[lbo-talk] Why think anthropologically (at least sometimes)

[Charles Darwin Jr. Jr.]

On 6/3/05, Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at dodo.com.au> wrote:
> At 5:57 PM -0700 3/6/05, Jim Devine wrote:
> 
> >The problem is that males and females are essentially the same
> >creature (subject to different hormone signals) and have co-evolved.
> >If women had evolved non-sentient, men would have, too, because they
> >basically have the same brains.
> 
> They both have the same nipples and breasts too, but they come out
> different. So your rationalisation that different brain sizes didn't
> happen because it wasn't possible doesn't cut much ice. Like I say,
> it didn't happen because it wouldn't have been any evolutionary
> advantage.
> 
> Pair bonding between women and men is an advantage however. Hence
> orgasm, which has been shown to play a part in bonding. The
> advantages of orgasm in terms of conception, which CB argues are its
> sole function, are actually minimal or non-existent. Far more crucial
> is what happens AFTER conception, the nurturing of the fetus (which
> necessarily involves that the mother prosper.) Then the long years of
> nurture, care and education of infant. It is a terrific advantage for
> the child to have two parents devoted to this task. The only mystery
> is why anyone would deny that this is the explanation. I think I've
> worked out CB, it seems to conflict with some kind of idealised
> version of primitive communism that he thinks it conflicts with.
> 
> >  Of course, many women would argue that
> >men _have_ evolved as non-sentient. This bias might be reinforced by
> >the implausible codswallop above.
> 
> Clever. But I suppose if the male was only necessary for conception,
> then a non-sentient male would make much more sense than a
> non-sentient female for Homo Sapiens. In fact the male could even be
> genetically programmed to drop dead and stop wasting food and space,
> as soon as the task of conception was completed. (Which does happen
> in some mammals.)
> 

-------------------------

The two posts above just go to show how much the grammar of Aristotle
is still with us.

More beer please..............