The January Philosophy Book of the Month 2019 is The Runaway Species. Discuss The Runaway Species now.

The February Philosophy Book of the Month is The Fourth Age by Byron Reese (Nominated by RJG.) Discuss The Fourth Age now.

Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 2983
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Post by Burning ghost » December 1st, 2018, 1:57 am

This is a podcast where two renowned scientists (Hayes and Wilson) discuss how psychology and evolution are coming together and the benefit of this.

Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science: An Integrated Framework for Understanding, Predicting, and Influencing Human Behavior

This is “part II” of the interview. The first part is more or less about psychology specifically whilst this second part expands into different ideas about the approach of scientists, certain biases of scientific fields, and how these two people came together and inspired each others work:

https://www.offtheclockpsych.com/podcas ... al-science

The discussion is quite wide ranging and I imagine there is something of interest for everyone.

Note: Will probably be throwing out a different podcast every month (or maybe two if people are interested.) I’ll give whoever is interested to have a listen and will post something within the next few days highlighting some of the things that interested me in the discussion.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
ktz
Posts: 165
Joined: November 9th, 2018, 12:21 am
Favorite Philosopher: Habermas

Re: Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Post by ktz » December 1st, 2018, 4:40 pm

Thanks Burning ghost for the suggestion. I particularly liked the section where they talk about the isolating and psychogenic effects of modern technology around the 50 minute mark -- the 24 hour news cycle generating the functional equivalent of a dangerous environment full of predators is an interesting context for talking about its harms that I hadn't previously considered.

Their reference to "Prosocial" technique is sounds very interesting as well. They didn't mention EO Wilson by name but they talked a lot about group selection, and I'm curious what kind of techniques are involved given some of their supporting data like the success in its application to at-risk youth.

I also found their Nietzschean perspective on early childhood trauma to be very surprising. It reminds me of Nassim Taleb's conception of "Antifragility", describing things that become stronger under conditions of stress and disorder. I wonder what kind of conversation these two would have on Gabor Mate's work on addiction, in which he theorizes addiction to be the consequence of unresolved trauma, especially in early childhood.
You may have a heart of gold, but so does a hard-boiled egg.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3282
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Post by LuckyR » December 4th, 2018, 2:57 am

Adding it to the list
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 2983
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Post by Burning ghost » December 15th, 2018, 2:31 am

Sorry, will try and add something to this later in week. Seems like I’m gettnig back into my old habits of being either sidetracked by new ideas/projects or taking on too much at once. I’m going to have to listen to this again - maybe tomorrow.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 326
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Post by chewybrian » December 21st, 2018, 9:09 am

I want to get involved, but I've been waiting to see some other takes on this. It seems to me that they are stretching the idea of evolution a bit. I don't think it can be truly be called evolution in markets, for example. There is a sort of 'survival of the fittest' in terms of ideas, or products in the market. But, these lack the element of random chance that drives real evolution (I think...). You could easily say intelligent design is involved. If I bring a product to the market, its essence probably precedes its existence. At least much of the time, I design it to fit a need, rather than discovering as a surprise through trial and error that it serves a purpose. Even if I discover something by accident, I am likely to refine it with a purpose in mind before exposing it to the 'survival of the fittest' competition in the marketplace.

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 2983
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Podcast Discussion (December): Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science

Post by Burning ghost » December 23rd, 2018, 2:16 am

Chewy (and ALL) -

I wouldn’t say they’ve “stretched” the meaning of evolution, but take on its meaning beyond a clockwork deterministic attitude often brought to the table by geneticists.

As mentioned in the discussion neuroscience and psychology have started to bridge the gap between a more human take in the world and the distanced scientific methodology that has to, by definition, keep human thought at some distance (the object over the subject issue).

When they talked about “groups” I took this as a look at emergent properties over hard and fast measurements that although obviously useful can inhibit investigation into other areas making all “soft science” appear flimsy at best - when to dismiss physics over psychology, or psychology of physics was something nicely summed up by the human attitude toward a sunset. We naturally way or the other in regards to different phenomenological experience; it is foolish to say that either analytical thinking or emotional content has more useful application (although in some situations one may trump the other easily enough - like when ciewkng a sunset).

I also took the thoughts put forward on language to reflect the disparity between differing fields of research. What I find bery encouraging is how neuroscience, behavioural biology and psychology have began to mesh together and feed off of each other. The hard science will remain the foundation of study, yet it is up to the human element (the aesthetic sensibilities) to step away from the analysis of data and to move into areas where attempts to make measurements fail to give anything but fleeting consistancy and to try to pry out of these wilder corners of human thinking something applicable to hard science adn open up a new pathway so will can better “measure”/“predict” a more productive/fulfilling route to discovery.

It is the fortunate discoveries that often lead to progress. The refinement, as you put it, would be the analysis of the phenomenon after it becomes broadly recognised as important to academic research. Mathematicians don’t set out to play the stock markets or model the physicsl world, yet time and time again obscure mathematical ideas collide with the “real” world producing marked technological advances - people climb mountains because they are there.
AKA badgerjelly

Post Reply