Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
It is a bad comparison and mostly because this part;
"It wouldn't make sense that humans evolve from other mammals, develop a larger brain to separate them from their predecessors, and then go against all logic that millions of years of evolution taught the animal kingdom."
is actually not really right at all, surely. Humans are animals yes but the evolution of the human brain is at this point so far beyond any other animal life (on earth...) that being quick to compare to the animal kingdom never really gains much. The basics being... the vast majority of animals don't love at all. We like to assign pets human characteristics - we like to pretend that our dogs love us in a human way - they simply don't, and can't, because non-human animals simply aren't capable of the level of abstract thought required for "human love"... therefore they can't really be placed in a debate about the nature of human connection.
Animal instinct is relevant to a discussion about desire, or "lust", but they're completely different things. Other than the fact that (again, going back to it) most people are deeply socially conditioned to confuse the two.
|
I mean, love can be explained by a chemical reaction in the brain that doesnt exist in other animals. Chocolate can cause the same reaction, and so could a multiple partner
if it was socially acceptable to have one, and people very hypothetically lived in an unimaginably different world to what we're in now.