Macdougall-Shackleton's Levels Of Analysis

In the article “levels of analysis revisited”, MacDougall-Shackleton discusses why it is important in differentiating between the levels of analysis and levels of reductionism, specifically ultimate functions and proximate mechanisms, when constructing research questions and forming hypotheses. This is very important when dealing with debates in evolutionary psychology because if there is no clear distinction between the two levels of analysis, is it likely that counterfactual arguments can be formed. To conclude this essay, I will discuss why I agree with McDougall-Shakleton on the necessity of clearly differentiating between the levels of analysis and why a thorough comprehension of both cause and function is required to understand behaviour.

At multiple points in the article, he reiterates that neither ultimate or proximate explanations are superior to the other and are not necessarily mutually exclusive alternatives. Firstly, MacDougall-Shakleton assesses a number of concepts that deal with levels of analysis and seeks to explain the differences between them. According to MacDougall-Shakleton, the term levels of analysis is also often cited as levels of reductionism. He distinguish the difference between ultimate and proximate factors by stating that ultimate factors are the variables that are responsible for determining likelihood of survival of the offspring and reproductive success of the individual and it’s offspring. Ultimate explanation is essentially the “why” an organism behaves the way it does, which includes adaptive functions or the evolutionary history of the organism. On the other hand, proximate factors are those that explain biological function in terms of immediate physiological or environmental factors. While ultimate explanation is the “why” an organism behaves the way it does, proximate explanation is considered the “how” an organism is able to do what it does. Proximate explanation includes the mechanistic causations and development of the

It is essential to recognize that the use of an integrative approach is not without uncertainty and to thoroughly assess the mutual exclusivity of the two hypotheses. Also, although two hypotheses are from the same level of analysis, they may not be exclusive. Figuring out whether alternative hypotheses are mutually exclusive alternatives or not, is necessary to avoid false debates similar to past instances. Furthermore, just because ultimate and proximate levels do not directly compete does not mean they should have nothing to do with each