The integrative framework for the behavioural sciences has already been discovered, and it is the adaptationist approach

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (1):39-40 (2007)
Abstract
The adaptationist framework is necessary and sufficient for unifying the social and natural sciences. Gintis's “beliefs, preferences, and constraints” (BPC) model compares unfavorably to this framework because it lacks criteria for determining special design, incorrectly assumes that standard evolutionary theory predicts individual rationality maximisation, does not adequately recognize the impact of psychological mechanisms on culture, and is mute on the behavioural implications of intragenomic conflict. (Published Online April 27 2007).
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,788
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Chandra Sekhar Sripada (2008). Adaptationism, Culture, and the Malleability of Human Nature. In Peter Caruthers, Stephen Laurence & Stephen Stich (eds.), The Innate Mind, Volume 3. Oxford University Press.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

8 ( #168,674 of 1,099,047 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

7 ( #33,832 of 1,099,047 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.