From: Kalkor (kalkor@kalkor.com)
Date: Sun Jan 13 2002 - 11:39:56 MST
Mind if I take another stab in the dark (I haven't gotten to those links you
gave me yet, but thank you!) to promote discussion? Here goes...
[Kirk]
"What are the biosocial precursors of
extreme emotional attachment? What bio-evolutionary benefits are forwarded
through the selection of this behavioral tendancy?"
The maternal instinct for progeny survival is the easiet to forward on the
face of the issue.
It is not what I am asking for.
This response is the most often forwarded. In the n=76 times that I have
gotten a response to this question, I have received 43 (now) replies that
deal with moma/baby protect/love.
Let me restate "Extreme Emotional Attachment". Think Adult!
[/Kirk]
Any bio-evolutionary benefit forwarded through the selection of this
behavioral tendancy would be forwarded through the offspring of the
pair/group of adult humans with extreme emotional attachment. So what
survival benefit does this attachment afford, either to them or their
offspring?
To start with the adults, "Safety in numbers". These humans with extreme
emotional attachment will stay together and protect each other, increasing
the chances for their survival and mating, and also the chances for survival
of their young offspring. Which is partially what you have already stated
you're not asking for ;-}
But why would a child born with this behavior encoded in its genes be more
effective at surviving and passing on genetic information? As far as
surviving: see the point above about moma/baby protect/love. Protected
infants survive.
Later in life however? Is the answer mate ATTRACTION? Does the CAPACITY for
extreme emotional attachment somehow signal to us that this is a worthy
mate, more than indifference would? I tend to think so, but I have no
empirical evidence to support this "belief". Any comments?
Kalkor
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:39 MDT