ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 มิ.ย. 2024
- Cheating Is in Our Genes: What Science Says about Monogamy
Watch the newest video from Big Think: bigth.ink/NewVideo
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though adultery is punishable by death in some societies, it still occurs regularly. This tells Dr. Helen Fisher there is probably a genetic predisposition toward cheating on your partner. Of course not everyone cheats, so it's not necessary for survival, but if we dial back ten thousand years, to a time when resources were more scarce, adultery would have helped genes survive the present generation and be passed onto the next. That gives a clear rational for men's desire to cheat, but what about women? Fisher offers several explanations...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HELEN FISHER:
Helen E. Fisher, Ph.D. biological anthropologist, is a Senior Research Fellow at The Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, and a Member of the Center For Human Evolutionary Studies in the Department of Anthropology at Rutgers University. She has written six books on the evolution, biology, and psychology of human sexuality, monogamy, adultery and divorce, gender differences in the brain, the neural chemistry of romantic love and attachment, human biologically-based personality styles, why we fall in love with one person rather than another, hooking up, friends with benefits, living together and other current trends, and the future of relationships - what she calls: slow love.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Helen Fisher: Everywhere you look in the world people are adulterers, even where you can get your head chopped off for it or stoned. That means that it probably has some biological predisposition. There’s all kinds of cultural reasons that people are adulterers. If you ask a person why they’re adulterers they may say, "Well I get lonely when my partner is out of town; I want to solve a sex problem; I’d like to have more sex; I’d like to get caught and patch up my marriage; I’d like to get caught and end my marriage; I’d like to supplement my marriage." But scientists are beginning to find out some biological predispositions. A predisposition doesn’t mean that you’re necessarily going to be adulterous. I mean, you can have a predisposition to alcohol and give up drinking.
And there’s some things about the brain that seem to predispose some people to adultery. One of them is a set of genes or a gene, we’re not quite sure which, in the vasopressin system. And there was a wonderful study out of Sweden. They studied a gene in the vasopressin among 552 men. Some men had no copies of the gene, some had one copy of the gene and some had two copies of the gene. And the more copies of this gene you had, the less stable your primary relationship was. They were not studying adultery but they were studying the stability of a partnership which can certainly lead to adultery that’s unstable. There’s also some genes in the immune system that seem to play a role in adultery. We tend to be drawn to people who have a different set of genes in this part of the immune system and, in fact, when the data show that when you are with a partner who is very similar to you in this part of the immune system women particularly are more likely to be adulterers and more likely to be adulterers when they’re ovulating, when they’re more likely to get pregnant.
I think we’ve evolved these three distinctly different brain systems for mating and reproduction - sex drive, feelings of intense romantic love and feelings of deep attachment. They’re often connected to each other. You can fall in love with somebody, drives up the dopamine system, triggers the testosterone system and all of a sudden they’re the sexiest person in the whole world. But they’re not always well connected. You can lie in bed at night and feel deep attachment for one person and then swing wildly into feelings of intense romantic love for somebody else and then swing wildly into feeling the sex drive for somebody who you barely ever met.
Which made me wonder whether millions of years ago there was something adaptive about having a partnership with one person and raising your babies and having extra relationships with other people. And it’s actually relatively easy to explain. Let’s dial back a million years. You’ve got a man who’s got a wife, a partnership, and two children. And he occasionally goes over the hill and sleeps with another woman and has two children, extra children, with her. He’s doubled the amount of DNA he has spread into the next generation. Those children will live and pass on whatever it is in him.........
To read the transcript, please go to bigthink.com/videos/helen-fis...
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.77[1/2] ก็ไม่ได้ชอบเอาชนะ แต่เรื่องอะไรต้องแพ้!!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JraaBYOd7I0/mqdefault.jpg)
Don't get married. You're welcome.
Thank you
*phew* was about to. thanks Jesus
But Why?!
Ibrahim Abu Eraq marriage! What is it good for? absolutely nothing for!
+Shubhankar Mukherjee It's good for human beings
i was married 28 years and I was so physically sick the entire time... I divorced and got a new partner of 8 years now - I have not had a cold or flu or virus in 8 years.
+Mary Peters (Eminpee)
your previous relationship was probably an unhealthy one, which was probably bad for your psychological health, which can greatly affect your physical health
Good thing he left your genes are trash.
Of course, for the last 8 years all ur germs went onto him and he took them away like a champ.
@@HakuCell what you say has a lot of credence, he has since been married three times since our relationship and he's terribly unwell to this day. I really have not been sick since we parted 15yrs ago.
I've never cheated. It hurts when someone you love is unfaithful. I could never put someone through that.
