Love

Humans are intelligent enough to know that there's more to people than shiny coats...

Over the course of time, (procreation being still the driving factor), relationships were required to fall in to and fulfill many social and religious obligations. That makes us different right there. I doubt ducks have a social obligation to choose a proper duck to protect famly fortune, or their obligations to church to marry to curb fornication and other "evils".
And still as time passes, needs are met in relationships, with security and comfort, partnership, etc. that exceed those obligations in favor of personal fulfillment.
I think the big shift came when intelligence became a bigger survival mechanism than physical attributes (though they are still important for healthy children and immunities, protection, etc), sometimes the stronger mentally are the stronger period, so that changes the stage of "strutting one's stuff" like a peacock. MOney became a "protector" and provider of sorts and that changed the face of "social needs met" as well.
AFter all that...the bottom line I think: regardless of the conventions we have set up around relationships and procreation, if we just cut it to talking about "love" - the other animals don't feel it. Theirs is strictly instinct, and I don't believe them capable of that feeling. Something that sets us apart is the mental capability to understand that concept (even as it blends quite seamlessly with the physiology and instinct that makes attraction and survival of the species part of us, just like the animals.)



OR - I could just be talking out my arse and we should ask resident Biology guy - NeuroFizz.

rich said:

I

I'm looking for the difference between a ram mounting a ewe, and a man mounting a woman. Nothing erotic, mind you, I'm too old.

Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

regarding this particularly, one difference is I think we enjoy it. Not sure a lot of other animals can be proven to get the "recreation" of it that we can. And face it, we don't always do it for procreation: sometimes we do it for that, but I'm willing to bet more people do it hoping not and fearing procreation than than hoping to, at least not every time. In essence, sometimes we do it just because its fun

When a man mounts a woman, I think the basic emotions are the same -- very primal, hormonal, driven by animalistic desires and wants, and because of physical needs. It's only before or after the act that our high-level functions kick in and we realize -- aw, I wuv her. Our mind tells us: It's about wuv, not sex.

Then when we talk about relationships, marriages, etc. social elements kick in.

BTW, humans are not the only animal that mate for love (or recreation). Dolphins, for example, for lifelong partnership with one another and I doubt it's all based on sex and procreation alone.

maestrowork said:

BTW, humans are not the only animal that mate for love (or recreation).

Click to expand...

affection maybe, and certainly some do for recreation, but I don't believe they do it for "love". I think that is a human concept, not an animal one. And the "social" can be called into question as well, I'm sure, in their own social groups there is obligation, right and ritual, etc that come into play.

But what is "love"? How do you define love? How could we say that the dolphins that pair for life don't do it for "love" or don't "love" each other? Personally, I don't think "love" is a human concept. I think it's universal. However, the human definition of "love" might be narrower.

Hm... I don't think I understand the question. However, I don't understand much, so I think it's my own fault.

I hear if you chant "Bah ram ewe bah ram ewe" you can get them to do whatever you want...

Stew21 said:

affection maybe, and certainly some do for recreation, but I don't believe they do it for "love". I think that is a human concept, not an animal one. And the "social" can be called into question as well, I'm sure, in their own social groups there is obligation, right and ritual, etc that come into play.

Click to expand...

Oh, love exists, all right, but it has very little to do with the act of procreation. That is all about a man needing to spread his genes; the animal in him wants children, lots of them, with lots of women, even though the human in him doesn't, for social (and financial) reasons. And the animal in him will always go for young, healthy looking females, and the more the better, because they are the most fertile.

When love steps in, things change. The sex part recedes; he's willing to forgo the spreading-his-genes-everywhere thing for the greater contentment that comes from companionship, the feeling of oneness and relatedness. The raw animal part of him takes a back seat; he realises he can't have both, and doesn't even want it.

Sex is limited to that one person, and he finds that sex with love is better than without it.

Animals function by instinct. Humans use their senses and also their feelings.

You mean there are men out there that don't even want to spread their genes eveywhere?

Gulp!

rich said:

No, for the most part they just want to get laid. Is that what the male animals want to do?

Click to expand...

Nah. Only monkeys (possibly other smart animals, but I wouldn't know) mate to have fun.

And us, too. We mate to have fun.

maestrowork said:

But what is "love"? How do you define love? How could we say that the dolphins that pair for life don't do it for "love" or don't "love" each other? Personally, I don't think "love" is a human concept. I think it's universal. However, the human definition of "love" might be narrower.

Click to expand...

I don't know how to define love. Regarding dolphins, I believe that is an instinctual mating habit/ritual among that species. And largely territorial (which is an instinct we have as well).
Human definition of love might be narrower, but I don't know how else to understand it because I'm human.
This is strictly my own opinion, I think it is a cerebral thing that other species don't have. I think of my old dog. I loved him, he was loyal and obedient, and friendly and gentle to other animals, gentle with my children and would never hurt a fly. As much as I would like to assign his behavior with a love for me, I don't believe that is what it was. It is securing his comfort and food, giving affection to receive it, and by nature, he was a kind animal.
The lines get fuzzy for me in regard to caring for their young though. Is that making sure their genes survive or some kind of love? IT would be wonderful to assign it as love, however, I am not sure they are capable of that.

Regarding RIch's comments:
yes, we have marriage laws, divorce laws, pre-nups and annulments- all social and financial and religious in nature. Human conventions for protection of property, money and religious standing. Even without those things though, there is a "love" and enjoyment and fulfillment associated with sex in loving relationships.

Trish - scratches her head, takes a pill for the headache caused, and sits back to see what corner she's painted herself into with this ramble.

We have to look anthropologically how humans evolve. In the cavemen days, I bet much of sex had to do with procreation and recreation, instead of love. Males wanted to spread their seeds as much as possible and father as many children by strong healthy females. Females want the strongest or most intelligent males because they can only bear so many children... survival of the fittest. I think "love" as we know it evolved through time and civilization. The idea of companionship (which exists in the animal kingdom) turns into something else -- one-on-one relationship, marriage, etc.

Interesting question. I recommend the book "Anatomy of Sex," which examines these topics.

I think Heinlein might have touched on something when he wrote:

"Love' is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own."

Animals don't really have that.

this is one of those discussions that spins one into some sort paradox, isn't it?
i suspect it has something to do with that thing that separates humans from animals. free choice?
hmmm, i'll come back when my sentences stop spinning in upon themselves.

"Separation" in these animal's pairing (either through death or some other reasons) most often results in severe depression and even death in the surviving animal. So what causes these? We can call it affection or bond or territorial behaviors, but I am not convinced that animals can't love.

I wonder if one animal ever deprives his/her mate of sex on purpose. I mean...I wonder if they ever use the "I'm tired right now" or "You're being a jerk, so I really don't want to have sex with you" excuses. I've seen female animals play hard-to-get, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case with some.