When and why did the human self evolve
When and why did the human self evolve
复制标题
人类自我何时以及为何进化
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1970
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Robin I. M. Dunbar
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Sedikides;John J. Skowronski;Robin I. M. Dunbar
自我的建构是心理学及其相关学科的核心。这一构想使哲学家和科学家、宗教和政治人物、作家和诗人着迷。自我被誉为动机、情感和行为的基础，也被誉为更深入理解人性的关键。与此同时，自我被神秘化为神秘和短暂的，也被诋毁为个人痛苦和社会灾难的直接途径。考虑到自然选择原则在心理学中的相关性越来越大，这并不奇怪，一个多方面的和有影响力的自我结构已经开始吸引那些对各种人类心理属性的进化起源感兴趣的心理学家的注意。这些心理学家将人类自我概念化为一种为了应对推动自然选择的环境压力而进化的特征。然而，这一概念化是否可能产生成果是一些辩论的主题。这场辩论是由于我们认识到，我们对影响人类早期进化的条件的知识基础仍然很薄弱。因此，人们必须做出一些合理的假设，试图利用自然选择的原则来理解自我的进化起源。对于一些研究人员来说，这样的推测--无论信息多么灵通--都是徒劳的，甚至可能产生误导。对于那些只留下微弱物理痕迹的选择压力，如社会组织，尤其如此。例如，Bahn（1990，第75页）认为：“我不想透露这个消息，但社会组织是无法挖掘的，当人们所能希望的最好的是一个基于推理和类比的假设时.“然而，其他研究人员认为，产生知情的猜测有助于，甚至可能是必要的，发展对进化如何塑造人类心理特征的理解。正如奎亚特和雷诺兹（Quiatt and Reynolds，1993，p.262）所指出的：“人类学家如果能够完美地抑制自己的想象力，那他们的同伴就很无趣。只有明智的推测才能让我们了解我们的社会是如何进化的。“在这一章中，我们站在这两种争论的最后一方，而不是毫无歉意。
The construct of self is central to psychology and allied disciplines. This construct has captivated and enchanted philosophers and scientists, religious and political figures, writers and poets. The self has been hailed as the basis of motivation, emotion and behavior, and has also been heralded as the key to a deeper understanding of human nature. At the same time, the self has been mystified as enigmatic and fleeting, and has also been vilified as a direct route to personal miseries and societal woes. Given the increasing relevance of natural selection principles in psychology, it is not surprising that a construct as multifaceted and influential as the self has begun to attract the attention of those psychologists who are interested in the evolutionary origins of various human psychological attributes (e. These psychologists conceptualize the human self as a trait that evolved in response to the environmental pressures that drive natural selection. However, whether this conceptualization is likely to bear fruit is the subject of some debate. This debate is driven by the realization that our knowledge base concerning the conditions that influence the early evolution of humans is still thin. Consequently, one must make a number of plausible suppositions in an attempt to use principles of natural selection to understand the evolutionary origins of the self. For some researchers, such speculation—no matter how informed—is futile, and even potentially misleading. This is particularly true for those selection pressures, such as social organization, that leave only faint physical traces. For example, Bahn (1990, p. 75) argues: " I hate to break the news, but social organisation is unexcavatable, when the best one can hope for is a hypothesis based on inference and analogy … In fact it is quite possible that all the interpretations of Palaeolithic life yet put forward are hopelessly wrong, and in any case we shall never know which of them are correct. " However, other researchers believe that the generation of informed speculation facilitates, and may even be necessary to, the development of an understanding of how evolution has shaped human psychological characteristics. As noted by Quiatt and Reynolds (1993, p. 262): " Anthropologists who have managed perfectly to subdue their imagination make dull company. Only informed speculation can give us a sense of how our society Evolution of the Human Self 3 evolved. " In this chapter we side, rather unapologetically, with the latter of the two debate …