Dynamic Ecologies and the Biological Bases of Violence: A Critical Analysis of Jonathan Gottschall’s The Rape of Troy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Jonathan Gottschall’s The Rape of Troy employs an array of interdisciplinary resources in order to explain the relentless cycle of Homeric war as emerging from the operations of evolutionary competition over reproductive resources. This paper suggests that considerations regarding the operations of psychological adaptations in Homo Sapiens will be greatly benefited from characterizing the socio-historical properties of human life in terms of a dynamic array of ecological niches. By characterizing human history as a dynamic array of ecological niches, emphasizing that we have an active capacity for ecological modification, and showing this to be responsible for the oft exapted character of our behaviour, I suggest means of coherently distinguishing ‘cultural’ determinants of human psychology from ‘evolutionary ones’. Moreover, I hope to have demonstrated that we can sustain these distinctions as applicable to different levels of description rather than distinct sorts of natural phenomena or ontological categories. By reflecting on these issues through the lense of the philosophical issues of reductionism and intentionality we can understand the distinction between evolutionary directives and psychological motives. Resumo: The Rape of Troy , de Jonathan Gottschall, lanca mao de uma serie de recursos interdisciplinares para explicar o intenso ciclo de guerras homericas como emergindo das operacoes de competicao evolutiva por recursos reprodutivos. Este artigo sugere que as consideracoes concernentes as operacoes de adaptacao psicologica no Homo Sapiens se beneficiarao imensamente da caracterizacao das propriedades socio-historicas da vida humana em termos de um conjunto dinâmico de nichos ecologicos. Ao caracterizar a historia humana como um conjunto dinâmico de nichos ecologicos, enfatizar nossa capacidade ativa de modificacao ecologica e demonstrar ser consequencia disso o carater frequentemente exaptado de nosso comportamento, eu sugiro um modo de distinguir coerentemente entre determinantes culturais e evolutivos da psicologia humana. Espero ainda demonstrar que essas distincoes sao aplicaveis nao a tipos distintos de fenomenos naturais ou categorias ontologicas, mas a diferentes niveis de descricao. Refletindo sobre esses pontos atraves das lentes das questoes filosoficas do reducionismo e da intencionalidade, podemos entender a distincao entre diretivas evolutivas e motivos psicologicos.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".