Outside of infancy, it is at least largely nonsense, generated by stilted unimaginative psychologists with very poor bases and evidence for their theories. It is a fairy tale. Key required pieces of evidence can not be unambiguously shown -- and it is NOT because "behavior is so complex". And, in fact, the cause is very, very simple:
The real reasons such 'theorists' are forced to such bizarre positions for explanation is simply that it is NOT ALLOWED that one hypothesize (or even imagine) that there are significant innate behavior-guidance factors that occur during development after infancy, in spite of clear universal qualitative changes in the nature of concepts (in a regular sequence, near particular ages) during child development -- somehow adults always rise to the challenge of "engineering" these, all across the globe.
PLUS: Such other real possibilities (such as emerging innate-guidance factors) are ruled out by the closed hypothetico-deductive systems. Spare yourself a large waste of time, and see an alternate, more biological (and more biologically likely) account via the "Human Ethology and Development" Project.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology