Why would an atheist care about monogamy?

[Newpublius]

For a woman, maybe, but for a man who doesn't need protection, no.

Well there are sexually transmitted diseases too.

The point is that there is an inherent tension that exists between the two behaviors.

[Devil'sAdvocate]

Much of the scientific literature says it was evolutionary. Part of it had to do with shortages in the availability of females. Part of it had to do with protecting and keeping children alive. You'll have to expose yourself to all the literature out there and freely available.

That is not to say that society didn't enter into it and select for monogamy nor that culture didn't also enter into it in terms of the much later appearance of the institution of marriage.

Also, a certain though small percentage of mammals are monogamous. Animals can be social, but hardly can be said to have culture--let alone sit down as a group and discuss and decide to be monogamous as a social construct would imply.

So stop it with the postmodern everything's a social construct stuff already.

Well yeah, laws and institutions which arise from reason and constrain human biology are social constructs, and this is sometimes for the better, since our biology isn't that much different from an ape and still contains the same violent and rapacious impulses.

Postmodernism is different, since postmodernism would hold that truth itself is a construct, which isn't my argument.

[Chris]

Well yeah, laws and institutions which arise from reason and constrain human biology are social constructs, and this is sometimes for the better, since our biology isn't that much different from an ape and still contains the same violent and rapacious impulses.

Postmodernism is different, since postmodernism would hold that truth itself is a construct, which isn't my argument.

You skipped right on past the evolutionary stuff and the biological stuff.


I don't think I've seen a thread of yours in which you didn't claim everything is a social construct. Perhaps you're just not good at playing devil's advocate.

[Cletus]

It's a legitimate question. I cannot readily discern why an atheist would care about the integrity of monogamy.

You might try thinking about it. Are you telling us that you can't see any reason for monogamy other than fear of retribution from some vengeful deity?

[Cletus]

I'm going to assume it's just because some people are mindless followers, and blindly follow whatever the conventional laws or beliefs of their surrounding culture are without any regard for the logic or consistency.

To date, you have demonstrated nothing more than a passing acquaintance with logic, reason, or rational thinking.

[Devil'sAdvocate]

You skipped right on past the evolutionary stuff and the biological stuff.


I don't think I've seen a thread of yours in which you didn't claim everything is a social construct. Perhaps you're just not good at playing devil's advocate.

If your argument is that humans biologically evolved to monogamy, I don't see how that can be the case. My understanding is that human biology hasn't changed except in very marginal increments since are earliest ancestors.

And if people were biologically hardwired to be monogamous, then people would never feel a temptation to cheat on their spouse; the fact that infidelity occurs is because our purely physical nature isn't monogamous; monogamy was created to keep our physical desires in line.

[Chris]

If your argument is that humans biologically evolved to monogamy, I don't see how that can be the case. My understanding is that human biology hasn't changed except in very marginal increments since are earliest ancestors.

And if people were biologically hardwired to be monogamous, then people would never feel a temptation to cheat on their spouse; the fact that infidelity occurs is because our purely physical nature isn't monogamous; monogamy was created to keep our physical desires in line.

It is the case. Your personal incredulity is not an argument.

That's a strange dichotomy, everything is either biology or social construct.

[Ethereal]

Not sure where you come up with these premises but they are not known to be true.

It's an active debate within anthropological circles whether or not humans as a species are naturally polyamorous or monogamous. There is a good deal of evidence suggesting it is the former.

[Ethereal]

Because it's the best way to raise kids

Why?

[Ethereal]

You might try thinking about it. Are you telling us that you can't see any reason for monogamy other than fear of retribution from some vengeful deity?

No, not really. Not in any generalized sense, at least. I know there are reasons specific to certain institutions or authorities, but not humanity at large. My reading of the evolutionary and anthropological evidence leads me to believe that polyamory is a much more sensible way for humans to reproduce and associate. I understand that many people are perfectly happy with being monogamous, and I won't rule out the possibility that monogamy has some niche role to play in the evolutionary order, but I do not accept the belief that monogamy is a superior or preferable form of human social evolution. I consider it mostly an artificial construct imposed on society by institutions of authority having to do with issues of paternity and private property.