Abstract
The behavioral sciences are characterized by a plurality of distinct forms of explanation. Ernst Mayrs (1961) famous distinction between ultimate and proximate explanations is sometimes invoked to make sense of part of this plurality. Whereas evolutionary theorizing explains human behavior by appealing to evolutionary forces working in the past (natural selection being the notable example), proximate explanations explain it by appealing to current cognitive and psychological mechanisms. Despite the widespread use of this distinction by both philosophers and scientists, its precise content remains unclear. Those philosophers who have examined the distinction have not reached a consensus on the kind of explanations that ultimate explanations are, nor how they relate to proximate explanations (Ariew 2003, Beatty 1 994,
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
