John Tooby and Leda Cosmides: Evolutionary Psychology and the Mismeasure of Interdiscipline
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48160/18532330me8.178Keywords:
interdiscipline, evolution, dialectics, ideology, evolutionary psychologyAbstract
The term “interdiscipline” has been coming into use with increasing frequency. An accurate characterization of this term must contain a historical analyses regarding the origins and development of disciplines. Historically speaking, disciplinarization of knowledge has been a result of efficientist, and ideological criteria, all of which might be reproduced in the construction of false interdisciplines, particularly in life sciences. Evolutionary Psychology is an example of such a false interdiscipline in theory of evolution. This is particularly clear in the works by Tooby and Cosmides. These authors, attempt to fuse some previously existing branches of biology, in order to build a new explanation about human behavior. But their attempt fails as they lack of a relational conception and, instead, they put into practice an essentialist methodology that ascribe to a fundamental biological and genetic unity, the properties that will express in all the levels of analyses including the behavioral and culturalones. This is conceived as occurring by means of a one-directional transmission of information processes. Due to this, their so-pretended interdisciplinarity, actually becomes another ideological and reductionist re-disciplinarization.The construction of an interdisciplinary biology must get rid of these ideologies, considering disciplines as dialectical interpenetrated transitions, without rigid essences, and without ontological and predetermined analytical hierarchies.
References
Althusser, L. (1988),Ideología y aparatos ideológicos del Estado. Freud y Lacan, Buenos Aires: Nueva Visión.
Bailey, D.H., Durante, K.M. y D.C. Geary (2011), “Men’s Perception of Women’s Attractiveness is Calibrated to Relative Mate Value and Dominance of the Women’s Partner”, Evolution and Human Behavior 32: 138-146.
Buss, D.M. y D.P. Schmidt (1993), “Sexual Strategies Theory, An Evolutionary Perspective on Human Mating”, Psychological Review 100: 204-232.
Buss, D.M. (eds.) (2005), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Carnap, R. (1965), “Psicología en lenguaje fisicalista”, en Ayer, A.J. (ed.), El positivismo lógico, México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, pp. 171-204.
Dunbar, M. y L. Barrett (eds.) (2007), The Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Engels, F. ([1893]1997), “Carta a Franz Mehring, 14 de julio de 1893”, en Moore, S., Crítica de la Democracia Capitalista, México: Siglo XXI, p. 95.
Farrel, K.N., Luzzeti, T. y S. van den Have (eds.) (2013), Beyond Reductionism, A Passion for Interdisciplinarity, London: Routledge.
Fonkenthal, M. (2001), Interdisciplinarity: Towardthe Definition of a Metadiscipline?, New York: Peter Lang.
Frodman, R., Klein, J.T., Mitohuan, C. y J.B. Holbrook (eds.) (2010), The Handbook of Interdisciplinarity, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
García, R. (2007), Sistemas complejos, conceptos, método y fundamentación espistemológica de la investigación interdisciplinaria, México: Gedisa.
Gould, S.J. (1981), La falsa medida del hombre, Barcelona: Antoni Bosch.
Hahn, E. (2000),“Contribución a la crítica de la conciencia burguesa”, en Lenk, K.(ed.), El concepto de ideología, Buenos Aires: Amorrortu, pp.123-136.
Jablonka, E. y M. Lamb (2005), Evolution in Four Dimensions, Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life, Cambdidge, MA: MIT Press.
Klein, J.T. (1990), Interdisciplinarity, History, Theory and Practice, Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Klein, J.T. (1996), Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities and Interdisciplinarities, Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
Kockelmans, J.J. (1979), Interdiscplinarity and Higher Education, London:The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Kosick, K. (1967), Dialéctica de lo concreto, México: Grijalbo.
Levins, R.(2007),“Strategies of Abstraction”, en Lewontin, R. y R. Levins, Biology under the Influence: Dialectical Essayson Ecology, Agriculture and Health, New York: Monthly Review Press, pp. 149-166.
Levins, R. y R. Lewontin (1985), “Conclusion, Dialectics”, en Levins, R. y R. Lewontin, The Dialectical Biologist, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 267-288.
