Is tibetan polyandry adaptive?

Human Nature 9 (3):225-261 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper addresses methodological and metatheoretical aspects of the ongoing debate over the adaptive significance of Tibetan polyandry. Methodological contributions include a means of estimating relatedness of fraternal co-husbands given multigenerational polyandry, and use of Hamilton’s rule and a member-joiner model to specify how inclusive fitness gains of co-husbands may vary according to seniority, opportunity costs, and group size. These methods are applied to various data sets, particularly that of Crook and Crook (1988). The metatheoretical discussion pivots on the critique by evolutionary psychologists of adaptationist accounts of polyandry. Contrary to this critique, I argue that valid adaptationist explanations of such practices do not necessitate cognitive mechanisms evolved specifically to produce polyandry, nor that there must have been exact equivalents of Tibetan agricultural estates and social institutions in human evolutionary history. Specific issues raised when one posits either kin selection or cultural evolution to explain the adaptive features of Tibetan polyandry are also discussed

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,517

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-24

Downloads
26 (#610,886)

6 months
12 (#312,853)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Adaptationism.Steven Hecht Orzack - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Rebirth of Kinship.Mary K. Shenk & Siobhán M. Mattison - 2011 - Human Nature 22 (1-2):1-15.

Add more citations