Now, I'm no fan of some EP (though it can be hilarious when they make up their BS), but its a variegated community, and those EPers who really know actual evolutionary theory, and like totally do empirical research are interesting if often provocative. Its also weird to try and discredit an entire research program with such a short, confusing, mistake ridden article. I shall attempt to correct them forthwith. The author provides a list of 'often believed tenets of EP'.
- Computational mind (the brain is more like a computer than a biological organ)
- Determinism (biology is destiny)
- Fatalism (free will/choice is an illusion)
- Consciousness (subjective awareness deludes us into thinking we have free will)
- Reductionism or essentialism (race and gender are concrete, not socially constructed, can be reduced to their genetic essence, and are quantifiable)
This doesn't mean I endorse the crude stereotypes in some EP, only that these accusations get tossed around like the Fuhrer's name as argument enders. They are not.
- Intelligence is definable and measurable
- Sexual selection should focus on benefits for the individual organism
- The "function" or "purpose" of life is to make more life
- The __ gene: The gay gene, the god gene, etc.
The biggest problem with the article is that there is a lot to criticize with some EP, but the article does such a piss poor job of it.