(April 2, 2018 at 3:51 pm)Khemikal Wrote:(April 2, 2018 at 3:32 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I see how y'all can get caught up with him using the word "supernatural" in the beginning there. But the rest of it can make logical sense for anyone, imho. He made a great point.
LOL? What point? To say I'm not "biologically suited" to monogamy is to ignore everything about me. It starts there, and just gets worse, asserting magic in place of the obvious.
-Biologically, I'm massive, intelligent, fiercely loyal, and deeply committed. It's who I am. Who I've always been. It didn't even need to be taught my most instructive lessons have been those times when who I am has lead to misery..my own or others, lol. If I were a betting man, it's the explanation for why I've never been single. Why I'm a serial monogamist with five kids and more trouble brushing off the ladies than anything else. Why I'm still convinced my every ex was a wonderful person and mommy material.
The author did not say we are not "biologically suited" for monogamy. That's what the professor said that he was arguing with. The author's argument is that we are suited for it because we are rational beings.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
