Schulz, Armin (2011) Sober & Wilson’s evolutionary arguments for psychological altruism: a reassessment. Biology and Philosophy, 26 (2). pp. 251-260. ISSN 0169-3867
Full text not available from this repository.Abstract
In their book Unto Others, Sober and Wilson argue that various evolutionary considerations (based on the logic of natural selection) lend support to the truth of psychological altruism. However, recently, Stephen Stich has raised a number of challenges to their reasoning: in particular, he claims that three out of the four evolutionary arguments they give are internally unconvincing, and that the one that is initially plausible fails to take into account recent findings from cognitive science and thus leaves open a number of egoistic responses. These challenges make it necessary to reassess the plausibility of Sober & Wilson’s evolutionary account—which is what I aim to do in this paper. In particular, I try to show that, as a matter of fact, Sober & Wilson’s case remains compelling, as some of Stich’s concerns rest on a confusion, and those that do not are not sufficiently strong to establish all the conclusions he is after. The upshot is that no reason has been given to abandon the view that evolutionary theory has advanced the debate surrounding psychological altruism.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Official URL: | http://www.springerlink.com/content/102856/ |
| Additional Information: | © 2011 Springer |
| Divisions: | Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method |
| Subjects: | B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General) B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology |
| Date Deposited: | 28 Jan 2011 11:25 |
| Last Modified: | 14 Feb 2024 21:27 |
| URI: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/31839 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
