What Evolutionary Psychology Can’t Explain

With Question Evolution Day (QED) just a few days away, I’ve been thinking about evolution from a different angle: evolutionary psychology (EP), which purports to explain human behavior. I came across an article by Glenn Geher which attempts to explain, for example, why we love our kids; why it’s hard to hit the gym; why we prefer cookies; and why we love nature. He says we love nature as follows: “Across most of human evolutionary history, our ancestors were outside. And they relied upon all kinds of things found in nature for basic survival.” My guess is this sounds reasonable to many people. However, it doesn’t explain why so many people I have encountered don’t love nature, at least not in the sense of being in it. Many like pictures of waterfalls or forests, for example, but don’t want to experience it for themselves. I live only about two hours from Yosemite National Park, which is so popular that starting this year, you have to make a reservation to enter on all Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, as well as every day from July 1-August 16. An evolutionary psychologist would point to this and say, “See? This proves my point!” However, I have met many people in my city who have lived here their whole lives and have never visited Yosemite NP; furthermore, they have no interest in doing so. Additionally, EP doesn’t explain why I love nature, which is because some of my best times of worshiping the Lord are in it. I’m sure that other people who enjoy being in nature have other reasons as well. 

Some would say that at least evolutionary psychology offers a reasonable-sounding explanation for the behavior of some people. However, for a theory to be robust, it needs to explain much more. In addition, I have thought of some behaviors that EP has no reasonable explanation for.

Let’s look at abortion. One thing that evolution, and by extension EP, prioritizes is reproduction, as this perpetuates your family line; the more children you have, the better. This also explains marital infidelity. In other words, it essentially doesn’t matter all that much who you make children with, as long as you make as many as possible.  Furthermore, if you die without any children, your genes die with your body, which is a terrible thing from an evolutionary perspective. So, why would an expectant mother abort her unborn child? Here’s an EP explanation: “prioritization of long-term development over immediate reproduction.” In other words, it’s not convenient for me right now to have a child because I have other, more important goals. Since evolution prioritizes reproduction so highly, the flaw in this explanation should be obvious.

Another behavior that EP has no reasonable explanation for is same-sex attraction. (This is how it is often referred to in research.) Even children understand that it takes a man and a woman to reproduce. However, evolutionary psychologists try to explain all human behavior, including this one. I came across an article which refers to kin selection hypothesis, meaning that “homosexual men might enhance their own genetic prospects by being ‘helpers in the nest.’ By acting altruistically toward nieces and nephews, homosexual men would perpetuate the family genes, including some of their own.” (This is from a ScienceDaily article.) In other words, gay men help by caring for their nieces and nephews, which helps perpetuate their family line, even if not from their own bodies. This explanation is based on a study of Samoan men. The researchers admit that since Samoan society is centered on tightly-knit extended families, this explanation doesn’t fit modern Western societies, where “families are much more geographically dispersed.” I appreciate the researchers’ honesty in regard to this caveat, but it emphasizes that this kin selection hypothesis is a very poor explanation. 

I also want to mention a positive behavior that EP doesn’t have a reasonable explanation for: heroism. Why would an individual risk his life for someone else, particularly a stranger? Here’s an explanation that I found: “Physically risky heroic behavior may be an evolutionary adaptation that provides mating advantages for men but not women.” (Frank T. McAndrew) In other words, women love heroic men! Notice “mating advantages.” Once again we see the priority of reproduction in evolution, even as an evolutionary psychologist indirectly repudiates EP explanations for abortion and same-sex attraction!

While evolutionary psychology attempts to explain seemingly every human behavior, when it comes to abortion and gay sex, its explanations are laughable, frankly. The Bible gives us a much better explanation for these actions; they are manifestations of our sinful condition. The same can be said of marital infidelity, which I also made reference to earlier. Regarding heroism, the Bible tells us this, in John 15:13: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” Jesus, of course, is our ultimate example of this, as He died a horrible death for us on the cross.

Evolutionary psychology, of course, is directly related to the theory of evolution. Here is the link to a post I wrote a couple of years ago questioning evolution: https://keithpetersenblog.com/is-evolution-a-viable-theory/ And last year, I wrote a post about intelligent design: https://keithpetersenblog.com/the-intelligent-designer/ In addition, I referred to Question Evolution Day at the outset; thank you, Bob Sorensen, for publicizing this. Here is the link to Bob’s site, full of articles questioning evolution: https://www.piltdownsuperman.com/; check out his “Question Evolution Day” link.

The more I have studied the sciences, including the theory of evolution and its offspring (pun intended), evolutionary psychology, the stronger my faith in God has become. In contrast, I have talked to many Christians over the years who are afraid that as their kids study science, they will “lose” their faith in God. If they study sources beyond what they have learned in school, I believe that they will get a very different perspective–one that in fact points to God, rather than away from Him.