[p2p-research] The difference between anarchism and libertarianism

[Stan Rhodes]

Tomas' view of in and out-group behavior being the realm of evolutionary
psychology is not accurate.  Plenty of human behavior is empirically
verifiable, and studied by various fields within the general discipline of
psychology.  Ev psych just constructs a narrative on top of those findings,
which may or may not be useful.  One must to separate what the psychological
evidence presents, and what an ev psych narrative speculates--separate the
behavior from the story about the behavior.

So yes, evolutionary psychology IS very speculative, but can be useful when
it proposes a hypotheses that can actually be tested.  Unfortunately, many
times ev psych establishes an attractive and convenient narrative that
researchers too willingly accept.  I only see ev psych narratives as useful
when practiced with full awareness of these limitations; good psychologists
know a story is still just a story.

However, the dismissal of human nature as a "useful context because of the
extent of social construction and the difficulty in isolating cross-cultural
universals – of which there are few if any, and none of them politically
relevant" is completely baseless, and wrong.  Plenty of cross-cultural
universals have been found in behavior economics and the psychology of trust
and reciprocation, and they couldn't be more politically relevant.

The literature on human cognition and decision making questions many
assumptions in each political view.  We should not be surprised: those
views, too, are narratives built upon normative statements that can be--and
usually are--quite assumptive.  And, quite honestly, I'm not even sure what
"social construction" means now.  The term was used to help challenge
assumptions held too dearly, but now I only see it used as a philosophical
hand-wave when uncomfortable scientific facts enter the scene.  "Social
construction" is either obvious or irrelevant.

You say that "it is comforting for middle-class worshippers of order to
fantasise that things are alright, but this perspective is only possible by
hiding inside a protective sphere."

For your consideration: it's comforting for political philosophers to
fantasize that they are right about human behavior and its implications, but
that perspective is only possible by refusing to falsify their own
assumptions.

I'll admit, that's not entirely fair: all humans experience confirmation
bias.

-- Stan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090613/20ffccea/attachment.html>