which would result in the perfect version of every living thing
existing in harmony with the environment. Not exactly. The gen-
eral idea is that some biological features that an organism possesses
might help the organism adapt to their current environment. For
example, the ability to digest certain kinds of foods or even to react
in a certain way to a dangerous situation. Also, mutations in genes
occur all the time. Think about freckles, stork bites, or birthmarks.
Those are often the cause of random gene mutations. Children
aren’t exact copies of their parents. Unless they are identical
twins, each child has a unique combination of genes from both
parents. Combinations of genes from parents to offspring result in
the wonderful variations we see in all living things. Over time these
variations might help or hinder survival. In psychology, the influ-
ence of Darwin led to an early school of thought called
functionalism.
Back in the 1900s psychology was very different than it is
today. A major way of thinking about behavioral and mental pro-
cesses emerged called functionalism. Functionalism was concerned
with the purposes of behavior. William James, an early functional-
ist, was inspired by Charles Darwin’s work on finding meaning
behind the behaviors and physical structures of animals. Darwin
inspired biologists not only to describe but also to explain why
animals have certain biological features such as long necks, or the
ability to fly. The goal of functionalism was not simply to identify
a behavior but also to describe how aspects of it increased the
likelihood of survival. Functionalists were interested in how beha-
vior acts to adapt to the environment. Modern functionalists or
evolutionary psychologists try to explain the evolutionary benefit
of our behaviors.
How does this relate to sensation-seeking? Many human
actions contain some element of risk. Riskier actions can lead to
great rewards or great peril. For example, being an experience-
seeker might mean you are drawn to unusual foods you’ve never
tried before. But choosing the wrong food can lead to disgust, or
even death, if you’ve made a particularly unfortunate selection. For
low sensation-seekers like me this risk would have been an incen-
tive to stick with familiar, safe foods. Sensation-seekers may have
chafed at a boring diet and sought new options, however, even if
they seemed unlikely to yield much interest. As delicious as
a pineapple is, on the outside it looks like a prickly pinecone. If
I didn’t know what was inside, I would likely not explore any36 / Buzz!Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Access paid by the UCSF Library, on 11 Nov 2019 at 14:20:40, subject to the Cambridge