Scott Alexander critiques Emil Kirkegaard's evolutionary definition of mental illness, arguing for separate terms to distinguish between social dysfunction and evolutionary fitness concepts.
Longer summary
Scott Alexander responds to Emil Kirkegaard's proposal for defining mental illness based on evolutionary fitness. Scott argues that while Kirkegaard's definition may be useful in evolutionary psychology, it doesn't align with practical needs in mental health care and social policy. He proposes keeping two separate concepts: one based on social dysfunction (Scott's definition) and another based on evolutionary fitness (Kirkegaard's definition). Scott provides several examples to illustrate the differences and limitations of Kirkegaard's approach, including ADHD, alcoholism, and ephebophilia. He concludes that Kirkegaard should coin a new term for his concept, such as 'genetic maladaptation', while preserving the term 'mental disorder' for its more common usage.
Shorter summary