More handpicked essays just for you.
The evolutionary theory chapter 2 psychology
Essay written on evolutionary psychology
Genetics, evolutionary psychology, and behavior essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Kim: This discussion question response is being directed to a “no” respondent simply because there are insufficient students in the course with surnames M-Z. Although Bins and her classmate, Chouraeshkenazi, have both responded with “no” relative to this week’s discussion question asking whether evolution provides an adequate explanation for psychological concepts, she seeks to respectfully talk through some of Chouraeshkenazi’s argument. In this regard, Bins is interested in Chouraeshkenazi’s response to her response.
Chouraeshkenazi argued that religious and socio-political ideologies seem to be on a collision course with evolutionary psychology, leading to plenty of negative reactions to the latter. It is acknowledged that Christian Fundamentalists are bound to take issue with evolutionary
…show more content…
psychology simply because it has “evolution” in its name.
It is also acknowledged that the majority of Christian Fundamentalists are largely unaware what precisely evolutionary psychology is. According to Buss (2009), the inauguration of evolutionary psychology proclaimed the realization of Darwin’s vision for the future accenting natural selection. Buss also declared (Grace, 2001) that evolutionary psychology’s central theme is to discover, report, and explain the nature of cognitive organs and to communicate their function(s). Critics of evolutionary psychology not only take issue with this discipline’s Darwinian underpinnings, they rebuke its human nature universality position. Even Christian psychologists are uncomfortable with evolutionary psychology’s claims. This is all, indeed, important to know. But, the bolder argument, in conjunction with the worth of evolutionary psychology, zeroes in on its lackluster science. Looren de Jong and Steen (1998), Gould (2000) and Rose and Rose (2000), all well respected scientists in their own rights, have dismissed its principles, emphasizing that EP is
mostly a false notion that is also noxious and dangerous (Grace, 2001). Academics and scientists alike condemn EP because of its untenable theoretical and metatheoretical viewpoints and because evolutionary psychology insists on using biological concepts (Grace, 2001), when it is ill equipped to do so. Because of these scientific weaknesses (and many others), evolutionary psychology cannot be used to explain psychological concepts. If the foundation is made of sand, the structure built upon it will inevitably teeter-totter. References Buss, D. M. (2009). The great struggles of life: Darwin and the emergence of evolutionary psychology. American Psychologist, 64(2), 140-148. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1037/a0013207 Grace, C. R. (2001). The pleistocene mind: A critical review of evolutionary psychology, and an introduction to intelligent design psychology. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 29(4), 289. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/223677921?accountid=8289
Shlomo Yitzchaki is one of the most influential rabbis in Jewish history. Born in Troyes, France in 1040, Shlomo Yitzchaki grew up Jewish and learned from his father. When his father died in 1046, Shlomo Yitzchaki lived with his mother until 1057 when he married his wife and joined the Yeshiva of Yaakov Ben-Yakar. Since then he has become a staple in Jewish learning and Jewish history. Today we know him as Rashi. Rashi was and is very influential to Jewish scholars because of the way his commentary spread, the simplicity and variation of his commentary, and the controversy of his method that is still discussed in modern times.
Dr. A. Charles Ware describes the recent misuse of scriptures that had been used to support and propagate racism. He brings them into the light while taking an honest look at the churches as well which reveals that racism isn’t limited to just evolutionists. The Ku Klux Klan, a group that identifies their organization as being a group of Christians with great moral and good Christian behavior, has brought terror and agony for the minority groups of the United State. An overview on genetics, natural selection, and the theory of evolution gives scientific facts while providing biblical truths that proves that we are all One Race One
This paper will be reviewing the book “Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: an introduction to worldview issues, philosophical foundations and models of integration, by David N. Entwistle. As the title states, this book discusses how to integrate psychology and theology. It also dives into why it is so important to be able to integrate the two. Entwistle explains that just because the two are different does not mean they should be separated, and that we have to use both our worldviews. “Weaving together perspectives from psychology and Christian theology can help us understand and appreciate humanity more fully than we could either perspective alone.”
A framework of five models is shared: Enemies, Spies, Colonialists, Neutral Parties, and Allies. The Enemies model either associates no relationship between Christianity and psychology. The Spies model focuses on what works best for them from both Christianity and psychology. Colonialists use psychology only to the degree that it fits theology. Neutral Parties model holds that psychology and theology are independent with possible correlation between findings of the two, however that is about as far as one discipline may encroach on the other. Allies, the model considered by Entwistle, acknowledges that while psychology and theology are separate, they are still dependent, based upon the underlying unity of truth of God’s written word and His Works (Entwistle, 2010). The underpinning of the integrative approach to psychology and Christianity appears to be that of anthropology; this may be seen in the two books, God g...
Further still Mayr makes the attempt at understanding the phenomena of why man cannot agree to having evolved from the same common ancestor as the wild animal the chimpanzee. It may seem that, according to Mayr, that man's own inability to come to terms with his own evolution, stems from a feeling of not wanting to be reduced to just another animal in the chain of life. For hundreds of years, as Mayr examines, religion after religion has always placed man on some sort of pedestal, superior to all other species. And when Darwin confronted the world with possibly another truth, he shattered man's perception of himself. Even today, a hundred years after Darwin first challenged the accepted order of man as a divine being, Mayr still raises controversy in the debate over man as being just another animal undergoing a constant evolutionary change like all other animals.
