Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
7552601 | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences | 2014 | 11 Pages |
Abstract
In this paper, I critique arguments made by philosopher David Buller against central evolutionary-psychological explanations of human mating. Specifically, I aim to rebut his criticisms of Evolutionary Psychology regarding (1) women's long-term mating preferences for high-status men; (2) the evolutionary rationale behind men's provisioning of women; (3) men's mating preferences for young women; (4) women's adaptation for extra-pair sex; (5) the sex-differentiated evolutionary theory of human jealousy; and (6) the notion of mate value. In sum, I aim to demonstrate that Buller's arguments contra Evolutionary Psychologists are left wanting.
Related Topics
Life Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (General)
Authors
John Klasios,