Science Forums 2

[Boerseun]

Jeez, Louise...

Sometimes, I think I'm talking to a wall. Or that very few of my posts are actually read.

If HB says that humans are monogamous, then he's flat-out wrong.

However, the idea that humans are monogamous is prevalent, and cuts across cultural and religious boundaries.

Why would that be?

That, in itself, the idea that we are something that we clearly and explicitly are not, is endlessly fascinating in itself, and is fertile soil for discussion of the properly scientific kind.

I won't recommend this thread for Strange Claims, because after all, this isn't the first time you heard any human claim to be monogamous. Let's forget the fact that HB claims that there's a monogamy instinct, which is false, and dig a little deeper and ask him why he believes it to be the case. Because that, in itself, is mighty fascinating.

I'll tell you my theory for the belief in human monogamy: It all boils down to our social hierarchy. You don't wanna mess with the Alpha Male's women. And not because you don't want to, but because the Alpha Male wants to protect his interests, and don't want any other DNA to compete with his. By the same token, you wouldn't take any nonsense from any other males lower on the totem pole. And so the chief, or priests, or whoever in any particular society sways the biggest influence, defend the concept of human monogamy. Although the real reason might not be religious, as might be claimed by the priest. The real reason behind it is merely the preservation of the hierarchy, or simply the maintenance of social stability.

That's one of the reasons that I believe HB can so easily fall into the trap of simply assuming human monogamy as a fact. Because its culturally ingrained over so many generations that we have come to unquestioningly accept the dogma.

But the prevalence of that particular dogma would not make it a strange claim in the least.