Help
Sign In »
Register Now!
Well, twin studies show a high correlation of homosexuality, suggesting a strong genetic component. http://www.springerl...7453600k586276/
Ideally such a study would use identical twins raised separately, but those are very few in number. I couldn't find one, and it's rather late at night, and I don't even know if such a study has been done.
Welcome to ScienceForums.Net!
|
Welcome to ScienceForums.Net! We welcome science discussion at all levels — from beginners to researchers, covering topics from biology to computer science, and much more. Registration is fast and free, and allows you to post on the forums, so register now and join the discussions! After you've registered, come in and introduce yourself, or visit the forum index. If you need any help registering, posting, or if you just have some questions about our site, please feel free to contact us at staff at scienceforums dot net.
|
|
| Guest Message © 2012 DevFuse | |
Is homosexuality a mental illness?
Rate Topic:
#61
26 June 2010 - 07:10 AM
Mr Skeptic 
iDon't-Believe-You
Our voting system is broken! It nearly guarantees that we will have only two political parties that have any chance of winning, and that they will be very similar.
- Posts: 8,309 | Joined: 15-September 07
Reply
#62
26 June 2010 - 04:20 PM
pioneer
Protist
The term homophobic is based on a language game manipulation. If a person was walking down a dark alley and became defensive because of a gang of street thugs, they would be called gang-o-phobic. Gang-o-phobic means secretly they want to become part of the gang and their defensive anxiety is not even real. The train of illogic doesn't even make sense when applied elsewhere, unless we were promoting gangs and trying to help with their recruitments so the data looks better.
How about this application of the language game; gays are homophobic-phobic. They secretly like to gay bash but are in denial. When put into perspective the language game is illogical.
I tend to think so called "homophobic" behavior (defensive) is as natural to that person as gay behavior is to a gay person. They are the two sides of the same coin. If you extrapolated gay to 100%, the human species would not exist for more than one generation. If all females became lesbian to 100%, guys would still do them and make babies. Mother nature, to avoid a possible path leading to extinction of the species, set up checks and balances to limit the percentage.
Based on the liberal language manipulation game, only one side of this survival of the species coin is considered a mental disease. However, the entire coin should be treated as an single entity, with both sides of the coin either a mental disease or not.
How about this application of the language game; gays are homophobic-phobic. They secretly like to gay bash but are in denial. When put into perspective the language game is illogical.
I tend to think so called "homophobic" behavior (defensive) is as natural to that person as gay behavior is to a gay person. They are the two sides of the same coin. If you extrapolated gay to 100%, the human species would not exist for more than one generation. If all females became lesbian to 100%, guys would still do them and make babies. Mother nature, to avoid a possible path leading to extinction of the species, set up checks and balances to limit the percentage.
Based on the liberal language manipulation game, only one side of this survival of the species coin is considered a mental disease. However, the entire coin should be treated as an single entity, with both sides of the coin either a mental disease or not.
- Posts: 1,145 | Joined: 29-July 07
- Reply
#63
29 July 2010 - 11:22 PM
nec209
Baryon
Genecks, on 5 May 2010 - 12:42 AM, said:
Long ago, the APA considered homosexuality a mental illness. Many people throughout the past decades considered that idea silly, and it was thrown out as a mental illness. I thought it was silly when I learned about it. However, in my studies of psychology, biology, and neuroscience, I've considered that homosexuality may indeed be a mental illness in a sense...
Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.A mental illness is defined if one cannot live a normal life.If one believe he can talk to ghost or talk to lamp post does not make him have a mental illness .But if he cannot go to school,work or the cops get involved it is a mental illness .
I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.
I don't think any of this has to do with genes.
- Posts: 345 | Joined: 29-December 08
- Reply
#64
29 July 2010 - 11:40 PM
iNow
SuperNerd
nec209, on 29 July 2010 - 11:22 PM, said:
Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.A mental illness is defined if one cannot live a normal life.If one believe he can talk to ghost or talk to lamp post does not make him have a mental illness .But if he cannot go to school,work or the cops get involved it is a mental illness .
I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.
I don't think any of this has to do with genes.
I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.
I don't think any of this has to do with genes.
Think whatever the hell you want. You're painfully mistaken. You equate homosexuality with "talking to a ghost" and "talking to a lamp post?" You think it's a fetish simply because folks are attracted to different people than you are attracted to? You think individuals only have sex with the same gender if they are super horny and can't get any from a member of the opposite sex?
A mental illness? Is being black or hispanic a "mental illness" also?
Truth Wins Out - Commentary: The APA Says "No Evidence" In Support of Ex-Gay Therapy
It was encouraging to see the APA question the ex-gay tactic of teaching vulnerable clients to live in a fantasy world. Groups like Exodus and the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), regularly encourage clients to say they have converted, even though they are still gay. The idea is that by proclaiming a false heterosexual identity in advance of any legitimate change, the desired transformation will eventually come.
This idea is equivalent to me wanting to play professional basketball, so I begin to identify as a member of the New York Knicks. Never mind that I am too short, too old and not good enough to make the roster. If I embrace this surreal existence long enough, I will one-day be dunking the ball under the bright lights of Madison Square Garden.
It is imperative that clients are honest about who they are and not prodded to make claims that are not true. Such a gap between fantasy and reality, according to the APA report, can create “cognitive dissonance” and does not resolve “identity conflicts.”
This idea is equivalent to me wanting to play professional basketball, so I begin to identify as a member of the New York Knicks. Never mind that I am too short, too old and not good enough to make the roster. If I embrace this surreal existence long enough, I will one-day be dunking the ball under the bright lights of Madison Square Garden.
It is imperative that clients are honest about who they are and not prodded to make claims that are not true. Such a gap between fantasy and reality, according to the APA report, can create “cognitive dissonance” and does not resolve “identity conflicts.”
Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation
The task force conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates.
Even though the research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, regardless of sexual orientation identity, the task force concluded that the population that undergoes SOCE tends to have strongly conservative religious views that lead them to seek to change their sexual orientation.
Thus, the appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for those who seek SOCE involves therapist acceptance, support, and understanding of clients and the facilitation of clients’ active coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, without imposing a specific sexual orientation identity outcome.
Even though the research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, regardless of sexual orientation identity, the task force concluded that the population that undergoes SOCE tends to have strongly conservative religious views that lead them to seek to change their sexual orientation.
Thus, the appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for those who seek SOCE involves therapist acceptance, support, and understanding of clients and the facilitation of clients’ active coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, without imposing a specific sexual orientation identity outcome.
Sweet Jebus, man... How is it almost 2011 and we're still battling such deep and profound ignorance? The mind boggles.
The Real Story on Gay Genes | Sex & Gender | DISCOVER Magazine
Whether or not a gay gene, a set of gay genes, or some other biological mechanism is ever found, one thing is clear: The environment a child grows up in has nothing to do with what makes most gay men gay. Two of the most convincing studies have proved conclusively that sexual orientation in men has a genetic cause.
<...>
Bocklandt is quick to point out that most likely there is no single “gay gene”—no single switch for sexual orientation. Instead, there are probably a handful of genes that work in ways as yet unexplained.
<...>
He thinks it is likely that perhaps 5 to 15 genes explain sexual orientation in most people.
<...>
Bocklandt is quick to point out that most likely there is no single “gay gene”—no single switch for sexual orientation. Instead, there are probably a handful of genes that work in ways as yet unexplained.
<...>
He thinks it is likely that perhaps 5 to 15 genes explain sexual orientation in most people.
A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation -- Hamer et al. 261 (5119): 321 -- Science
The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.
Evidence for maternally inherited factors favouring male homosexuality and promoting female fecundity - Royal Society Proceedings B
The Darwinian paradox of male homosexuality in humans is examined, i.e. if male homosexuality has a genetic component and homosexuals reproduce less than heterosexuals, then why is this trait maintained in the population? In a sample of 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men and their relatives (a total of over 4600 individuals), we found that female maternal relatives of homosexuals have higher fecundity than female maternal relatives of heterosexuals and that this difference is not found in female paternal relatives. The study confirms previous reports, in particular that homosexuals have more maternal than paternal male homosexual relatives, that homosexual males are more often later-born than first–born and that they have more older brothers than older sisters. We discuss the findings and their implications for current research on male homosexuality.
A genetic study of male sexual orientation
Homosexual male probands with monozygotic cotwins, dizygotic cotwins, or adoptive brothers were recruited using homophile publications. Sexual orientation of relatives was assessed either by asking relatives directly, or when this was impossible, asking the probands. Of the relatives whose sexual orientation could be rated, 52% (29/56) of monozygotic cotwins, 22% (12/54) of dizygotic cotwins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual. Heritabilities were substantial under a wide range of assumptions about the population base rate of homosexuality and ascertainment bias.
http://www.springerl...w03624953x255l/
We examined data from a large cohort of homosexual and heterosexual females and males concerning their siblings' sexual orientations. As in previous studies, both male and female homosexuality were familial. Homosexual females had an excess of homosexual brothers compared to heteroxual subjects, thus providing evidence that similar familial factors influence both male and female homosexuality. Furthermore, despite the large sample size, homosexual females and males did not differ significantly from each other in their proportions of either homosexual sisters or homosexual brothers. Thus, results were most consistent with the possibility that similar familial factors influence male and female sexual orientation.
We also examined whether some parental influences comprised shared environmental effects on sexual orientation. Scales attempting to measure such influences failed to distinguish subjects with homosexual siblings from subjects with only heterosexual siblings and, thus, did not appear to measure shared environmental determinants of sexual orientation.
We also examined whether some parental influences comprised shared environmental effects on sexual orientation. Scales attempting to measure such influences failed to distinguish subjects with homosexual siblings from subjects with only heterosexual siblings and, thus, did not appear to measure shared environmental determinants of sexual orientation.
Or here: http://tigger.uic.ed...i_etal_2005.pdf
Or here: http://www.newscient...osexuality.html
Seriously, people, it's not some either/or, black/white, binary state:
http://www.plannedpa...gender-4329.htm
Quote
Each of us has a biological sex — whether we are female, male, or intersex. Our gender is our biological, social, and legal status as men or women. And sexual orientation is the term used to describe whether a person feels sexual desire for people of the other gender, same gender, or both genders.
Each of us has a gender and gender identity. Our gender identity is our deepest feelings about our gender. We express our gender identity in the way that we act masculine, feminine, neither, or both. Some of us are transgender — which means that our biological sex and our gender identity do not match up.
Each of us also has a sexual orientation. You may be bisexual, gay, lesbian or straight. Or you may be “questioning” — unsure about your sexual orientation.
The more you understand biological sex, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation, the more you may understand yourself and how you relate to other people. Because sex and gender are so complex, you may have many questions. You may wonder about your own sexual orientation or gender identity, or you may wonder about someone you know. You may have questions about how society views sex and gender — including homophobia, sexism, and transphobia.
Each of us has a gender and gender identity. Our gender identity is our deepest feelings about our gender. We express our gender identity in the way that we act masculine, feminine, neither, or both. Some of us are transgender — which means that our biological sex and our gender identity do not match up.
Each of us also has a sexual orientation. You may be bisexual, gay, lesbian or straight. Or you may be “questioning” — unsure about your sexual orientation.
The more you understand biological sex, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation, the more you may understand yourself and how you relate to other people. Because sex and gender are so complex, you may have many questions. You may wonder about your own sexual orientation or gender identity, or you may wonder about someone you know. You may have questions about how society views sex and gender — including homophobia, sexism, and transphobia.
http://en.wikipedia....ki/Kinsey_scale
Quote
"Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects.
