Recently, the doubts and questions plaguing the theory of evolutionary psychology have boiled up to the mainstream press.

    最近，圍繞進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)的質(zhì)疑已經(jīng)進(jìn)入到大眾媒體

    Questioning Evolutionary Psychology

    Something is afoot in the story of us.

    Well it's pretty cool when we can see scientific viewpoints turning, slowly of course. Also known as a paradigm shift. Right now, it appears evolutionary psychology is under mainstream fire.

    Put simply, evo psych posits that favorable traits during our hunter-gatherer days persisted in our modern contexts. Natural selection carved our behavior and locked it in place. For example: so-called rape genes are passed on to modern males because the cave dwellers who carried rape genes sired more offspring and thus passed on that trait or adaptation to more descendents than those without the trait. And so that's why we have rape today. This is obviously an oversimplification, but you get the idea.

    The public is drawn to evo psych because it provides a most desired thing: a neat reason, or excuse, for who we are; how we behave. That is not easily questioned, because it's essentially unverifiable. We can't go back in time to prove it.

    With the appearance of a New York Times op-ed by David Brooks and a feature piece by Sharon Begley in Newsweek, the evo psych paradigm is being questioned in front of the general public.

    These authors break the fanfare with two hits: evo psych depends on a relatively static environment over millennia, which evidence shows not to be the case. Our environment changes, and so the potential to engage genetic potential changes, dependent on the environment. Secondly, neuroplasticity appears to be firmly established, and the brain has extraordinary malleability and is able to adapt to different contexts over time. In short, the authors and their quoted researchers say the core of human nature lies in its "variability [across cultures and contexts] and its flexibility."

    挑戰(zhàn)進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)

    我們的故事中有些新動向。

    當(dāng)我們看到科學(xué)觀點(diǎn)正在轉(zhuǎn)變的時候，這是一件很酷的事情，當(dāng)然了，這樣的轉(zhuǎn)變是很緩慢的。這種轉(zhuǎn)變也稱之為"范式轉(zhuǎn)移"（paradigm shift）.目前，進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)似乎正處于大眾主流媒體的攻擊之下。

    簡單的說，進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)認(rèn)為人類在狩獵時期的一些有利特點(diǎn)在我們現(xiàn)代社會中繼續(xù)保留了下來。自然選擇塑造了我們的行為方式，進(jìn)而把它固定下來。比如：所謂的強(qiáng)暴基因就傳到了現(xiàn)代社會的男性身上，這是因?yàn)榕c那些沒有這種基因的人相比較，攜帶強(qiáng)暴基因的遠(yuǎn)古穴居者能繁衍更多的后代，從而把這種特點(diǎn)或適應(yīng)傳給更多的后代。這就是為什么我們當(dāng)今的社會存在強(qiáng)暴的原因。很顯然這個例子過于簡化了，但是能讓你明白其中的思想。

    公眾被進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)吸引，是因?yàn)檫@個理論提供了一個最讓人心儀的東西：為解釋我們是誰以及我們?nèi)绾涡惺绿峁┝艘粋�漂亮的推理或者說一個借口。這不容易受到質(zhì)疑，因?yàn)樗�基本上不可證實(shí)。我們不能倒回時間去證明。

    隨著David Brooks在《紐約時報(bào)》（New York Times）的一篇評論文章以及Sharon Begley在《新聞周刊》（Newsweek）的一篇特邀文章的出現(xiàn)，進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)的范式正受到大眾的挑戰(zhàn)。

    這些作者用兩個證據(jù)對進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)"熱潮"進(jìn)行了挑戰(zhàn)：進(jìn)化論心理學(xué)依賴于一個在幾千年的時間里相對靜止的環(huán)境，而證據(jù)顯示這并非事實(shí)。我們的環(huán)境一直在改變，所以根據(jù)環(huán)境的變化，包含基因在內(nèi)的潛在改變也在改變。另外一個方面，神經(jīng)可塑性似乎已經(jīng)牢固地建立起來了，而且大腦具有超常的可塑性，從而經(jīng)過一定時間后能夠適應(yīng)不同的環(huán)境。簡而言之，這些作者以及他們引述的研究者們稱，人類本性的核心在于它的"可變性[遍及不同的文化和環(huán)境]和靈活性".

    Vocabulary:

    Plague: 瘟疫；困擾，糾纏

    Evolutionary: 進(jìn)化論的

    Psychology: 心理學(xué)

    Evo psych: Evolutionary Psychology的縮寫形式

    Afoot: 進(jìn)行之中

    Paradigm: 榜樣

    Trait: 特質(zhì)

    Persist: 持續(xù)存在

    Sire: 成為父親

    Offspring: 后代

    Descendent: 后裔

    Oversimplification: 過于簡化

    Unverifiable: 不可證實(shí)的

    Op-ed: 評論文章

    Fanfare: 喇叭聲；浮夸

    Static: 靜態(tài)的

    Millennia: 千年（復(fù)數(shù)）

    Neuroplasticity: 神經(jīng)可塑性

    Malleability: 可塑性

    Variability: 可變性

    Flexibility: 靈活性