319–30. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Henrich, J. 2008. “A Cultural Species.” In Explaining Culture Scientifically, ed. Brown, M., 184–210. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S., and Norenzayan, A.. 2010. “The Weirdest People in the World.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33:61–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hull, D. L. 1986. “On Human Nature.” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 2:3–13.Google Scholar
Jahoda, G. 1966. “Geometric Illusions and Environment: A Study in Ghana.” British Journal of Psychology 57 (1–2): 193–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kronfeldner, M., Roughley, N., and Toepfer, G.. 2014. “Recent Work on Human Nature: Beyond Traditional Essences.” Pihlosophy Compass 9:642–52.Google Scholar
Lewens, T. 2012. “Human Nature: The Very Idea.” Philosophy and Technology 25:459–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewens, T. 2015. Cultural Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, E. 2008. “A Plea for Human Nature.” Philosophical Psychology 21:321–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, E. 2012. “Reconceptualizing Human Nature: Response to Lewens.” Philosophy and Technology 25:475–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, E. Forthcoming. “Human Nature.” In How Biology Shapes Philosophy: New Foundations for Naturalism, ed. D. Livingstone Smith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. 1986. A Border Dispute: The Place of Logic in Psychology. Cambdrige, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ramsey, G. 2013. “Human Nature in a Post-essentialist World.” Philosophy of Science 80:983–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuels, R. 2012. “Science and Human Nature.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 70:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, M. H., Campbell, D. T., and Herskovits, M. J.. 1966. The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception. Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill.Google Scholar
Singh, D. 1993. “Adaptive Significance of Female Physical Attractiveness: Role of Waist-to-Hip Ratio.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65:293–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, D., and Luis, S.. 1995. “Ethnic and Gender Consensus for the Effect of Waist-to-Hip Ratio on Judgments of Women’s Attractiveness.” Human Nature 6:51–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sober, E. 1980. “Evolution, Population Thinking and Essentialism.” Philosophy of Science 47:350–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. 1999. Who Is Rational? Studies of Individual Differences in Reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stich, S. P. 1990. The Fragmentation of Reason. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tabery, J. 2014. Beyond Versus: The Struggle to Define the Interaction of Nature and Nurture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tooby, J., and Cosmides, L.. 1990. “On the Universality of Human Nature and the Uniqueness of the Individual.” Journal of Personality 58:17–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tooby, J., and Cosmides, L. 2005. “Conceptual Foundations of Evolutionary Psychology.” In The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, ed. Buss, D., 5–67. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Wason, P. C. 1966. “Reasoning.” In New Horizons in Psychology, ed. Foss, B., 135–51. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
Wason, P. C., and Johnson-Laird, P. N.. 1972. Psychology of Reasoning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Yu, D. W., and Shepard, G. H.. 1998. “Is Beauty in the Eye of the Beholder?” Nature 396:321–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed