Earlier quoted context omitted.
All ev psych, even the most accurate stuff, runs the risk of being a backronym sooner or later because it attempts to canalize future possibility based on biological history. It tends to contain some teleology in the implicit assumption that humans today are peak human and that all evolution is biological. However, that said, it is very difficult in my experience to make correct decisions for a large organization if…
I like the big five, but HEXACO has that edge to ferret out corruption.
I think the future of ev psych is more in the bottom-up: what the evolutionary sub modules are and how do they articulate with each other to produce aspects of awareness/behavior — the stuff the Salk Institute is doing with using ML/AI to understand cognition, for example.