On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Doug Henwood wrote:
> "The fact that psychosocial traits such as number of sexual partners
> and infidelity appear to behave as other common complex genetic
> traits in humans, in that they have a heritable component, lends
> support to evolutionary psychologists' theories on the origins of
> human behaviour."
>
> Professor Spector believes that the logical conclusion of his team's
> new research may be that infidelity and other sexual behaviours
> persist because they have been evolutionarily advantageous for women
> at some time.
This is precisely what drives me nuts about evolutionary psychology: it's all post hoc! If the research shows that infidelity has a heritable component, then we make up an evolutionary story after the fact to explain this. If the research had shown that infidelity did not have a heritable component, then we'd make up a an evolutionary story that emphasizes the obvious benefits of monogamy and sexual fidelity.
The more of this goofiness I read, the more it reminds me of overzealous Freudians insisting that all behavior is a disguised manifestation of the unconscious. (Again: post hoc, it's easy to make up a plausible explanation; where the rubber meets the road in science is when researchers make a prediction/hypothesis before they gather the data!)
Miles