Right..it is most hurtful thing happen to a person
Don't normalize cheating by justifying romantics, it's destroying family values thus social stability.
It's too late at this point to save those values at this point.War is on the horizon and there's no way to stop it now.
Societies have to die eventually
Its the cycle of life
When someone's says family values u know it is just an invalid opinion
I smirked when she said that female adulterers got extra meat out of the arrangement.
+TestMeatDollSteak Thought the same thing. Aint nothing like getting a lil extra meat from across the hill.
Maybe they're predisposed to nonmonogamy but society doesn't offer obvious answers to that question, so people get scared and instead of negotiating for and planning an open relationship or marriage, they cheat.
NAH ..that's not scientific fact and we ARE NOT brainless animals as she would like to suggest
Her own argument suggests that people weren't naturally monogamous. The whole argument is dismantled by her own supporting arguments.
This is a pretty clear case of having a desired outcome, and then finding details that help suggest that the desired outcome is real. This is the opposite of scientific thought, and I hope that the anthropology/history communities start to break from this tradition of projection.
@@forgottenjewelsurbex7635 I Really would like that to be the case. However, You made a statement with no backing.
This title should be changed to, *"Cheating May or May Not be in Our Genes, We're Still Not Sure: What Science Says about Monogamy"*
true, it's too grab more viewers.
+rochat There really is no question about it: Cheating is absolutely in our genes.
+rochat The original title is right. Not may or may not... It is IN the genes of some of us.
+rochat according to her you can be predisposed to cheating if you have a certain set of genes statistically... now the real unknown part what what gene not whether you are predisposed to it... at least that's what she says.
Temperance Raziel She never spoke with any certainty and used words like probably and might quite a bit. So I don't yet believe it's "absolutely in our genes".
Hasn't this been known for quite awhile? Regardless, just because we have a predisposition towards it doesn't mean we should nurture it. Which is what a lot of people in comments are insinuating. But as Dr. Fisher explained, wouldn't it seem that it's an outdated thing? Meant for a time where personal survival of ones lineage and reproducing as much as possible was of utmost concern. In a "advanced" and "cultured" society, we should be capable of achieving more than blatant promiscuity in relationships. The most beautiful relationships tend to be the ones that have lasted the longest and been the truest and those are always looked up to by the rest of culture. So why would we want to encourage fooling around and having babies with whoever instead of trying to find someone to be dedicated to? Also this isn't coming from a religious point of view or whatever, I just don't understand why encouraging such behavior that can often be incredibly damaging to all parties involved, in a number of ways, is being so heavily encouraged nowadays (and during the hippie era, though for different reasons). According to Dr. Fisher, this is something that was developed ages ago in order to survive and only persists now because those are the ones who had reproduced the most. I'd say it's something that could be compared to wisdom teeth or the appendix. Something we have, but doesn't serve a purpose, but can still cause plenty of issues.
Thank You!
+Augerboy320
Absolutely, naturally inclined does not mean morally permissible, and it shouldn't be nurtured.
+Augerboy320 I'm not inviting you to my parties.
+Augerboy320 Have you considered that your moral indignation at the thought of non-monogamy is little more than the product of being brought up in a sexually Puritanical culture? More people than you might think have loving, honest OPEN relationships with their partners.
RobbyRaccoon My upbringing when it comes to culture in general, is widely diverse. My family, who have had what I consider to be very unique and experienced lives(with all sorts of stories; my parents in particular), have also had close family friends from all sorts of walks of life, and as a result I've been exposed to many different mentalities regarding virtually everything. I also grew up in communities where people weren't very judgmental and different/opposing views weren't simply discounted. So I would not think my belief that monogamy or at the very least restraint, should be encouraged over promiscuity, was only a result of a sexually puritanical culture. Rather, understanding many view points, statistics and studies, as well as personal experiences and observations. Also I doubt "more people than I think" are in successful open relationships considering that an incredibly small percentage of people are in or at some point participate in one. And for the few, many therapists think it is most often damaging, but of course there is a minority that it works exceedingly well for. Besides, the hook-up culture and nearly identical things, is what is being heavily advocated (and more of what I'm referring to), not open-relationships, which I believe to be a somewhat different argument. Obviously with a number of connections, but still a different matter overall. One which I still very much disagree with, but for different reasons, which I'd rather not delve too much into so as not to detract from the what I was originally inferring/stating my opinion on.
According to r/K selection theory, if you want a prosperous society you will need high ingroup preference that is found in the nuclear family. Monogamy benefits all parties involved especially the children. this type of video is troubling because upon reading the comments you see how degeneracy becomes a virtue to those who think only of superficial hedonism.
+Alex Franco "...need high ingroup preference that is found in the nuclear family" that bit is not accurate. It was the extended family and tribe that got us here. Nuclear family only came about from the industrial revolution forward.
Agree on the last part, and so-so on the r/K applied to humans (only if you are a completely illiterate person you are close to being an "r", everyone else is different degree of "K")
Cheers
This gives me insight as to why my son's father cheated and abandoned us when he was only 3 months old. I'll be very mindful to instill the morals needed for my son to fight his genetic coding.
+April Hare This gives me insight as to why my bird flew away. I'll be very mindful to instil the morals needed for my new bird to fight his genetic coding.
=========
How about you just teach your son to be open and honest about his desires, and have him become someone who values himself enough to find people who'll respect his non monogamous desires without having to lie? Just a thought
+Miryr we're not birds. I probably will do that as well, if that's what he chooses. I'm sure he'll use his father as an example of what not to be, whether it's lying, cheating or both,
Fair enough, seems like a reasonable approach. Having said this, we're more subject to genes than we humans care to admit. We just kinda forget that deep down we're all animals, hence the bird joke.
Either way, I wish you luck =)
+Miryr thank you. I greatly appreciate that. enjoy,
+April Hare It's kind of like teaching a person to fight against hunger or sweating. If it's genetic, you'll do nothing but cause him suffering and self-shaming the rest of his life. Why not, instead, teach him to accept whatever it is he desires to do romantically and be *honest* with himself and any mates he has in the future by telling them up front how he views a relationship and what he wants. Let the woman decide if she wants to be in an open relationship with him or a polyamorous one. Eventually genetics will win and he will cheat in a monogamous relationship, so it's better to just accept the fact that it's there and teach him to be honest. There are women out there who are just fine with an open relationship or are bi-sexual and would love for him to bring another woman to the bedroom.
It's all about finding the right one rather than making yourself the right one for someone else....
This is a very weak scientific argument. Seems entirely speculative and anecdotal.
+Hall1263 It's not anecdotal at all, you can check body of knowledge of Evolutionary Psychology. for start you can read Blank Slate by Steven Pinker.
Really? Natural selective pressure is incredebly high on reproductive habits, anything that dosent work goes out the evolutionary window fast. The very fact that humans still cheat is a strong indicator that the behavior did infact have evolutionary advantages to make it survive in competition with monogamy.
What about the science behind the jealousy and only wanting one person? It's funny, when I was single I understood the whole cheating thing had to do with everything she said here, but being in a long term relationship I can't even imagine cheating on him and I get sick to my stomach thinking about him cheating on me. It's weird how a status could distort your state of mind.
There goes one more myth man I love science now am not afraid to cheat or get cheated on
Genes rule us simple evolution!
Is not cheat if you discuss about it with your partner and you both agree to do it
Just don't enforce it!
She'll get extra Meat for sure lol
LMFAO
Dagnabbit
I have enjoyed the insights provided by this particular guest each time she has appeared.
Life is short, ballance your options and do all of your desires. And if you make mistakes grow from them.
A guy in a bar.
Wasteful way to live your existence
Thats a dangerous way to think..
Hmmm whether it's in our genes or not it's also a personal choice. Do if you don't like monogamy ok if you prefer monogamy ok. just don't try to force someone else into your thinking. Monogamy could just be a more emotional choice based on how much that person means to you. There are some people who just end up only loving one person very greatly and there's nothing wrong with that. If that's not you don't worry about it. you don't have to say yes to marriage. Just make sure you and the person your with discuss these things so there's less damage and issues. That's the way I see it.
🙌
Makes sense. Why are we so surprised and emotionally effected when deep down we know it's more natural than monogamy?
Because nature, as in the total sum of our cultural, mental, and behavioural traits from ancient times, in it self isn't intrinsically or ultimately beautiful
Is murdering someone natural instinct?
interesting, thanks for sharing Helen
"she'll get extra meat" that's for sure!
+Arth Fader This is the comment that I was looking for :D
eh. I've heard this argument before and I just don't buy it.
All you are talking is sex, lusting the body ...we marry when we love the person. You're old enough respect yourself and academia and make da difference !!
You can love more than one person...
When your gf does that to you? What will you do
I died when she said she gets extra meat
There was a time when the population wasn’t so large and multiplying was a requirement.
Now we don’t have that issue in terms of population but our genetic instincts remain in tact
~ I’m writing this from my girlfriends sisters bed 😭. Kill me now!!
Wow
Yes true even though we are to be monogamous we are going against nature we are programmed that way by nature
I know this might not fall in line with how people view love. marriage and tradition. But from a biological standpoint, it makes perfect sense, and I give her credit for talking about this, not necessarily say, hey you should be cheating, but she's just putting science and logic behind why people do it in the first place aside from an emotional reason.
Often times we are at ends with our own biology and physiology, to the point where it makes people uncomfortable and even angry just by the thought of it.
At the end of the day, we're just the smartest apes on a spec of dust floating around in the cosmos.
Not true . There’s a difference between true love and caveman . In sorry but you weren’t in love . If your partner isn’t enough - then that’s not true love . Most men are poly - because they aren’t truly in love . If you badly want others - that’s not being in love . That’s why I always tell females to remain single . Most females are monotonous and can never be with a poly man . Men find monotony a burden and claim it’s against nature to fall in love and be with on it that person . But what you are describing is against the nature of love . Men were conditioned to be with many females . Falling in love and being attracted to mainly one person , thinking about one person and not being as attracted to others/fantasising etc - isn’t un natural . Perhaps it’s ‘ biology ‘ for caveman or regular men that aren’t in love . Most men aren’t in love . Just lust . That’s why don get married .
We need to conquer the galaxy though, we need to pump up those numbers
It makes sense, if you look at our animal ancestors there's no/little monogamy, so why should it be natural for us humans?
Also, before taking the road on this one, how many times have you fantasized about having multiple partners?
I'm not saying this is something everyone should embrace but rather that those who want to live this way get the chance to do so as it is probably more natural to us humans than monogamy.
+HK Normann monogamy can be advantageous: it ensures that each one of your child get the highest possible care, rather than having many children where you treat each with little care. And in case of our closest ancestors another variant also exists:
Harems: males are polygamous, but females are monogamous (at least until another male comes in and kills the previous one and the previous children, in which case they end up switching partners)
Spliter That's determined by number of children rather than number of partners. If you read stories by people who grew up with polyamorous parents they often describe it as more positives than negatives when it comes to care.
mantazr Sure, people proboably find taboo stuff more sexy when looking up porn (the forbidden fruit is always the sweetest), but i doubt they'll ever want to do it in real life like some would want to be in an orgy or threesome etc.
+mantazr You just tried to discredit his statement by making up some statistics.
Rape, and underage sex implies harm to other people, it is morally wrong, whereas polygamous relationships are taboo only because they aren't the norm. Monogamy is so embedded into the human race, that most people see anything different as inherently wrong, just because polygamy isn't normal in most parts of the world, it doesn't mean that it is morally wrong.
One might even say that monogamy is wrong, since in it's roots there are jealousy and selfishness.
+Kopac Tunela Did you even try? Again it's really hard for me to not call you names but look up porn statistics, mom, sister and teen is right up there top 10. Now I will use your logic, underage sex doesn't mean harm to other people. Underage sex is taboo only because they aren't the norm. Now in some countries (maybe even half of the world) you can marry and have sex with a 13year old because it's a time when she can give birth, nature made it that way, means it's more natural and we should do it that way. That's is all your logic, I hope you feel proud of your values and your thinking.
Adultery is immoral. You wanna fuck around? Be my guest. Just don't make empty promises to people who will be destroyed if they found out you were cheating on them.
Loved this.
This is the most exhaustive explanation ever as to why one should stick to flings.
I'm 27, never had a girlfriend or been in love. But have had crushes, and slept with girls i've dated. I'm absolutely terrified of love and being cheated on. I get very hurt seeing the girl I'm dating talking to another guy in the club (if I don't quite trust her), never mind finding the mother of my children in bed with another man. I feel like, I'd love to experience true love (and have awesome passionate hot sex with a partner like that) but at the same time I'm so scared of the dark side of it. Monogamy cleary doesn't work out well for humans.
Same. Here but I'm virgin 😒
Excellent incredibly interesting! Excellent speaker!!
Marriage is evil and always has been.
+Rand Huso I think the way that marriages are currently presented and arranged are at fault. The marriage itself is good. Societies interpretation of marriage is what ruins it.
+SilicalNZ what's wrong with people interpretation of marriage? (I'm not criticizing you or trying to argue btw, I'm just curious and would like to read what your reasons are). :D
insurance policy :D hysterical analogy
Yeah, this one was better than the last one. I suspect risks were similar back in the day for committing adultery, you know, for instance making it far more likely on of the persons in the primary relationship becomes a murder or impoverished, for instance...
The note about the role of the immune system is interesting, something I knew, but it is a good opportunity to expand on. Being that birth control seems to make women attracted to people with similar immune systems, but, then, when they stop taking it, they become interested in people with a more different immune system. This is both bad for society and genetics at the same time. Also, it seems likely that some diseases may result, particularly, perhaps, something like Asperger's, for instance seems like a standard thing to check to see if this is a risk factor for.
I've mentioned this before, so I hope this research is actually ongoing presently, but, good luck.
the sefish gene Richard Dawkins
More like jealousy gene lmao
don't let the feminists see this video or their head might explode.
The comments are full of the hypocrites in the religious community that rant about how their deity forbids such behavior... but will happily 'forgive' them when they are caught doing it.. And for those that are shocked that it is actual like this in human nature, this is NOT saying that You are Required to do it, it is simply Understanding WHY it 'could' happen... You don't have to 'fess up, at least not until you are caught.
The truth hurts.
Although I really like Helen Fisher’s video “The Science of Love,” I have to disagree with this one. The evolutionary argument she tries to defend doesn’t hold up: a woman who has cheated lives in fear that the husband will find out and, at the risk of raising somebody else’s children (i.e. not his own genes), will leave the family to fend for themselves. The other man, likewise, is unable to determine with any certainty who the offspring belong to, and may be equally unwilling to provide for the (now) single mum - more so when he’s got a family of his own with a woman who (allegedly) hasn’t cheated, and therefore a much higher chance to be raising his own kids and perpetuating his own DNA. He may perhaps still provide some kind of care and assistance to the other woman on the off chance that her kids might also be his kids, but the minimal support the woman can get from this adulterer would not by any means compensate the kind of support she could be getting from a husband confident that her children are his, too.
i agree..if a woman fears of getting caught..why do it..just get a divorce and be single and screw the hell whomever u want..
Your thinking is flawed. Some men don't even support their own children. So it makes sense for a woman to have several lovers: that way, she's less likely to face hardships alone.
Edit: And some men can't provide help through no fault of their own: illness, injury, death, other commitments (war) etc., as mentioned in the video.
I can't agree with that, as it would not make evolutionary sense for the men because of the reasons I mentioned above. It would be too costly for a man to risk raising a child who's carrying somebody else's DNA. That some men can't provide for their families is why females are highly selective about whom they mate with.
@@marcgarcia3016 I seemed to remember reading somewhere that 1 in 10 people is raised by a man who they think is their biological father, when in fact he's not. And a quick google search confirmed it:
“If you look at people who have had genetic tests within families for reasons other than trying to work out paternity, for one in 10 people your dad isn’t who you think it is.” (The Telegraph)
And that's before taking into account all the men who openly raise other people's kids. Cuz ye such men do exist!
So again, your thinking is flawed. This has been happening for centuries, so it must be working from an evolutionary standpoint!
@@quinncreel6091, I wouldn't consider The Telegraph a particularly reliable source. Besides that, 10% is in fact a very low percentage indeed, which I believe further proves my point. Obviously, that is not to say that humans aren't cooperative beings who will sometimes help others in need, even if that means making certain sacrifices. Have a look at Dawkins's Selfish Gene. It's magic!
This is one hell of a woman. Wish I could've married a women like this.......
Ethics says that is not right to follow all of ours desires.
I know it's weird, but she's kind of a Gilf :|
+Shubhankar Mukherjee wow
Am I right or am I right?
+Shubhankar Mukherjee u rite m8
I hope to be a GILF someday.
there is some error in her philosophy, in the olden days people lived in tribes, so if husband dies, the family tribe would typically take care of needs. the newer generation, we have nuclear families, that are single unit, destroyed families, so this kind of behaviour and cheating is more common. also a quick note.. in older generations of family sexual fantasies and activities were less as they had alot of hardships, eg, starvation, disease, etc
+Amir Hussain In the "olden days [when] people lived in tribes" there were no husbands. Tribal culture is understood to be polygamous in that an alpha male (similar to what you can see in lion prides) had multiple female partners as the best genes were to be passed on. Survival of the fittest. Also, nuclear families are the norm of past generations (a nuclear family *must* have two parents and children); today, *alternative families* are the norm. This is a reflection of women entering the workforce, higher rates of divorce, and an increase in unwed pregnancies.
+Rebecca H civilization, unfortunately started in middle east. it was not like that as you described. i know tribal families there till today.
Amir Hussain Perhaps, but (as you said by saying the olden days) I'm discussing tribal families from centuries ago
I no longer believe in monogamy. I find that it causes lies. But what I don't understand is how anyone can meet someone and want them to be faithful but then can't help themselves when the opportunity comes to play around. Sounds selfish. So you think you can have a person all to your self while you go around playing with other people. It's just not fair. Yes I want a partner to myself and I'm only willing to keep that partner for myself so long as that person wishes to be only mines. And I'll do the same.
@SultanNify It is about selfcontrol
It's time for us to evolve
Ye she really seems to want Adultery and 'extra relationships' to be a normal thing, makes me sick honestly.
Maybe your libido is a bit high? This gran talks about women but uses men as examples, it's really funny.
She's talking science. Sorry if you can't take it, but it's just facts.
@@roy_for_real2674 Yeah Yeah I know, it's 5 years ago almost, that's a different time =] 20-25 years is a big change in life, I was naive then and just trolling, probably not very sober either. I agree with her take on it being a predesposition, I'd say I have no variation of the gene =D...
No If it's in owr genes then it's because of the fact that we're meant to populate . Coming from two people, and having that in our genes if for that past 97% of human existence. Today there are many thing that we have found in our genes that we are supposed to resist and go against for various factors. It excuses that are being made.
I just wanna go over this hill she’s talking about Shit sounds lit
A perfect example of scientific reductionism and mecanicisim. Among humans, sexuality is not solely a bio-chemichal phenomenon. It's always permeated by meaning: perversion, fantasy, fear, longing for affection and acceptation, social validation in front of others, etc. It is overly simplistic to ignore all of these layers of meaning and to consider only genetics and evolution. Our present spiritual state, nihilism and a lack of conviction in objective values for instance, may be just as good a cause for adultery as genetic predisposition; and a statistical study looking only for genes would be unable to see this kind of connection simply because it lies outside of the specter of its view.
I meant, we need to conquer a galaxy right? We should pump those numbers
3:18. That argument. I like it. Pretty much shattering every monogamous bla one could bring up.
Hard to fathom.
But true. Sex doesn't distinguish eitherhow.
The only true role it has is to keep humanity/creatures alive.
The "who" doesn't matter.
Too bad the human has counciousness.
Thats why it doesn't jive too well with him.
Stupid ego.
Live with it.
Liking someone is possible, but distinguishing this from "Love" "Sex"...
That is something even the smartest struggle with.
100% RIGHT.
I don't think research in this area isn't being done to justify cheating, i think it's more to identify why we cheat. and the best reason to identify why we cheat may be so we can begin to actively suppress the urge since society has evolved to the point where adultery isn't necessary/beneficial for the survival of the human race. I think generally it is harder to suppress feelings when you don't understand why they exist, and being more aware, and open about discussion about these feelings may help to weed them out of our genes.
If only providing for their offspring would be in their genes too...
two words
Self Control
people should try practicing it.
Unfaithful behavior in males is associated with higher testosterone levels.
Aggression is also in our genes, but mind and law should fight it.
No longer are we animals from the jungle, most of us.
Those that cannot control themselves need to be sedated.
We might need to rethink the primacy of monogamy when it comes to the ways in which we govern our relationships. To say that we may have a predisposition toward pair bonding as well as adultery, in my opinion, could be presenting a false dichotomy. Where did we get the idea that a pair bond must be monogamous? That's not a rhetorical question. I'd really like to know.
this is another gross example of the absurdity of materialism, where genes are considered causes rather than indications
There seems to be a lot of little thinkers in the comment section.
So to sum up this entire video, some people throughout history and even now are susceptible to cheating on their spouses. Bravo Big Think, Bravo. Can I please do a video where I fart in a cup for five minutes please? I'm sure that is the type of calibre you're looking for now.
I might as well get stoned.
Maybe this is right, but it doesn't give someone the right to cheat on someone else: of you want to search for new partners fine, just don't be a dipshit and break up your previous relationship before engaging with another one.
if*
"cheating is in our genes"
it's so nice to see people try to justify that your Id should be ruling your life
+The_Scriptor Its very clear that knee jerk reactionaries like yourself in the comments don't actually understand genetics. If you did then the term Epigenetic effect would have meaning to you and you'd realize that genetics can be turned on and off by factors in the environment. God damn it you people are stupid and your stupidity is ruining the world. Open a fucking book before you open your mouth.
I know what epigenetics are, and epigenetics have not been researched enough to give a verdict on what kind of effects they have on the psyche and sexuality, at least not as far as I know
you have completely failed to link your argument to mine, I was saying that you need to excercise self-control, instead of trying to justify your actions with your genetics, you however completely missed the point and went on to correct me about genetics
there is one more thing which does influence our psyche and our actions, it's hormones, a man can't justify a, let's say sexual assault, with elevated levels of testosterone, but again you must excercise self-control instead of blaming your physical make-up, your Id should not be ruling your life
lastly your comment seems much more like a kneejerk reaction than mine, especially with your last two sentences
+The_Scriptor "If I don't know why something exists, any proposed explanation is necessarily an attempt to justify that thing!"
Did you even watch it?
+DeoMachina
good point, yes I did, but I guess I overassumed
+The_Scriptor 40 seconds into the video she stresses that having the genetic predisposition for something doesn't mean that you'll necessarily have that thing. Being predisposed to cheating doesn't mean you'll cheat it just means the starting line for everyone isn't equal. It's easier for someone who doesn't have that propensity to resist cheating than it is for someone who does. She said nothing about lack of self control and In no way can be summarized in that cheeky "cheating is in our genes" That's a distortion and it makes you seem like you weren't paying attention to the topic or that you're an idiot. Having said that, there's always more research to be done but I've seen the epigenetic effect as a recursive pattern so it wouldn't surprise me if future research found her to be mostly correct.
An explaination is not a justification.
marriage is a cultural concept and religion backs up the culture.
"Cheating Is in Our Genes" is kind of misleading considering she even said that there's an increased chance of cheating.. Not a definite..
Is she Carrie Fisher's sister?
3:16 The reproductive payoffs of adultery that existed millions of years ago may indeed make women and men both adulterous, but definitely not "equally" adulterous. The nature of each "type" of adultery is completely different. While a man responds to a biological urge to just reproduce as much as he can, almost whenever and with whoever... the woman's adulterous predisposition is still based on thoughtful transcendental and meaningful things ... she still looks into the man she is being adulterous with, looking for something more than sex... something that would surely result in fewer acts of adultery. And another thing, I simply can not undestand this: 3:09 SHe should notice that when men cheat with other women.. most of the women they are cheating with have no idea that he is involved with another person.
Oh yeah sure lmao women want men only for what they can do for them, resources, Money , satisfaction in sex ect
I was caught on the jeans
monogamy is not natural but it does not mean that you cannot live in a monogamous relationship. Many of us have urges everyday to do things. Have you ever thought about physically hurting someone? I know I have. I used my morals and good judgement to determine my decision based on the life that I live and the type of person I am. Being monogamous is a choice. For me it's not forced, it's just as natural as the urge to shit.
It is hard to imagine a woman with many boyfriends. The amount of resources she would have and the amount of work that would get done would be substantial. The amount of female enemies would also be substantial as well.
Read "Sex at Dawn" by Christopher Ryan. You're welcome.
“All's fair in love and war.” I suppose both of these will ultimately bring forth some type of social breakdown when the foremost of the two is disloyalty. I think it probably goes beyond a religious obligation as well, the worst and the best together again. Coo coo ca-choo
I’m cheating right now by looking at this.
why should adultery even be seen as something wrong or "cheating" I wouldn't want to be in a marriage that wasn't an open one.. I don't believe in monogamy.
+Chr1551 cheating is doing something behind your partners back. It's about trust. You can cheat in an open relationship.
Why not just change jeans?
Sure it makes biological sense to cheat.
However this is a far greater issue...
It's about mutual trust and respect towards your partner.
And about honor.
I will not be as weak willed as to succumb to such primitive desires.
If you have a great loving partner then that should be honored...
truely spoken.
You know what else is not in our genes? Knowing how to read. That said, if you want to be with somebody who's monogamous, just find someone who's educated in the ways of Western Civilization. For example, they believe in Christianity or any of the other religions that teach monogamy. When the progressives throw out religion as being racist, they're also throwing out monogamy. This video is the perfect example of how a relativistic morality says you don't have to be faithful to one person. It's like some sort of science breakthrough! Humans have to be taught monogamy. Otherwise, the women just join harems and sleep with the top 20% of guys.
82 people are married :3
I'm not :D
I wasn't cheating, I was re searching dawg.
Says the person who is dying alone and never met her soulmate
❤
no offence but it doesn't sound very scientific to me frankly
+Federico Pinci Unfortunately Evolutionary Psychology may seems unscientific, but there are great researches on the topic that you can check.
+Ardi Namardi point taken, i definitely do not know much about evolutionary psychology. Still i believe that the notion of adultery would need further clarification. This is mainly because I assume that the institute of family in the palaeolithic for instance was hardly comparable to what we mean by family today. But even restricting my argument to today's families there are areas where the practice of polyandry is well established. With the epidemics, famine and disasters in africa we witness the rise of extended families each and every time. What I mean is that the concept of family constantly evolves and so does the ruleset attached. I am not sure that in the paleolithic for instance any rule concerning monogamy was in place yet. I don't know, don't get me wrong, but I guess not as we hardly have access to any written testimony of such a habit preceding the "invention of history" in Babylon. Which also means before the invention of monarchy as the first written historical document known today, if I am not wrong, was a list of kings. This may also be interesting, whether monarchy and the introduction of adultery are someway linked for example. Anyway I understand that the point of view of the psychologist needs to make an abstraction.
+Federico Pinci Exactly as you said its hard to determine what causes human behavior, how much environment and/or genes determine our behavior. At first glance it's almost impossible to exclude all environmental factors to check how much genes effect behavior or the other way.
Until mid 20th century almost all approaches were only examining the environmental factors Until Evolutionary Psychology. Assumptions of Evo-Psy are that we have evolved from primates and genes has at least some effects on our behavior.
When we observe some behaviors that are universals between all humans, from tribes in Africa, South America and even Australia to cities from different cultures and religion, we assume those behaviors have genetic basis. And if a behavior has a genetic factor to it, it should be explain in the context of Evolution. Evo-Psy has been very successful in explaining and predicting human behavior. I agree that this video needs better context and it's very confusing.
I tried to summarize this point of view as clearly i could. If you are interested in evolution i suggest "Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins and if you already have some background in evolution, "Blank Slate" by Steven Pinker is amazing in explaining the human behavior.
Thank you Ardi i'll have a try at the books ;)
I've always felt predisposed to monogamy.
There needs to be much more research done in this area
Too many of BigThinks newer videos seem to be promoting really toxic, self centered and destructive behavior. And pass it off as some scientific/cultural break through.
If you're gonna do the LTR. Then be faithful!
If you know you can't be faithful. Then don't go into a LTR!
Smh!
+Urhoboman5 You're taking something personally that she's simply explaining from a scientific perspective. It's impossible to deny how prolific cheating is, so this is her attempt at explaining it. Nowhere in this video, nor I'm sure in what she believes, is the idea that cheating is fine.
Actual science and your subjective view or experience are rarely going to be the same. Get used to it.
+Urhoboman5 If you're going to do the LTR, then define the boundaries first. I know of a few couples who are explicitly non-monogamist, and they do fine.
hmm, makes sense, especially if you take into account that we're apes
If men would want to make women pregnant to spread his DNA why is the desire to have children not so strong to men? You say they want sex to spread their DNA to children but men often are the ones who say they don’t want children AND if this would be the explanation then why is the sex drive higher then the desire to actually have children? No matter how much children cost, men also pay women(prostitutes) for sex so they normally shouldn’t mind paying for a baby if having a baby would be the actual reason for sex. Your explanation has some flaws
"..why is the desire to have children not so strong to men".
Where have you get that from? That isn't true, not for me.
I am trying to find a woman to have children with, without any success. I am the ordinary good guy, "one-woman-man".
Why is it so impossible to find a woman to have children with?
B.T.W I have never been with any prostitutes.
No such thing as being completely faithful to just one person! So ladies go out over the hill & get yourself some extra meat ; )..
... huh? The first line is a head scratcher. "It happens, therefore, there is a biological predisposition". What the fuck does that even mean? It seems like a completely meaningless deduction to me. There's correlation, yes, there's empirical evidence that this is common place, but that doesn't mean that the jump "therefore it is biological" makes any more sense.
What about psychology? Sociology? Statistical analysis? It's very likely that it is explained in the video, but that's not a way to be taken seriously by me at least. :/ I am all for rhetorical simplification, but this is just rhetorically crude.
+Alderick van Klaveren If you want evidence about these topics i suggest to read about researches that has been done in Evolutionary Psychology or great books on Evo-Psy, for example Blank Slate by Steven Pinker, The evolution of desire by David Buss.
Well look how lucky women are
2:12
"You can lie in bet at night.."
I hate to be that douche, which I totally am but when you're talking about a bed, it's "lay", not "lie".
Are Muslims evolutionairly wiser with their polygamy laws then?
Christianity and sikhism has the same laws
+Amanpreet Singh yep. Guru Gobind Singh married 3 women
Inderjit Singh yea he most probably did
I was pointing out that other scriptures say the same too
But i dont think in past times men had multiple wives because of what she explained. it was cuz women were and still are treated as property.
Yup that's right
Plenty of guilty mofos up in these comments.
imb4 the downvotes
Remember to forgive your cheating partner. In this country, that qualifies you to run for President!
But wait...about women cheating. Wouldn't it also be a danger? Her mate finds out about her other male partner, that could be disastrous for her survival. To be cast out and losing all resources and protection, to death. If we are talking ancient humans here, I would think cheating to be a huge problem. Eh whatever. My wife and I have been together for 20 years now. And we have both been faithful and in love. Not saying we haven't had hard times, but she has my complete loyalty and faithfulness. I would do anything she ever asked of me. And that's because she has earned my trust and respect. She is just not a great sex partner or mother, she is much much more. As that is directly to us forming such a strong Union. Us vs the world
Staying with one person just isn't natural.
Women. . .