Социобиология и критика адаптационизма
Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. That’s why biologization of the humanities and development of neurosciences and neurocomputing presupposes taking into account changes in evolutionary theory. Critique of adaptationism is an important part of the modern scientific critique of Darwinism. History of the critique of adaptationism is intertwined with history of sociobiology. This circumstance is embodied by the longstanding confrontation between evolutionary dissidents R.C. Lewontin an S.J. Gould on the one hand and sociobiologists E.O. Wilson and R. Dawkins on the other hand. Meanwhile Soviet Union had its own sociobiological project by V.P. Efroimson. This project was underdeveloped for political reasons. It’s merits were discussed mainly in the context of nature-nurture debate. Among Russian-speaking critique of adaptationism in sociobiology works of ethologist E.N. Panov are worth of special consideration.
The commented famous work by S.J. Gould and R.C. Lewontin is crucial not only to sociobiology critique but to polemics on evolutionary theory in general. Reflection provoked by Gould and Lewontin’s paper in the field of philosophy of biology enables to clarify the relation between the adaptationist program and biological reductionism.
The results of cross-cultural research of implicit theories of innovativeness among students and teachers, representatives of three ethnocultural groups: Russians, the people of the North Caucasus (Chechens and Ingushs) and Tuvinians (N=804) are presented. Intergroup differences in implicit theories of innovativeness are revealed: the ‘individual’ theories of innovativeness prevail among Russians and among the students, the ‘social’ theories of innovativeness are more expressed among respondents from the North Caucasus, Tuva and among the teachers. Using the structural equations modeling the universal model of values impact on implicit theories of innovativeness and attitudes towards innovations is constructed. Values of the Openness to changes and individual theories of innovativeness promote the positive relation to innovations. Results of research have shown that implicit theories of innovativeness differ in different cultures, and values make different impact on the attitudes towards innovations and innovative experience in different cultures.
The article discusses general and specific problems of integration methods of the social and natural sciences, in particular sociobiology, evolutionary psychology and sociology methods in the study of emotions. The author argues that the emotion research, first of all moral emotions from the perspective of the evolutionary approach, can serve as a sort of "point", in which it is possible to combine methodological tools of sociology, sociobiology, evolutionary psychology and partly neuropsychophysiology to study complex social phenomena as morality and altruism, as well as various kinds of behavior associated with them. The paper discusses the theoretical and methodological aspects of the study of emotions in this way.
The article discusses the prospects of joint research of sociologists and socio-biologists on the evolution of morality and altruism. Sociologists compare morality and altruism in human society with that in animals behavior can be seen as manifestations of empathy and althruim and of co-existence rules in groups of animals of each biological species. The authors present the current understanding of the evolutionary prehistory of human social behavior. A significant challenge for cooperation activities of sociologists and sociobiologists is the rapid progress of the natural sciences. Discoveries and findings in biology and biologists models often lead to simplistic conclusions, and at the same time the works of sociologists, in which they try to use these innovations, often turns untenable. It is therefore necessary to continue the search for the directions and mechanisms of integration of sociological and sociobiological approaches to such complex phenomena as morality and altruism.
In this paper the impact of adaptationism and genocentrism critique on the development of evolutionary theory in the past half century is examined. This critique was personified in R.C. Lewontin and S.J. Gould attack on sociobiology of E.O. Wilson and R. Dawkins. The conceptual reconstruction of the Modern Synthesis, undertaken by modern supporters of the “Expanded Synthesis” M. Pigliucci and G. Muller, can be reformulated in terms of adaptationism and genocentrism. Thus, adaptationism and genocentrism critique still guides the development of evolutionary theory in the 21st century