Evolutionary Psychology

985 Words2 Pages

The purpose of this academic piece is to critically discuss The Darwinist implication of the evolutionary psychological conception of human nature. Charles Darwin’s “natural selection” will be the main factor discussed as the theory of evolution was developed by him. Evolutionary psychology is the approach on human nature on the basis that human behavior is derived from biological factors and there are psychologists who claim that human behavior is not something one is born with but rather it is learned. According to Downes, S. M. (2010 fall edition) “Evolutionary psychology is one of the many biologically informed approaches to the study of human behavior”. This goes further to implicate that evolutionary psychology is virtually based on the claims of the human being a machine that can be programmed to do certain things and because it can be programmed it has systems in the body that allow such to happen for instance the nervous system which is the connection of the spinal cord and the brain and assists in voluntary and involuntary motor movements. Charles Darwin has five parts to his theory of natural selection, firstly the “Geometric increase” which claims that “all living things reproduce in great numbers”, meaning that species may survive but not all will survive because, the resources used for survival for instance ,food will not be enough for all living things. “The struggle for existence” because there is a limited number of resources and can only sustain some and not all, not all living things will survive, however the question lies in which living being will survive?. “Variation” is the third part of natural selection which claims that within those living things there are variations within them that will determine whic... ... middle of paper ... ...ey remain in the bottom. Mills and his argument are not so strong at criticizing Darwin because “He gives a bit too much credit to religion for the good it does, without taking enough credit back for the bad it does”(Hull.1973). Therefore Mills only looks at one aspect of religion and in his arguments he cannot give concrete evidence of where the divine God is and who or what created him, so he does defend religion for a cause and effect factor, but in terms of a cause and effect for God, there is no evidence. To conclude, Darwin does give strong arguments for his implications on human nature from how humans evolved and how human nature is, however they do contain loopholes that leave questions unanswered. However, so does Mills, because in his arguments against nature, he defends God by providing all the good that has been done by religion, not considering the bad.

Open Document