BillMcD wrote: slb wrote:
Per your strange logic then, being asleep and eating should also be closely reserved. That's the funniest explanation I've been given to justify the sex taboo in our civilization
And sleeping often is
'closely reserved'. Animals tend not to sleep where they don't feel safe. They also tend to maintain a high level of alert while eating. Watch even semi-feral dogs or cats sometime, and you'll see it.
Interesting how you've come back to animals regarding the feeding, sure humans are not considering this activity "closely reserved", they actually enjoy this activity in crowded areas like restaurants. But guess what ? They no more consider sleeping "closely reserved", never heard of dormitories ?
I know it's difficult to admit a taboo because it is ingrained and considered "normal", Diogenes
was already unsettling the citizens of Athens because he was ridiculing the traditions and taboos 2500 years ago by masturbating in public. But at least he was not thrown in prison for that.
slb wrote:You probably missed all the posts in this thread about animals having sex not for a reproductive purpose. Also the higher on the food chain a mammal is, the longer and more frequents are their ruts, compare the matting duration of a rabbit and a lion. Oh, and BTW, the human being is on the top of the food chain ...
Nope, didn't miss a one. And it doesn't change anything, either. You'll note I didn't say that drive for safety only occurred when rutting for procreative purposes. It's always there, because the act is always one involving vulnerability.
Sorry, I was not explicit enough. My point was to explain that your use of animal matting habits was a nonsense because animals themselves do not all show the behavior you're attributing them. If mating is dangerous for a species, evolution will take care of that and matting will be very short (a few seconds for a rabbit) and avoid non-reproductive behavior; conversely predators are not vulnerable during the matting (several minutes for a lion). You could certainly draw a better comparison regarding animal and human sexuality with predators or even better primates like bonobo/chimpanzes who actually are using sex as a social behavior.
BillMcD wrote:a)the "reptile brain" underlies everything you do. It is a functioning, strong, and often dominant part of the decision-making process that takes place in the human mind - a decision-making process, I should note, that seems to happen before you consciously make a decision. (see Libet, Benjamin). It is a very large part of why, as rational as we like to pretend to be, we are still very much creatures of emotional knee-jerk response before reasoned decision unless we make not insignificant efforts to train ourselves otherwise.
You are twisting Libet's work here. Nowhere Libet says that unconscious processes in the brain are "dominant" for decision-making: They are the initiators, this is extremely different. Libet also explains that after this unconscious initiator, then the consciousness accept or veto. And that's basically where all our education and sophisticated motives are, including our sex taboos.
BillMcD wrote:b)Sorry, society itself is merely a means to increase the chances for reproduction[...]The continuation of life is Life's purpose. Everything that we do, as individuals, as groups, as a species, is tied directly or indirectly to the need to breed.
Has a transhumanist, I disagree with this statement but it is unrelated to our topic, if you're interested on discussing that we may start a new thread.
BillMcD wrote:We don't know a)to what extent thinkamancy/loyalty/duty combine to form an underlying precondition[...] 'if the Warlord/Overlord/Ruler wants it, you want it'[...]
We know that at least a caster unit may not want it, remember Sizemore & Parson dialog about killing.
BillMcD wrote:b)we don't know to what degree units with some measure of self-determination (warlords, casters, etc) place value on intimacy, for exactly the reasons you mention: there's no biological necessity that we know of, so we have no way to know if the 'rules' that govern Erf generate a simulated imperative that would give rise to similar tendencies or not.
Sure, except that again, intimacy is related to a sex taboo and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it is a reproductive act