Gould and Richard Lewontin famously criticized behavioral ecology, saying much of it was little more than story-telling, and that behavioral ecologists were so certain that species traits were adaptive that they weren’t bothering to test whether this was actually the case. Sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, and behavioral ecology have been (rightly) criticized both on political grounds, but also for a lack of scientific rigor. Ecology and evolution seem to be especially susceptible to just-so narratives, as researchers struggle to attribute the patterns they see in nature to a causal mechanism. In science, just-so stories are compelling because they’re simple, elegant, intuitive, and fun to tell. They’re entertaining, but not factually accurate (hence the pejorative). “How the Rhinoceros Got His Skin,” “How the Leopard Got His Spots,” and “How the Camel Got His Hump” offer moral, rather than scientific, explanations for evolution. The term is a reference to Rudyard Kipling’s collection of children’s fables that playfully use species traits as a framework for teaching kids important life lessons.

Calling something a “just-so story” in science is almost universally intended as a criticism. Sometimes, what we think we know about the natural world is based more on story-telling than the scientific method. Girl’s preference for pink. Are these fact, or fiction? “Just-so stories” are named after Rudyard Kipling’s 1902 book of animal fables.

Just so stories animals