Authors
Rebekka Hufendiek
University of Bern
Abstract
A recurring claim made by evolutionary psychologists is that their opponents neglect biological explanations as such for ideological reasons. I argue in this paper that this is a self-immunizing strategy that avoids serious engagement with existing critique by exploiting the long history of essentialist fallacies and anti-essentialist debunking arguments. To argue for this claim, I reconstruct the general form of the essentialist fallacy as well as the history of anti-essentialist debunking arguments and suggest that they play a central role in the persistence of the ideological dimension of the nature-nurture debate. Discussing recent work from evolutionary psychology on how hormones influence female behavior, I show how self-immunizing strategies are used to avoid engagement with existing critique, while reproducing sexist stereotypes at the same time.
Keywords Essentialist Fallacy  Ideology  evolutionary psychology  feminist philosophy of science
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/josp.12389
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,177
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

Human Nature and the Limits of Science.John Dupré - 2001 - Oxford University Press.
Toward a Feminist Theory of the State.Catharine A. Mackinnon - 1991 - Law and Philosophy 10 (4):447-452.
What is Innateness?Paul E. Griffiths - 2001 - The Monist 85 (1):70-85.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Fine-Tuning Argument.Neil A. Manson - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (1):271-286.
Four (Or So) New Fine-Tuning Arguments.Lydia McGrew - 2016 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 8 (2):85--106.
Fine-Tuning Fine-Tuning.John Hawthorne & Yoaav Isaacs - 2018 - In Matthew A. Benton, John Hawthorne & Dani Rabinowitz (eds.), Knowledge, Belief, and God: New Insights in Religious Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 136-168.
The Fine-Tuned Universe and the Existence of God.Man Ho Chan - 2017 - Dissertation, Hong Kong Baptist University
Misapprehensions About the Fine-Tuning Argument.John Hawthorne & Yoaav Isaacs - 2017 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 81:133-155.
A Theological Critique of the Fine-Tuning Argument.Hans Halvorson - 2018 - In Matthew A. Benton, John Hawthorne & Dani Rabinowitz (eds.), Knowledge, Belief, and God: New Insights in Religious Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 122-135.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-12-11

Total views
27 ( #420,870 of 2,499,416 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #169,712 of 2,499,416 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes