= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanArmak comments on Using Evolution for Marriage or Sex - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (148)
I think that the insofar is probably not, in fact, very far. The psychological mechanisms built up around sex predate the human species, they're not going to change so easily.
Plus, if increasing promiscuity doesn't make psychologically modern humans happier, why focus on changing the psychology of modern humans to like being more promiscuous? Aren't we privileging the question with respect to sex here? Why not spend that time and effort focusing on making people enjoy cheaper, more sustainably produced foods? How about changing our standards of humor so it's easier to satisfy people with cheesy sitcoms? Is making people more adapted to promiscuity the most helpful psychological alteration we could be making?
Well, other humans societies are known to be more relaxed and permissive about sex than the modern Western world. And that's without effective contraception. So we clearly can improve somewhat.
No. But down that road lies the argument of "invest all your effort in the single most efficient charity to the exclusion of everything else". Most people don't actually do this, so it makes sense to talk about other things too.
The suggestion here is that making people more adapted to promiscuity the most helpful alteration we could be making with regard to promiscuity. Maybe one of the most helpful alterations with regard to sex in general.
Really, since most of the societies I can think of are a lot more restrictive.
Most are, but some (few?) are more permissive. I can't remember the right examples, though; I could find them if you're not aware of any examples.
Does it make them happier? How do we know this actually constitutes an improvement?
ETA: We would have evolved different psychological mechanisms around sex if the biological and ecological conditions around it had been different millions of years ago, but those psychological mechanisms are adaptations for our genetic continuation, not our happiness. Just because we've got safer, lower consequence access to sex than in our ancestral environment, does not necessarily mean we'd be happier if we adapted to use that access to a fuller extent.
We don't want to go down the road of "invest your money in the Society for Prevention of Rare Diseases in Cute Puppies" either. Lots of people do that, but that doesn't make it sensible.
By listening to the people who tried it?
Possible selection bias.
There's a big difference between becoming polyamorous and simply increasing promiscuity. The people who wrote those are in stable relationships with people they're happy with. Neither was in such a relationship prior to polyhacking.