Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-7lfxl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-17T19:22:44.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reply to Van Lange et al.: Proximate and ultimate distinctions must be made to the CLASH model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2017

Tomás Cabeza de Baca
Affiliation:
Health Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94118 tomas.cabezadebaca@ucsf.edu http://profiles.ucsf.edu/tommy.cabezadebaca
Steve C. Hertler
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, College of New Rochelle, New Rochelle, NY 10801 stevenhertler@hotmail.com http://www.psycho-diagnostics.com
Curtis S. Dunkel
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Western Illinois University, Waggoner Hall, Macomb, IL 61455. C-Dunkel@wiu.edu http://www.wiu.edu/cas/psychology/faculty/dunkelcurtis/

Abstract

Transcending reviewed proximate theories, Van Lange et al.'s CLASH model attempts to ultimately explain the poleward declension of aggression and violence. Seasonal cold is causal, but, we contend, principally as an ecologically relevant evolutionary pressure. We further argue that futurity and restraint are life history variables, and that Life History Theory evolutionarily explains the biogeography of aggression and violence as strategic adaptation.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable