Women Want Tall Men

[worm]

That's the most Karl Pilkington thing that i've ever read. Brilliant.

[worm]

I think us humans are far too quick to dismiss our 'animal' side, as that supposed 'wealth of knowledge' gets to show. Its basis is stupid human arrogance, and not intelligence.

[feral chile]

Then what's your problem with Freud?

The id is the instinctive, primordial drive to pleasure. The ego is the desire to be above all others. And the superego is the desire to destroy the ego.

Surely that appeals to a naturalist?

Edited May 23, 2011 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

An instinct is a response to emotion that can be shaped.

how do you know? How do you know that what you believe to be your own concious shaping isn't driven by instinct?

The simple fact is that until we know for certain what is instinct driven and where the limits of its influences are, we can not know what we are able to only-consciously shape.

Your mistake is seeing instinct as programming.

your mistake is assuming that I do.

This is utter rubbish and has been utterly disproven.

there's that wing-nut again.

It's wing-nutting that's mirrored by whole branches of 'science' (), but which has nothing but assumption at its heart. Because there is an unanswerable question at its heart an assumption is made for the answer to that and everything is then built on top of that assumed answer.

Having put the time in for doing that, the people responsible want to be thought of as especially clever, so they then claim it as a 'science' and with enough people taken in the whole thing becomes self-sustaining.

Yet it only takes a brief step back to consider what it is to see that its all based on a sham.

Emotions and intelligence, which are deeply rooted in instinctual responses in the physiology of the organisms experiential processing, are not programmed.

and you know this how?

A perfect example would be with desire. You could say that we are programmed to procreate (an exceptionally positivist assertion - assuming that every sexual desire can be related to a holistic ideal of procreation). You could also say that we have instincts on the presentation of stimuli (such as desire on the presentation of the opposite sex). But without emotion and intelligence, we have absolutely no idea of what to do with this internal reaction.

and yet animals do, and always have done - otherwise every species would have died out thru failure to pro-create.

There's a bit of a clue within that "always have done".

[eFestivals]

What are you referring to here? I don't know any theory or psychology theory that looks at 'nurture without nature'. This makes absolutely no sense at all. What are you talking about?

Corrected for you.

How is any theory like these able to know its correctness without first knowing what *exactly* is nature and what *exactly* is nurture?

As that exactness is an impossibility, all there is are HUGE assumptions. Theories that we cannot know the worth of.

[worm]

So, I reluctantly concede that naturalism is a fetish of mine. Attractive and seductive, yes, but not necessarily true.

[worm]

Corrected for you.

How is any theory like these able to know its correctness without first knowing what *exactly* is nature and what *exactly* is nurture?

As that exactness is an impossibility, all there is are HUGE assumptions. Theories that we cannot know the worth of.

[worm]

how do you know? How do you know that what you believe to be your own concious shaping isn't driven by instinct?

[RABun]

What's your point? Sexual desire cannot be defined by wanting children. It's internalistic bullshit, and sexist to boot. Women desire men because that's what they 'fancy'.

The assumption here is that sexual desire is a means of procreation. Although it can be, it clearly isn't the only reason for sexual desire. People should step out of the victorian era. This notion is the first to be dismissed in any university psychology reader as mysogynist.

[eFestivals]

But my intelligence and emotional experiences come to rationalise my intincts because I learn that they don't always lead to good consequences.

how do you know that what you believe to be "my intelligence and emotional experiences come to rationalise my intincts" isn't itself driven by instincts?

You can't. You can only assume.

Four paragrpahs of guff. It's been disproven Neil. That's a fact.

Yeah, your assumptions on my thinking is a proven fact. PMSL.

you:-

Your mistake is seeing instinct as programming. This is utter rubbish and has been utterly disproven.

me:-

your mistake is assuming that I do. There's that wing-nut again.

you:-

It's been disproven Neil. That's a fact.

I hadn't realised you were so specially clever, above and beyond all of the rest of humanity, the world's only super-being.

But you don't have an over-inflated opinion of yourself, oh no.

[eFestivals]

Because it requires learning.

and the proof that 'learning' isn't driven and shaped by instinct comes from what?

I'm saying that they are not motivated by the intention/instinct to procreate. They are motivated by the intention/instinct to seek pleasure.

PMSL:

If we could talk to the animals, just imagine it

Chatting to a chimp in chimpanzee

Imagine talking to a tiger, chatting to a cheetah

What a neat achievement that would be.

If we could talk to the animals, learn their languages

Maybe take an animal degree.

We'd study elephant and eagle, buffalo and beagle,

Alligator, guinea pig, and flea.

We would converse in polar bear and python,

And we could curse in fluent kangaroo.

If people asked us, can you speak in rhinoceros,

We'd say, "Of courserous, can't you?"

If we could talk to the animals, learn their languages

Think of all the things we could discuss

If we could walk with the animals, talk with the animals,

Grunt and squeak and squawk with the animals,

And they could squeak and squawk and speak and talk to us.

[saratink]

I agree that there are biological things going on to make someone more attractive.

For example , a program I was watching mentioned a study that was talking about attraction.

They got some pole dancers to track their menstrual cycle and over the month they saw how much they were tipped during their cycle. Turns out when the women were the most fertile,

They were tipped a lot more than the days they were not so fertile. They think this is due to hormones and things that make men find them more attractive and want to reproduce with these women.

[saratink]

I also read somewhere that if you want to pull (women) to dab vaginal secretions behind the ear as 'perfume' as men pick up the pheremones or hormones and find the women more attractive.

[eFestivals]

I also read somewhere that if you want to pull (women) to dab vaginal secretions behind the ear as 'perfume' as men pick up the pheremones or hormones and find the women more attractive.

Hmmmm... there's been a lot of research into what is referred to as 'pheremones', and everything points to the whole thing being nothing more than myth.

Mind you it's far more sane than the idea I came across in India 25 years ago, from a Switz guy. He claimed that if a woman was having her period and you (I can't remember exactly now) either shook her hand or touched her arm in a certain way, then she HAD to sleep with you.

I guess what these things really prove is that there's no sucker bigger than man who's desperate to get laid.

[Ed209]

Hmmmm... there's been a lot of research into what is referred to as 'pheremones', and everything points to the whole thing being nothing more than myth.

Mind you it's far more sane than the idea I came across in India 25 years ago, from a Switz guy. He claimed that if a woman was having her period and you (I can't remember exactly now) either shook her hand or touched her arm in a certain way, then she HAD to sleep with you.

I guess what these things really prove is that there's no sucker bigger than man who's desperate to get laid.

[jump]

I also read somewhere that if you want to pull (women) to dab vaginal secretions behind the ear as 'perfume' as men pick up the pheremones or hormones and find the women more attractive.

Edited May 24, 2011 by jump

[saratink]

Like someone said before, seems a lot of people are afraid to admit that we are actually animals and some things are instinctive and some things we don't have control over.

[worm]

how do you know that what you believe to be "my intelligence and emotional experiences come to rationalise my intincts" isn't itself driven by instincts?

[worm]

I hadn't realised you were so specially clever, above and beyond all of the rest of humanity, the world's only super-being.

[worm]

and the proof that 'learning' isn't driven and shaped by instinct comes from what?

[eFestivals]

Because intelligence is abstracted from instinct.

So show me something which proves beyond all doubt that idea.

You can't. Someone has simply decided that the lines are drawn in a particular place for one and the other, and everything else has been worked from that unproven presumption.

For example, you might be thinking "I'll give an intelligent response to what Neil has said", yet the whole idea of that could be the result of something other than intellect. There's simply no way of ever knowing, none whatsoever.

No, it's just that I know more than you.

What you really mean is that you're more of a sucker for thinking that assumptions are irrefutable fact than I am.

All animals seek pleasure.

Along with talking to the animals, do you hear voices in your head as well?

You're either incredibly thick or incredibly and stupidly arrogant. I'll let you choose which of those is correct.

[Ed209]

All animals seek pleasure. From that pleasure seeking, societies are formed and reproduction occurs.

[saratink]

All animals seek pleasure. From that pleasure seeking, societies are formed and reproduction occurs.

[eFestivals]

what?!?

Who told you that?

The animals. He's been talking to them, don't cha know.

If we could talk to the animals, just imagine it

Chatting to a chimp in chimpanzee

Imagine talking to a tiger, chatting to a cheetah

What a neat achievement that would be.

If we could talk to the animals, learn their languages

Maybe take an animal degree.

We'd study elephant and eagle, buffalo and beagle,

Alligator, guinea pig, and flea.

We would converse in polar bear and python,

And we could curse in fluent kangaroo.

If people asked us, can you speak in rhinoceros,

We'd say, "Of courserous, can't you?"

If we could talk to the animals, learn their languages

Think of all the things we could discuss

If we could walk with the animals, talk with the animals,

Grunt and squeak and squawk with the animals,

And they could squeak and squawk and speak and talk to us.

[eFestivals]

I hard somewhere that only dolphins and humans have sex for pleasure?

then you've been mis-informed - Hare Krishna's don't, and they're human.