I’m not asking you to take my word. That’s why I always link so much supporting info. Pinker is a respected psychologist- he’s not trained as a historian, anthropologist, or sociologist and it shows in his work and in the critiques of him from people who are. I previously linked you a story specifically about that - going into it in detail.
And, I actually linked you two stories about what's wrong with Buss, the second one specifically going into the flaws in his methodology - as well as the more general problems with all EP - plus another story that I researched and wrote about what's wrong with EP.
The difference between what is generally accepted as mainstream amongst experts and the what is widely in the cultural narrative (from people largely uneducated about the science - and who have their own agendas) ought to be self-evident.
Neither Buss nor Pinker are experts in the areas that they often provide opinions about, just as Jordan Peterson is not trained in most of the things that he spouts off around - and why so much of what he ways is also wrong. The fact that some people look to them as experts despite their lack of training or in depth experience in the fields they are discussing is a large part of why we have the disconnect that we do between cultural narrative and what is fact or at least widely accepted as fact by those who are experts.
As already stipulated, there is nothing even in the hard sciences that is 100% agreed upon and has no discussion or controversy, but when the vast majority of people who study something full time reach similar conclusions over a long period of time, then one can reasonably assume they are on track unless one knows enough about the subject to be able to spot inconsistencies or problems. For example, the new guidelines published by the APA in 2019 took 13 years to craft because they meticulously went through 40 years of research from a wide variety of sources. For me, that's a pretty good indication that they are correct.
Plus, I know enough about the neuroscience of human connection, ancient anthropology, primatology and other related topics to be able to draw on what makes sense through a wider lens and not just that which comes from the field of psychology.
And, you don't have to take my word for anything, but since I've linked you all sorts of supporting essays themselves filled with other people's research, intimating that I haven't made my case is a bit rich. I know it's a lot to read and/or sort through and nothing says that you have to read any of it - but it also kind of negates any critiques of what I've said if you haven't made yourself familiar with where I'm coming from and why I think what I do.
Edit: Clearly Buss is considered a legitimate evolutionary psychologist, but since the methodology of that entire field is lacking and insufficient and doesn’t take into consideration all kinds of things it would need to in order to come to more scientific conclusions, I don’t consider him an expert in what he talks about.
Here’s the Pinker story again in case you want to have a look at it (or somebody else reading this does).
