RE: Re[2]: The SSSM revisited

From: Ben Goertzel (
Date: Wed Dec 04 2002 - 12:06:46 MST

It's actually a pretty good book, Cliff. Although the authors are somewhat
opinionated -- and they do overlook key aspects of the human mind -- they
are not nearly as narrowminded as this conversation seems to be leading you
to believe...

-- ben g

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []On Behalf Of Cliff
> Stabbert
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 1:48 PM
> To: Samantha Atkins
> Subject: Re[2]: The SSSM revisited
> Wednesday, December 4, 2002, 5:32:19 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> SA> That is incorrect. It was *the* standard in Sociology,
> SA> Anthropology, Psychology for most of the 20th century. Check
> SA> out Chapter 1 of "The Adapted Mind" by Barkow, Cosmides, Tooby
> SA> for corroborating evidence and a detailed analysis and critique
> SA> of SSSM. SSSM also had deep effects on educational and social
> SA> policies.
> I don't have time to check out that book if it claims that a belief
> that man had *no* instincts, was a tabula rasa with a few reflexes and
> a learning ability, was *the* standard in psychology for most of the
> 20th century. That's simply a bogus claim.
> --
> Cliff

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT