Evolutionary psychology is one of many biologically informed approaches to the study of human behavior. Along with cognitive psychologists, evolutionary psychologists propose that much, if not all, of our behavior can be explained by appeal to internal psychological mechanisms. What distinguishes evolutionary psychologists from many cognitive psychologists is the proposal that the relevant internal mechanisms are adaptations—products of natural selection—that helped our ancestors get around the world, survive and reproduce. To understand the central claims of evolutionary psychology we require an understanding of some key concepts in evolutionary biology, cognitive psychology, philosophy of science and philosophy of mind. Philosophers are interested in evolutionary psychology for a number of reasons. For philosophers of science —mostly philosophers of biology—evolutionary psychology provides a critical target. There is a broad consensus among philosophers of science that evolutionary psychology is a deeply flawed enterprise. For philosophers of mind and cognitive science evolutionary psychology has been a source of empirical hypotheses about cognitive architecture and specific components of that architecture. Philosophers of mind are also critical of evolutionary psychology but their criticisms are not as all-encompassing as those presented by philosophers of biology. Evolutionary psychology is also invoked by philosophers interested in moral psychology both as a source of empirical hypotheses and as a critical target.

/pdf/stanford-encyclopedia-of-philosophy-1wqoykisq0.pdf

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

http://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/29535/korthagen%20-%20in%20search%20of%20the%20essence.pdf?sequence=1

In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic approach in teacher education

Entrepreneurial passion plays an important role in entrepreneurship, but theoretical understanding of what it is and what it does is lacking. We build on fragmented and disparate extant work to conceptualize the nature of entrepreneurial passion associated with salient entrepreneurial role identities. We also theorize the mechanisms of the experience of entrepreneurial passion that provide coherence to goal-directed cognitions and behaviors during the pursuit of entrepreneurial effectiveness.

/pdf/the-nature-and-experience-of-entrepreneurial-passion-3qgvttpiz4.pdf

The nature and experience of entrepreneurial passion

What is the meaning of Africa and of being African? What is and what is not African philosophy? Is philosophy part of Africanism ? These are the kind of fundamental questions which this book addresses. North America: Indiana U Press

The Invention of Africa: Gnosis, Philosophy and the Order of Knowledge

Selection by consequences is a causal mode found only in living things, or in machines made by living things. It was first recognized in natural selection, but it also accounts for the shaping and maintenance of the behavior of the individual and the evolution of cultures. In al three of these fields, it replaces explanations based on the causal modes of classical mechanics. The replacement is strongly resisted. Natural selection has now made its case, but similar delays in recognizing the role of selection in the other fields could deprive us of valuable help in solving the problems which confront us.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/213/4507/501.full.pdf

Selection by Consequences.

Knowing and Being: Essays by Michael Polanyi.

The Knower and the Known

1959 will find the majority of Western biologists assenting with renewed enthusiasm to the basic principles enunciated a century ago in The Origin of Species. But there continues to be an heretical minority, and, moreover, the heretics speak with authority and vigour. When, in turn, the orthodox pause to answer the dissenters’ arguments, they offer an illuminating paradigm of scientific controversy: illuminating both for a study of the nature of scientific disputes in general and for the epistemological problems inherent in evolutionary controversy in particular.

Two evolutionary theories (ii)

Is life different from the non-living? If so, how? And how, in that case, does biology as the study of living things differ from other sciences? These questions are traced through an exploration of episodes in the history of biology and philosophy. The book begins with Aristotle, then moves on to Descartes, comparing his position with that of Harvey. In the eighteenth century the authors consider Buffon and Kant. In the nineteenth century the authors examine the Cuvier-Geoffroy debate, pre-Darwinian geology and natural theology, Darwin and the transition from Darwin to the revival of Mendelism. Two chapters deal with the evolutionary synthesis and such questions as the species problem, the reducibility or otherwise of biology to physics and chemistry, and the problem of biological explanation in terms of function and teleology. The final chapters reflect on the implications of the philosophy of biology for philosophy of science in general.

https://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/43801/frontmatter/9780521643801_frontmatter.pdf

The Philosophy of Biology: An Episodic History

by N. Eldredge and M. Grene, Columbia University Press, 7992. $46.00 hbk 1242 pages) ISBN 0 231 07946 X Aristotle argued that ‘as each of the parts of the body, like every other in- strument, is for the sake of some purpose, viz. some action, it is evi- dent that the body as a whole must exist for the sake of some complex action”. His reasoning remains valid, even if the complex action modern biologists have in mind is more likely to be ultimate reproductive success than his ultimate cause. As an example, the foraging for food by a Drosophila larva and an adult’s al- location of materials to gametes are different sorts of immediate actions, but the complex action to which they are both subordinate is repro- ductive success. For any attribute of any organism to be an adaptation, it is necessary and sufficient that it normally contribute to this complex action. Reproductive success thus becomes the final conceptual device of adaptationist explanation. Eldredge and Grene reject this sort of reasoning, which they label ‘ultra- Darwinism’. Only explicitly procrea- tive functions, not those related to nutrition and survival, should be seen as for the sake of reproduction. Evolutionary theory would be im- proved by a consistent conceptual separation of the reproductive from the economic, a term they prefer to ecological in this context. Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick* are taken to task for explaining territoriality in the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) by its contribution to reproduction in a future season or future year, because most of the time it merely enhances feeding. The two categories of adaptation are viewed as important because they give rise to the two different hierarchies of biological organiz- ation. Economic adaptations underlie an ecological hierarchy that ranges from the local population to the glo- bal ecosystem. Reproductive adapta- tions underlie a genealogical hierar- chy from the local deme through ever more inclusive clades to the planetary biota. The authors want more attention to be given to the his- tory of communities and ecosys- tems, although they emphasize that such entities do not evolve or adapt in the same sense as mendelian popu- lations They state that all reproduc- tive adaptations evolve by sexual selection and maintain that this is Darwin’s original concept and is widely acceptable to current workers. Thus, they attribute a vixen’s defense of her cubs to sexual selection. The book contains some annoying errors and counter-factual impli- cations. It gives the impression, in discussing both genealogical and ecological hierarchies, that the population structures and develop- mental patterns of higher terrestrial animals and plants are the very gen- eral rule. This is surprising, in view of Eldredge’s expertise on a major marine group. It downplays the great variation shown by life history pat- terns and ontogenetic niche shifts. It maintains that cannibalism is rare in nature and largely limited to filial in- fanticide. Recent field work3-6 gives quite a different impression. Large piscivorous fishes can carry canni- balism to the point of multilevel food chains within a single population’. Discussions of insect eusociality make it dependent on the special genetic relationships in monandrous haplodiploid colonies and ignore the reduced kinship levels in multiply inseminated or multiple- queen colonies. They propose a close genetic parallel between insect colonies and those of asexually pro- duced bryozoans and siphonophores and then contrast these with mam- malian genetic and social systems. They thereby ignore the fact that hymenopteran egg production is just as meiotic as mammalian, and therefore provides for within-colony genetic conflict. They ignore termites. I have many conceptual conflicts with Eldredge and Grene that are re- ally matters of scientific opinion and philosophy. They see speciation (origin of new mate-recognition sys- tems) as the crucial event in biotic evolution. I prefer a broader concept of cladogenesis. I agree with their assessment of the importance of stasis in the fossil record, but not with their explanation of it. Most the weaknesses they find in contemporary evolutionary thinking I regard as strengths. These are not points to belabor here, especially since I recently belabored them elsewhere*. Despite the ways I think that Eldredge and Grene are in error, I can recognize that they make many valid and original points. They provide a well-reasoned discussion of the complex topic of biological (and in- stitutional) individuality and related phenomena of asexually generated colonies. They take the reader through a stimulating and informative historical tour from Descartes through Weismann to recent work by Buss, Sober and many others. They propose what strike me as promising ideas on human sociality and its relationship to language capability and our spe- cial brand of altricial development.

Marjorie Grene

Papers

Knowing and Being: Essays by Michael Polanyi.

The Knower and the Known

Two evolutionary theories (ii)

The Philosophy of Biology: An Episodic History

Interactions: The Biological Context of Social Systems