I think you may be missing my point. The rough outline of what I'm saying is that it's completely baseless to first assume a monogamy instinct since all of the data available indicates that we have evolved to prefer numerous mates, and to exploit numerous mating opportunities. It is only through cultural conditioning that we
suppress those urges and remain monogamous. However, the urges we feel are to mate with multiple different partners as often as possible, the
exact opposite of the suggestion in the OP of a "monogamy instinct."
The idea of monogamy is all well and good, and is definitely worthy of discussion in a psychology thread, however, my interpretation is that this is hardly the intended purpose here based on the OPs own posts.
I'm gonna lay the legal smack down on your cow worshippin' ass now.
Exhibit A:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydrogenBond
there are strong human counter emotions that suggest there is also a monogamous instinct within humans.
|
Exhibit B:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydrogenBond
Here is my theory for the monogamous instinct
|
You may also recall that I expressly suggested that one should first demonstrate the existence of a "monogamous instinct" prior to speculating about potential causes of it.
Exhibit C:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydrogenBond
all things being equal, monogamy within parents improves the mind/brain software in the next generation of brains, which are the children. Humans are composed of hardware and software, creating a dichotomy.
Monogamy in adults is better geared to the software emulation of hardware, within children because it doesn't change programming oars in midstream.
|
If that's not a strange claim, then I don't know what is.
Regardless, it's all baseless assertions, without a single solitary citation or reference with hard empirical data in support. He may as well be arguing that the farts of purple unicorns cause erections in leprechauns, but only on Tuesdays during a leap year.
Hmmm... Okay, so maybe I wouldn't make a very good lawyer, but my original point remains. It's completely baseless to first assume a monogamy instinct since all of the data available indicates that we have evolved to prefer numerous mates, and to exploit numerous mating opportunities... All data suggests that our "instincts" are to have diverse sexual partners, and that "monogamy" is a learned trait tied strongly to the society in which we were raised whereby we condition ourselves to suppress those natural urges. Either way, our "natural urges" (what some might call "instincts") are toward engaging in coitus with multiple partners. It's as simple as that.
Maybe things would be better if HB actually took a moment to define "monogamy instinct." What does that even mean? Does it mean that if I'm in a relationship with one girl and I see some other uber hot nude female beckoning me to her bed that I'm going to run the other direction due to some instinctual repulsion... a repulsion I would only feel due to my already being in a relationship with someone else? ... That if I weren't in another relationship, I would not feel the urge to run away or be repulsed? I mean, WTF are we even talking about here? The suggestion is laughable. The data is so fully on the other side of this I wonder why the question was even asked in the first place (but, while I wonder, TBH, I don't really care).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boerseun
"Firm grasp" on the topic... at the sex lab? Man, I can think of a million witty comebacks to that one... |
I've certainly missed you, my friend. I hope things are well in SA.
