The following text is about evolutionary psychology.
Evolutionary psychology proposes that many human psychological traits evolved as adaptations to ancestral environments. Fear of snakes, for example, may persist because avoiding venomous animals conferred survival advantages. Critics argue this approach often relies on untestable 'just-so stories'—explanations that sound plausible but cannot be falsified. How would we prove that a particular psychological trait is an adaptation rather than a byproduct or random variation? Defenders counter that evolutionary hypotheses can generate testable predictions, even about traits that evolved in the distant past.
What is the central methodological criticism of evolutionary psychology presented in the text?
It ignores evolutionary biology entirely
Its explanations may be unfalsifiable 'just-so stories'
It cannot explain any psychological traits
It only studies ancient humans
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Critics argue the approach "often relies on untestable 'just-so stories'—explanations that sound plausible but cannot be falsified."
- Evidence: Untestable; cannot be falsified.
- Reasoning: Scientific explanations should be testable.
- Conclusion: Unfalsifiability is the key critique.
Choice A is incorrect because the approach explicitly uses evolutionary biology. Choice C is incorrect because it can propose explanations; the question is verification. Choice D is incorrect because study scope isn't the methodological critique.