Evolution of human jealousy : a just-so story or a just-so criticism?
Document Type
Journal article
Source Publication
Philosophy of the Social Sciences
Publication Date
12-1-2003
Volume
33
Issue
4
First Page
427
Last Page
443
Keywords
Adaptationism, Evolutionary psychology, Philosophy of science, Testability
Abstract
To operationalize the methodological assessment of evolutionary psychology, three requirements are proposed that, if satisfied, would show that a hypothesis is not a just-so story: (1) theoretical entrenchment (i.e., that the hypothesis under consideration is a consequence of a more fundamental theory that is empirically well-confirmed across a very wide range of phenomena), (2) predictive success (i.e., that the hypothesis generates concrete predictions that make it testable and eventually to a certain extent corroborated), and (3) failure of rival explanations (i.e., that crucial and successful predictions attributed to the hypothesis in question cannot be derived from alternative hypotheses). The author argues that the hypothesis about evolutionary sex differences in human jealousy satisfies all three requirements.
DOI
10.1177/0048393103257964
Print ISSN
00483931
E-ISSN
15527441
Publisher Statement
Copyright © 2003 by Sage Publications
Access to external full text or publisher's version may require subscription.
Full-text Version
Publisher’s Version
Language
English
Recommended Citation
Sesardic, N. (2003). Evolution of human jealousy: A just-so story or a just-so criticism? Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 33(4), 427-443. doi: 10.1177/0048393103257964