Most things in psychology make more sense in the light of evolution. Consider,
American Psychologist March 1995
…In addition to emphasizing that natural selection works at the level of the individual, not the society, it is also important to note that the current human genotype is a result of past evolution. Furth (1995) states that we hold that the two ontogenetic developmental lines mentioned in our article have been selected for “the evolutionary advantage this dialectic attains in modern humans” (Furth, 1995, p. 176). If a trait or structure selected over the millions of years of hominid evolution is currently adaptive, that is indeed fortunate; however, “modern” humanity accounts for only a tiny fraction of the time humans and humanlike primates have been on the earth and subject to selection pressures. Thus, these two developmental lines must have been advantageous over a long period of premodern hominid evolution…
American Psychological Association 1994
Western psychologies have traditionally given greater importance to self-development than to interpersonal relatedness, stressing the development of autonomy, independence, and identity as central factors in the mature personality. In contrast, women, many minority groups, and non- Western societies have generally placed greater emphasis on issues of relatedness. This article traces the in- dividualistic bias and recent challenges to this view. It is proposed that evolutionary pressures of natural selection result in two basic developmental lines: interpersonal relatedness and self-definition, which interact in a dialectical fashion. An increasingly mature sense of self is contingent on interpersonal relationships; conversely, the continued development of increasingly mature interpersonal relationships is contingent on mature self-definition. Conclusions include implications for social policy and for facilitating more balanced development of both dimensions all members of society.
Individuality and Relatedness – Evolution of a Fundamental Dialectic