David Entwistle’s Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity David Entwistle's (2010) Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity is geared more towards Christians with conservative evangelical views and provides the reader with an outline to different worldview disputes and truth-seeking groundwork that surround the connection that underlies psychology and theology. In addition to analyzing the possible connection between psychology and theology, Entwisle discusses the consideration of integrating Christian faith with the practice of psychology. “Christian understandings of person-hood, the purpose of human life, our need for God, and the ethical teachings of Christian faith are integral to psychology, not merely parallel to it” (p. 199). Entwistle’s viewpoint on this matter is clearly stated. He believes that it is necessary for theology and psychology to be integrated in order to fully understand human nature.
Evolution, otherwise sometimes called the “Devil’s hoax,” is a controversial topic that ignites a rather substantial reaction, particularly in Christian religious communities. Through the years, the heated debate over whether God or evolution is right has become a major breaking point for people of faith. Evolution suggests that God didn’t miraculously place humans in their present form on Earth and that the Bible isn’t the ultimate scientific truth. In this world, science is pitted against religious faith, suggesting neither can exist mutually with the other. The Lutheran church has taken it’s own stance in the controversy, making a muddy splash in a worldly puddle between the real dirt of science and the sanctified Holy waters of faith. In doing so, the church provides explanations of figurative language and contextual issues that show how the two are not one in the same and offer a world where science and faith can freely live side-by-side, happily ever after.
Keith Henson a writer in evolutionary psychology once said that “Evolution acts slowly. Our psychological characteristics today are those that promoted reproductive success in the ancestral environment.” Evolution was first introduced by a naturalist by the name of Charles Darwin. Darwin had written an autobiography, at the age of 50, On the Origin of Species (1859) explaining how species evolve through time by natural selection; this theory became known as Darwinism. “Verlyn Klinkenborg, who writes editorials and vignettes on science and nature for the “New York Times”” (Muller 706) questions Darwin’s theory in one of his essays he wrote called Darwin at 200: The Ongoing Force of His Unconventional Idea. Both articles talk about the theory of Darwinism, but the authors’ use different writing techniques and were written in different time periods. Darwin himself writes to inform us on what the theory is, where as Klinkenborg goes on to explain why Darwinism is just a theory. Today, evolution is still a very controversial topic among many. It comes up in several topics that are discussed everyday such as in politics, religion and education.
The purpose of this academic piece is to critically discuss The Darwinist implication of the evolutionary psychological conception of human nature. Charles Darwin’s “natural selection” will be the main factor discussed as the theory of evolution was developed by him. Evolutionary psychology is the approach on human nature on the basis that human behavior is derived from biological factors and there are psychologists who claim that human behavior is not something one is born with but rather it is learned. According to Downes, S. M. (2010 fall edition) “Evolutionary psychology is one of the many biologically informed approaches to the study of human behavior”. This goes further to implicate that evolutionary psychology is virtually based on the claims of the human being a machine that can be programmed to do certain things and because it can be programmed it has systems in the body that allow such to happen for instance the nervous system which is the connection of the spinal cord and the brain and assists in voluntary and involuntary motor movements.
Evolutionary psychology is a specialist field within the spectrum of psychological enquiry, which seeks to examine and understand some of the predominant reasoning behind the concept of why the human species, whilst biologically similar to other species on the planet, is so very distinct in terms of intelligence and mental progression; demonstrated by the multifaceted and complex social structures we have created. Primary to this domain of evolutionary psychological interest is the notion of ‘theory of mind’, which was developed and advocated by Premack and Woodruff (1978), and has been the topic of fierce discussion and analysis since. It has resulted in manifold research studies and commentaries, regarding the topic, from an extensive range of sources within the academic field of psychology. This essay intends to explore the concept of theory of mind, using examples and research studies to fathom its relevance, application and significance within evolutionary psychology as a whole.
The ongoing scientific investigation of how exactly evolution occurred and continues to occur has been an argumentative idea amongst society since Darwin first articulated it over a century ago. The scientific basis of evolution accounts for happenings that are also essential concerns of religion; both religion and science focus on the origins of humans and of biological diversity. For instance, in the reading “Truth Cannot Contradict Truth,” Pope John Paul II, addressing the Pontifical Academy of Science, discussed the matter of God as creator of man. The Pope explains that men cannot relate to animals because men are superior. The reasoning for that is because God created humans under his likeness. What the church is saying about mankind contradicts with the scientific evidence scientists have found on human evolution. By analyzing the different scientific approaches, one will be able to grasp a clear understanding that the theory of evolution by natural selection conflicts with the Judeo-Christian worldview of God as creator.
Tooby, J., Cosmides, L., & Barkow, J. (1992). The Adapted Mind: evolutionary psychology and the
Wiester, John L. 1993. The Real Meaning of Evolution. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 45 (3): 182-86.
The book by Douglas Kenrick concerns evolutionary psychology, which is the study of evolution-based psychological traits. If you have a religious-based antipathy towards evolution, reading this book would be a total waste. If you accept the fact that humans have evolved over millions of years, reading this book may provide you with wonderful insights into human nature. Kenrick assumes that the science of evolution is beyond dispute and scarcely mentions Charles Darwin. But he does aggressively defend evolutionary psychology – “we claim that the evolutionary perspective can integrate psychology, economics, political science, and anthropology,
Whitehouse H. 2008. Cognitive Evolution and Religion; Cognition and Religious Evolution. Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology n. s. Vol. 3. No. .3