While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history... An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life.... A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist." (Kinsey, et al. (1948). pp. 639, 656)
While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history... An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life.... A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist." (Kinsey, et al. (1948). pp. 639, 656)
This post has been edited by iNow: 29 July 2010 - 11:43 PM
iNow
~~~ Pale Blue Dot ~~~
"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition."
~C. Sagan
http://thescienceforum.orgDid you like this post? Let me know about it by clicking the (+) sign here -->
~~~ Pale Blue Dot ~~~
"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition."
~C. Sagan
http://thescienceforum.orgDid you like this post? Let me know about it by clicking the (+) sign here -->
- Posts: 11,371 | Joined: 02-August 07
- Reply
#65
29 July 2010 - 11:43 PM
Sayonara³
Doomy doom ♫
nec209, on 29 July 2010 - 11:22 PM, said:
Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.
Quite a lot of contemporary research flatly contradicts your opinion.
Quote
A mental illness is defined if one cannot live a normal life.
No it isn't. That definition would include groups such as the blind, the deaf, paraplegics, etc.
If you are going to try and argue by definition, make some effort to get the definition right.
Quote
I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.
That sounds like it has come from someone who doesn't have a lot of sexual experience, to be quite frank.
Not that it really matters since anecdote and opinion aren't scientifically persuasive even with the weight of personal experience added on top.
Quote
I don't think any of this has to do with genes.
Fail. Sorry.
The Dictionary is not a technical resource.
- Posts: 13,749 | Joined: 19-July 02
- Reply
#66
29 July 2010 - 11:59 PM
nec209
Baryon
Quote
Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.
Quite a lot of contemporary research flatly contradicts your opinion.
Quite a lot of contemporary research flatly contradicts your opinion.
At one type this was a theory going around.I don't think doctors really understand but learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience was a theory going around.I'm not sure if doctors really understand now what cause it.
Quote
I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.
That sounds like it has come from someone who doesn't have a lot of sexual experience, to be quite frank.
Not that it really matters since anecdote and opinion aren't scientifically persuasive even with the weight of personal experience added on top.
That sounds like it has come from someone who doesn't have a lot of sexual experience, to be quite frank.
Not that it really matters since anecdote and opinion aren't scientifically persuasive even with the weight of personal experience added on top.
Telll that to your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.I dare you !!!
This post has been edited by nec209: 30 July 2010 - 12:04 AM
- Posts: 345 | Joined: 29-December 08
- Reply
#67
30 July 2010 - 12:04 AM
Sayonara³
Doomy doom ♫
nec209, on 29 July 2010 - 11:59 PM, said:
At one type this was a theory going around.I don't think doctors really understand but learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience was a theory going around.I'm not sure if doctors really understand now what cause it.
Telll that your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.
Telll that your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.
Maybe you should look at the research (the material provided by iNow would be a good start) then re-evaluate your position.
nec209, on 29 July 2010 - 11:59 PM, said:
Telll that your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.I dare you !!!
I strongly suspect that were any psychiatrist even remotely interested, they would agree.
The Dictionary is not a technical resource.
- Posts: 13,749 | Joined: 19-July 02
- Reply
#68
30 July 2010 - 12:05 AM
nec209
Baryon
Sayonara³, on 30 July 2010 - 12:03 AM, said:
Maybe you should look at the research (the material provided by iNow would be a good start) then re-evaluate your position.
Well research on what?
Quote
I strongly suspect that were any psychiatrist even remotely interested, they would agree.
What?
This post has been edited by nec209: 30 July 2010 - 12:06 AM
- Posts: 345 | Joined: 29-December 08
- Reply
#70
30 July 2010 - 12:11 AM
nec209
Baryon
Sayonara³, on 30 July 2010 - 12:07 AM, said:
The surfeit of research on the causes and mechanisms of sexuality.
Sigh.
Sigh.
That has nothing to do with fetish or frustration when it comes to sex.Well he is going on and on and on that homosexuality is genes
- Posts: 345 | Joined: 29-December 08
- Reply
#71
30 July 2010 - 12:23 AM
Sayonara³
Doomy doom ♫
nec209, on 30 July 2010 - 12:11 AM, said:
That has nothing to do with fetish or frustration when it comes to sex.Well he is going on and on and on that homosexuality is genes
You can't separate out homosexuality from sexuality. The former is just one particular expression of the latter.
The Dictionary is not a technical resource.
- Posts: 13,749 | Joined: 19-July 02
- Reply
#72
30 July 2010 - 12:29 AM
nec209
Baryon
Sayonara³, on 30 July 2010 - 12:23 AM, said:
You can't separate out homosexuality from sexuality. The former is just one particular expression of the latter.
I'm not sure what you mean ? Are you saying homosexuality or fetish is genes has all sexuality is genes ? What about all the differnet types of fetish is that genes .
Is that what you and iNow are saying? When did psychiatrist no longer say learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience ? Do wikipedia search or check a youtube search psychiatrist say they think not proven yet learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience ?
Has that change now? Are psychiatrist closer to proven of what cause it now than just theory ?
This post has been edited by nec209: 30 July 2010 - 12:31 AM
- Posts: 345 | Joined: 29-December 08
- Reply
#73
30 July 2010 - 01:35 AM
Mr Skeptic
iDon't-Believe-You
nec209, on 29 July 2010 - 11:22 PM, said:
I don't think any of this has to do with genes.
So is this just not thinking or is there some other explanation you have for the extremely high correlation between genes and homosexuality? Or is yours an "I don't believe research" kind of position?
Our voting system is broken! It nearly guarantees that we will have only two political parties that have any chance of winning, and that they will be very similar.
- Posts: 8,309 | Joined: 15-September 07
- Reply
#75
31 July 2010 - 06:28 AM
J.R.H.
Lepton
Double K, on 6 May 2010 - 04:01 AM, said:
So then (pink_trike) you are saying homosexuality is a choice, and not a biologically driven need?
There is a difference between desire and behaviour - the answer is choice.
All of the points you made come down to choice.
I personally don't believe it is a "choice". I used to think it was, but after lengthy discussions with gay people (for the record I myself am not)
but to them it was a desire. Something deep seeded, something that they felt and not something that they chose.
Now of course performing the act (behaviour) is a choice to some degree.
However the initial attraction was not.
It's also worthy of note that primates and humans are the only creatures which mate for pleasure...(and there are no recorded incidences of primates performing homosexual acts) which means it is a condition only (in nature) isolated to humans - which tells me that other factors need to be considered...
The main issue is that "feelings" can never be explained with logic, and as science tries to break everything into logical data - I dont feel science will ever have the answer to this one, and certainly not a quackdom like psychology.
There is a difference between desire and behaviour - the answer is choice.
All of the points you made come down to choice.
I personally don't believe it is a "choice". I used to think it was, but after lengthy discussions with gay people (for the record I myself am not)
but to them it was a desire. Something deep seeded, something that they felt and not something that they chose.
Now of course performing the act (behaviour) is a choice to some degree.
However the initial attraction was not.
It's also worthy of note that primates and humans are the only creatures which mate for pleasure...(and there are no recorded incidences of primates performing homosexual acts) which means it is a condition only (in nature) isolated to humans - which tells me that other factors need to be considered...
The main issue is that "feelings" can never be explained with logic, and as science tries to break everything into logical data - I dont feel science will ever have the answer to this one, and certainly not a quackdom like psychology.
Thats right on... i completely agree with that. thank you.
- Posts: 4 | Joined: 14-July 10
- Reply
#76
31 July 2010 - 02:41 PM
Moontanman
Scientist
J.R.H., on 31 July 2010 - 06:28 AM, said:
Thats right on... i completely agree with that. thank you.