Lewontin, R. (1985), “The Organism as Object and Subject of Evolution”, Scientia 118:63-82. (Reimpreso en Levins, R. y R. Lewontin, The Dialectical Biologist, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 85-106.)
Lewontin, R. (2000), The Triple Helix,Gene, Organism and Environment, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lewontin, R. (2001), “Gene, Organism and Environment”, en Oyama, S., Griffits, P.E. y R.D. Gray (eds.), Cycles of Contingency, Developmental Systems and Evolution, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 59-66.
Lewontin, R., Rose, S.y L. Kamin (1984), No está en los genes, racismo, genética e ideología, México: CONACULTA.
Lukacks, G. ([1923]1969), Historia y conciencia de clase, México: Grijalbo. Lumsden, C.J. y E.O. Wilson (1981), Genes, Mind and Culture. The Coevolutionary Process, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lumsden, C.J. y E.O. Wilson (1983), Promethean Fire: Reflections on the Origin of Mind, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Milic, V. (2000), “La relación entre sociedad y conocimiento en la obra de Marx”, en Lenk, K. (Comp.), El concepto de ideología,Buenos Aires, Amorrortu, pp. 137-163.
Neurath. O. (1965), “Sociología en fisicalismo”, en Ayer, A.J. (ed.), El positivismo lógico, México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, pp. 287-322.
Newell, W.H. (1990), Interdisciplinarity: Essays from the Literature, New York: College Entumee Examination Board.
Marx, K. ([1845]1953), L’Idéologie Allemande, París: Alfred Costes Editeur.
Marx, K. ([1857-1858]1987), Elementos fundamentales para la crítica de la economía política (Grundrisse), México: Siglo XXI.
Ostreng, W. (2010), Science without Boundaries:Interdisciplinarity in Research Society and Politics, London: University Press of America.
Palmer, C. (2000), Work at the Boundaries of Science: Information and the Interdisciplinary Research Process, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Pichot, A. (2000), La Société Pure. De Darwin a Hitler,Paris: Flammarion.
Pinker, S. (1997), How the Mind Works, London: Penguin.
Ranciêre, J. (1994), “On the Theory of Ideology–Althusser’s Politics”, en Eagleton, T.(ed.), Ideology, London: Longman, pp.141-161.
Repko, A.S. (2014), Introduction to Interdisciplinary Studies, Los Angeles: SAGE.
Strober, M.H. (2011), Interdisciplinary Conversations: Challenging the Habits of Thought, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Szosteck, R. (2010), Classifying Science: Phenomena, Data, Theory, Method, Practice, Dordrecht: Springer.
Thornhill, R. y C.T. Palmer (2006), Una historia natural de la violación. Los fundamentos biológicos de la coerción sexual, México: Océano.
Tooby, J. y L. Cosmides (1992), “The Psychological Foundations of Culture”, en Barkow, J.H., Cosmides, L. y J. Tooby (eds.), The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 19-137.
Tooby, J. y L. Cosmides (2005), “Conceptual Foundations of Evolutionary Psychology”, en Buss, D.M. (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 5-68.
Trivers, R. (1971), “The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism”, The Quarterly Review of Biology 46:45-57.
Weingart, P. y N. Stehr (eds.)(2000), Practicing Interdisciplinarity, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Wilson, E.O. (1975), Sociobiology, The New Synthesis, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wilson, E.O. (1978), On Human Nature, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Young, R.M. (1973),“The Historiographical and Ideological Context of the Nineteenth Century Debate on Man’s Place in Nature”, en Teich, M. y R.M. Young (eds.), Changing Perspectives in the History of Science, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 344-438.
Zizek, S. (1994), “¿Cómo inventó Marx el síntoma?”, en Zizek, S. (ed.), Ideología. Un Mapa de la Cuestión, México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, pp. 329-370.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Metatheoria – Journal of Philosophy and History of ScienceThe documents published here are governed by the licensing criteria
Creative Commons Argentina.Atribución - No Comercial - Sin Obra Derivada 2.5 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
