On the use of evolutionary mismatch theories in debating human prosociality

Author:

Segovia-Cuéllar Andrés,Del Savio LorenzoORCID

Abstract

AbstractAccording to some evolutionary theorists human prosocial dispositions emerged in a context of inter-group competition and violence that made our psychology parochially prosocial, ie. cooperative towards in-groups and competitive towards strangers. This evolutionary hypothesis is sometimes employed in bioethical debates to argue that human nature and contemporary environments, and especially large-scale societies, are mismatched. In this article we caution against the use of mismatch theories in moral philosophy in general and discuss empirical evidence that puts into question mismatch theories based on parochial prosociality. Evolutionary mismatch theories play at best a rhetorical role in these moral debates and may misrepresent the status of relevant evolutionary research. We finally recommend that moral philosophers interested in the evolutionary literature also engage with dispositions such as xenophilia and social tolerance to counterbalance the focus on psychological mismatches adopted so far.

Funder

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

German Academic Exchange Service London

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Health Policy,Education,Health(social science)

Reference73 articles.

1. Appiah, A. 2018. The lies that bind: rethinking identity. London: Profile Books.

2. Bagg, S. 2019. When will a Darwinian approach be useful for the study of society? Politics, Philosophy and Economics 16 (3): 259–281.

3. Barkow, J., et al. 1996. The adapted mind: evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

4. Beck, N. 2018. Hayek and the evolution of capitalism. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

5. Billig, M., and H. Tajfel. 1973. Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology 3: 27–52.

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Evolution of the polycrisis: Anthropocene traps that challenge global sustainability;Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences;2023-11-13

2. What Do Chimeras Think About?;Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics;2023-01-23

3. One Health Requires a Theory of Agency;Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics;2022-10

4. One health ethics;Bioethics;2021-12-12

5. Ethical (mis)use of prehistory;Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy;2021-07-09

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3