In the article levels of analysis revisited MacDougall Shackleton discusses why it is important in differentiating between the levels of analysis and levels of reductionism specifically ultimate functions and proximate mechanisms when constructing research questions and forming hypotheses This is very important when dealing with debates in evolutionary psychology because if there is no clear distinction between the two levels of analysis is it likely that counterfactual arguments can be formed To conclude this essay I will discuss why I agree with McDougall Shakleton on the necessity of clearly differentiating between the levels of analysis and why a thorough comprehension of both cause and function is required to understand behaviour To illustrate the instances where the levels of analysis differ he considers the use of songbirds as examples for specific conceptual differences At multiple points in the article he reiterates that neither ultimate or proximate explanations are superior to the other and are not necessarily mutually exclusive alternatives Firstly MacDougall Shakleton assesses a number of concepts that deal with levels of analysis and seeks to explain the differences between them
