Exaptation Revisited: Changes Imposed by Evolutionary Psychologists and Behavioral Biologists

摘要

Some methodological adaptationists (perhaps unconsciously) hijacked the term "exaptation," and took an occasion of Stephen Jay Gould's misspeaking as confirmation that it possessed an evolutionarily "designed" function and was a version of an adaptation, something it was decidedly not. Others provided a standard of evidence for exaptation that was inappropriate, and based on an adaptationist worldview. This article is intended to serve as both an analysis of and correction to those situations. Gouldand Elisabeth Vrba's terms, "exaptation" and "ap-tation," as originally introduced, are very useful, unlike the faded adaptationist echo of "exaptation" devised by the methodological adaptationists, which has made the term incoherent. We will discuss howexaptation relates to function, to aptation, and to adaptation, both primary and secondary. These ideas have been rendered practically useless through their mistaken definitions and misapplications by evolutionary psychologists.