What makes evo-psych a "pseudoscience"?

varrr · 2017-08-12T15:06:08+00:00

Not exaclty. The scientific bases on which TRP is built upon aren't wrong, but are somewhat limited and applied in an incorrect way, and that's why TRP is considered as a "pseudoscience". The foundational elements aren't wrong but are just incomplete.

Let me put it this way: let's say the game we paly is soccer. The red pill guys will say to you something like: "dude, the goal of the game is to score, and to score you need to put the ball in the net. You need to play as strikers, we all need to be strikers because strikers are the one that score!". Now, is what I just said wrong? Of course it's not. But is not the complete set of rules of soccer, and if you want to play soccer you need to know all the rules and play in the role that best suits you. In soccer you can't touch the ball with your hands, you can't knock out your opponents, and there's the rule of offside.

The Red Pill looks at life as a 4 years old looks at soccer: they understand the goal of the game but they lack the insight to understand that things are a little more complex than that.

I must add that SJW, equality and egalitarianism are equally deluded and oversimplified models of reality in my opinion.

quicklogaccount · 2017-08-12T16:43:28+00:00

Psychology is a bit of a "pseudoscience" because it's not based on the traditional observe-explain-test-repeat model people use for more exact sciences (health and nature).
Evo-psychology fares a bit better on that line but while experiments and behaviors repeat, you can't quite logically say they prove the theory.

TRP on the other hand fares worst. It's people, many of which found basis to support some of their biases in the theory and willingly ignore whatever denies their biases in the same theory.

RPAlternate42 · 2017-08-12T19:23:53+00:00

All psychology is pseudoscience because you can't directly test hypothesis. If we had a human that we could flick switches on to turn on or off certain psychological aspects, then we could properly test things.

TRP, Evo-Psych, reg. psych, etc, are all based on the idea that most people act a certain way most of the time under the same circumstances.

People simply don't like TRP because it pushes against the current social zeitgeist; it's wrong to say that most woman will most often act like "X" when presented with "Y."

But it's okay to say that people, when confronted with danger will either stay and fight or run to save themselves: fight or flight is an evo-psych topic and readily accepted. Female dual-mating strategy isn't accepted because it 1: makes women seem different than men and 2: makes women seem wrong.

The problem is, THEY see it as wrong whereas TRP just sees it as what is; The dual-mating strategy exists, women do it, and by accepting that you can work within it.

FirstnameLastnamePKA · 2017-08-12T17:55:38+00:00

There are many different schools of pysch. which covers Sexuality. Evo-pysch WAS the accepted norm until Social-Cultural (all of sexuality is taught opposed to programmed) arrose and now that has become the prevelent. Many of the same people who believe in the Social Cultural lense DESPISE people who believe in the Evo-Pysch lense; many of these people call evo-pysch a pseudoscience.

yallapapi · 2017-08-12T23:05:27+00:00

Just remember: "it's not stupid if it works"

Title	What makes evo-psych a "pseudoscience"?
Author	marianasentmenudes
Upvotes	6
Comments	8
Date	August 12, 2017 2:06 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/askTRP
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/asktrp/comments/6t8lrj/what_makes_evopsych_a_pseudoscience/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/askTRP/what-makes-evo-psych-a-pseudoscience.112337 https://theredarchive.com/post/112337

Comments