User talk:85.154.169.140

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/faculty/boyd/HenrichBoydRichersonHumNat08.pdf

The above has good review of many of the criticisms and critics of DIT - many of which are now in the new "criticisms" section. The "criticisms" section would likely benefit from a distinction between the semantic arguments against DIT (that certain words should or should not be used to explain processes in DIT) and substantive arguments (whether actual processes do or do not occur).

I could not find a copy of the Kaufman article online. Though its short abstract seems to be a review of another article cited.

67.166.158.234 (talk) 08:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)