The Evolution of Love
In the survival show post, I noted how amazed I was at seeing how far parents will go to ensure their children’s survival. This ‘phenomenon’ can be easily attributed to the love between parent and child, a love that we as being natural.
But why is it so natural? Why is it that in a time of life and death we choose to lag behind and save those close to us? I’m going to attempt to answer these questions in this post.
Like many simple explanations, this one will make use of the theory of evolution. Survival boils down to the ability of species to reproduce. But reproduction alone is not enough for survival. The offspring of the species must survive, at least long enough to be able to reproduce as well. Otherwise the circle of life would not be completed. The offspring of some species are able to survive on their own at the moment of birth, and as well know humans don’t belong to that category. Instead, newly born humans need at least 4 years of care to have the slightest chance of survival. In my opinion, the early humans who took great care of their babies, protected them, fed them, and fought for them, were able to pass their genes much more successfully than the ones who neglected their children. So nature automatically sorted humans with the “care and love” gene from the ones with “neglect” gene. Through storms, predator attacks, and all other dangers that early humans had to endure, the ones who were more loving and caring (as we would say these days), were the ones who provided their offspring the opportunity to grow up and reproduce. And so the love and care genes got passed down the line making it’s way to present day humans.
posted by x @ 9:27 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
At 3/28/2006 11:38 AM,
Anonymous said…
Darwin's natural selection can be applied to almost anything!! But there's also the whole nature vs. nurture debate. And maybe society has shaped us into "caring" for our children, so regardless of whether or not we've been programmed to care for and love our kids, most of us end up doing so because that's the values society taught us. Then there are those who could care less about their offspring, and they could be socialized that way too....
At 3/28/2006 6:55 PM,
Anonymous said…
so true Queenie...i was just going to mention that myself. i'm writing a paper for a criminal justice class i'm taking, and we are discussing children's delinquent behavior, and whether or not parents should be blamed for their children's actions. nature plays a big part in what a person does....someone may want to allow themselves to survive, but they would be too afraid of society looking down on them. alienation is a big factor when dealing with social norms. no one wants to be an outcast.
At 3/29/2006 1:50 AM,
x said…
Robert, thanks for the contribution. I'll add the book to the long "to read " list :)
To Queenie and Jinan
Darwin's theory can be applied to everything, and that's part of it's beauty. Thomas Huxley, after hearing of Darwin's new theory, said "How stupid of me not to have thought of that." I agree with you that society's expectations are a major factor in making our decisions. We fear of what people might say about us, what they would think of us etc. But this is today's society. Perhaps hundreds of years ago society didn't expect us to go great lengths to provide saftey for children. Societies are always being shaped and reshaped by new expectations. Genetics on the other hand is "engraved" within us, it's something we truly can't escape. Looking back at the survival story, I wonder if the parents' decision to try and save the baby was intitially brought forth by their unconditional love, or fear of society's wrath.
And Jinan, if you don't mind, pass the essay my way, I'd like to give it a read :)
At 3/29/2006 7:58 AM,
Anonymous said…
lol Omar....its 10 pages, and not due till the end of April...i
ll email it to you then :).
Post a Comment
<< Home