Which humans behave adaptively, and why does it matter?

Abstract

There has long been debate about the relevance of evolutionary theory to the study of humans. To many of us, however, the debate has shifted from whether to proceed with an evolutionary approach to how to proceed. Increasingly, it has been argued that studies of the current reproductive function of human traits make little or no contribution to the understanding of the psyche (e.g., Symons 1989). Here, on the basis of arguments about the relationship between an adaptation and an adaptive outcome, and a review of studies that assess current adaptiveness, I argue to the contrary that knowledge of the contexts in which people do or do not behave adaptively provides important information about the nature of the mechanisms that comprise the human psyche. In particular, studies that indicate that people behave adaptively in at least some contemporary environments cast doubt on many nonevolutionary constructions of human nature, and can be used now to distinguish alternative evolutionary constructions that are at odds over many issues pentaining to the human psyche's ontogeny and evolutionary background, especially the extent to which the human psyche is general purpose.