Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Max Planck Research Group Naturalistic Social Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Mar;17(2):465-490. doi: 10.1177/1745691621997113. Epub 2021 Nov 3.
A debate surrounding modularity-the notion that the mind may be exclusively composed of distinct systems or modules-has held philosophers and psychologists captive for nearly 40 years. Concern about this thesis-which has come to be known as the serves as the primary grounds for skepticism of evolutionary psychology's claims about the mind. In this article we argue that the entirety of this debate, and the very notion of massive modularity itself, is ill-posed and confused. In particular, it is based on a confusion about the level of analysis (or reduction) at which one is approaching the mind. Here we provide a framework for clarifying at what level of analysis one is approaching the mind and explain how a systemic failure to distinguish between different levels of analysis has led to profound misunderstandings of not only evolutionary psychology but also of the entire cognitivist enterprise of approaching the mind at the level of the mechanism. We furthermore suggest that confusions between different levels of analysis are endemic throughout the psychological sciences-extending well beyond issues of modularity and evolutionary psychology. Therefore, researchers in all areas should take preventive measures to avoid this confusion in the future.
围绕模块性的争论——即心智可能完全由不同的系统或模块组成——已经让哲学家和心理学家着迷了近 40 年。对这一理论的担忧——现在被称为服务怀疑论的主要依据——是进化心理学对心智的主张。在本文中，我们认为整个争论，以及大规模模块性本身的概念，都是不合适和混乱的。特别是，它基于对分析水平（或还原）的混淆，在这个水平上，人们正在接近心智。在这里，我们提供了一个澄清的框架，说明人们在接近心智的哪个分析水平上，并解释了为什么系统性地未能区分不同的分析水平，不仅导致了对进化心理学的深刻误解，也导致了对整个认知主义者在机制层面上接近心智的整个事业的深刻误解。我们还认为，不同分析水平之间的混淆是整个心理学科学中普遍存在的——远远超出了模块性和进化心理学的问题。因此，所有领域的研究人员都应该采取预防措施，以避免今后出现这种混淆。
