{"title":"关于将进化分析纳入社会学行动理论的思考","authors":"Andreas Tutić","doi":"10.1007/s11577-023-00907-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is explored if and to what extent two approaches in behavioral sciences, which are promising with respect to an evolutionary grounded, integrative action theory, are actually compatible. These two approaches are, on the one hand, evolutionary psychology, which conceptualizes human nature as a collection of evolved psychological mechanisms, each being functionally specialized with respect to a specific problem of adaptation. And on the other hand, the dual-process perspective, which holds that human behavior is driven by the interplay of two qualitatively distinct types of cognitive processes: Autonomous, fast, and associative Type 1 processes, which operate outside of the consciousness of the actor, on the one hand, and controlled, slow, and rule-based Type 2 processes of which the actor is aware. Notably, both of these approaches have descendants in modern sociological action theory, i.e., goal-framing theory (Lindenberg 2008, 2009) and the model of frame-selection (Esser 2001; Kroneberg 2011). It is argued that evolutionary psychology and the dual-process perspective are largely compatible, thereby giving rise to an evolutionary grounded, integrative action theory. Accordingly, Type 1 processes can be traced back to evolutionary old cognitive modules, which humans share with other species and which are highly efficient at solving specific problems of adaptation in a stable environment. In contrast, Type 2 processes of higher cognition are distinctly developed in humans and highly effective at dealing with a rapidly changing life space.","PeriodicalId":46893,"journal":{"name":"Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thoughts on Integrating Evolutionary Analysis into Sociological Action Theory\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Tutić\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11577-023-00907-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract It is explored if and to what extent two approaches in behavioral sciences, which are promising with respect to an evolutionary grounded, integrative action theory, are actually compatible. These two approaches are, on the one hand, evolutionary psychology, which conceptualizes human nature as a collection of evolved psychological mechanisms, each being functionally specialized with respect to a specific problem of adaptation. And on the other hand, the dual-process perspective, which holds that human behavior is driven by the interplay of two qualitatively distinct types of cognitive processes: Autonomous, fast, and associative Type 1 processes, which operate outside of the consciousness of the actor, on the one hand, and controlled, slow, and rule-based Type 2 processes of which the actor is aware. Notably, both of these approaches have descendants in modern sociological action theory, i.e., goal-framing theory (Lindenberg 2008, 2009) and the model of frame-selection (Esser 2001; Kroneberg 2011). It is argued that evolutionary psychology and the dual-process perspective are largely compatible, thereby giving rise to an evolutionary grounded, integrative action theory. Accordingly, Type 1 processes can be traced back to evolutionary old cognitive modules, which humans share with other species and which are highly efficient at solving specific problems of adaptation in a stable environment. In contrast, Type 2 processes of higher cognition are distinctly developed in humans and highly effective at dealing with a rapidly changing life space.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46893,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-023-00907-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-023-00907-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Thoughts on Integrating Evolutionary Analysis into Sociological Action Theory
Abstract It is explored if and to what extent two approaches in behavioral sciences, which are promising with respect to an evolutionary grounded, integrative action theory, are actually compatible. These two approaches are, on the one hand, evolutionary psychology, which conceptualizes human nature as a collection of evolved psychological mechanisms, each being functionally specialized with respect to a specific problem of adaptation. And on the other hand, the dual-process perspective, which holds that human behavior is driven by the interplay of two qualitatively distinct types of cognitive processes: Autonomous, fast, and associative Type 1 processes, which operate outside of the consciousness of the actor, on the one hand, and controlled, slow, and rule-based Type 2 processes of which the actor is aware. Notably, both of these approaches have descendants in modern sociological action theory, i.e., goal-framing theory (Lindenberg 2008, 2009) and the model of frame-selection (Esser 2001; Kroneberg 2011). It is argued that evolutionary psychology and the dual-process perspective are largely compatible, thereby giving rise to an evolutionary grounded, integrative action theory. Accordingly, Type 1 processes can be traced back to evolutionary old cognitive modules, which humans share with other species and which are highly efficient at solving specific problems of adaptation in a stable environment. In contrast, Type 2 processes of higher cognition are distinctly developed in humans and highly effective at dealing with a rapidly changing life space.
期刊介绍:
The sociology journal Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (KZfSS) ("Cologne Journal of Sociology and Social Psychology") was founded in 1948 by the Cologne sociologist Leopold von Wiese as the Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie. His successor, René König, broadened the journal''s scope towards social psychological topics, including cultural sociology and qualitative social research, which gave the journal its current name.
KZfSS is the most important sociological publication in the German-speaking world in terms of its scope and distribution. It publishes comprehensively on German sociological research in all disciplines and regularly communicates research results from many countries around the world.
KZfSS follows the model of a universal sociology journal. In addition to more than 40 double-blind peer-reviewed original research articles per year, it publishes detailed literature reviews and book reviews of German and international literature in a comprehensive review section. The journal thus provides a forum for sociological research and open discussion. Special emphasis is placed on offering young colleagues an opportunity for their first publication.
The journal is included in many renowned scientific Abstracting & Indexing databases such as the Social Science Citation Index.
In addition to the four annual issues, a supplement coordinated by guest editors is published annually.