JRH, as inow pointed out in post #11 DoubleK was incorrect in some of his assertions and you evidently missed Inows post.
Quote
It's also worthy of note that primates and humans are the only creatures which mate for pleasure...(and there are no recorded incidences of primates performing homosexual acts) which means it is a condition only (in nature) isolated to humans - which tells me that other factors need to be considered...
Many animals have sex for fun, dolphins being one, dolphins will even attempt to have sexual contact with humans, wild benobo chimps are notorious for having homosexual sex as well as sex with their young for fun and as a social lubricant. A great many other animals engage in homosexual contact so while DoubleK got part of it correct his assertions as quoted above are incorrect...
Life is the poetry of the Universe
Love is the poetry of life
You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...
"Nothing unreal exists"
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking
"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson
Check out my YouTube channel here.
If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->
Love is the poetry of life
You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...
"Nothing unreal exists"
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking
"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson
Check out my YouTube channel here.
If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->
- Posts: 3,436 | Joined: 21-September 08
- Reply
#77
31 July 2010 - 02:51 PM
pioneer
Protist
Science uses the animal standard to hep define natural human instinctive behavior. If we assume that is valid (for the sake of argument) the second logical aspect of the animal standard would be to define the natural limits of these animal behavior. For example, one may point to a lion gorging food. Using the animal standard one might argue gorging is natural, since we can show at least one animal species that does this. But the second half of the science standard should then say, although gorging can be shown to occur in nature and is therefore natural, even lions don't do this 24/7. Even with the gorging, the lion remains fit, because the gorging behavior has natural limits.
Relative to gay, one may show this in natural to many animals including apes. The next science question should be what are the natural limits? If we exceed these natural limits, even with the dynamics of a behavior defined as natural, one is not behaving naturally.
With gorging we can show animals do this. But we are hard pressed to find drastically overweight animals as a result of this behavior. There is a natural limit. With humans, we define this natural behavior, but the final human result does not coordinate with the natural; lacks the natural limitation. The question becomes, why doesn't science include the natural limits of animal behavior since this is being used as the gold standard for human behavior?
Relative to gay, one may show this in natural to many animals including apes. The next science question should be what are the natural limits? If we exceed these natural limits, even with the dynamics of a behavior defined as natural, one is not behaving naturally.
With gorging we can show animals do this. But we are hard pressed to find drastically overweight animals as a result of this behavior. There is a natural limit. With humans, we define this natural behavior, but the final human result does not coordinate with the natural; lacks the natural limitation. The question becomes, why doesn't science include the natural limits of animal behavior since this is being used as the gold standard for human behavior?
- Posts: 1,145 | Joined: 29-July 07
- Reply
#78
31 July 2010 - 03:02 PM
iNow
SuperNerd
Wow. Somebody ^^ should teach themselves what a strawman is, and then look up the concept of a non-sequitur. The mind continues to boggle...
iNow
~~~ Pale Blue Dot ~~~
"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition."
~C. Sagan
http://thescienceforum.orgDid you like this post? Let me know about it by clicking the (+) sign here -->
~~~ Pale Blue Dot ~~~
"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition."
~C. Sagan
http://thescienceforum.orgDid you like this post? Let me know about it by clicking the (+) sign here -->
- Posts: 11,371 | Joined: 02-August 07
- Reply
#79
31 July 2010 - 03:06 PM
Moontanman
Scientist
pioneer, on 31 July 2010 - 02:51 PM, said:
Science uses the animal standard to hep define natural human instinctive behavior. If we assume that is valid (for the sake of argument) the second logical aspect of the animal standard would be to define the natural limits of these animal behavior. For example, one may point to a lion gorging food. Using the animal standard one might argue gorging is natural, since we can show at least one animal species that does this. But the second half of the science standard should then say, although gorging can be shown to occur in nature and is therefore natural, even lions don't do this 24/7. Even with the gorging, the lion remains fit, because the gorging behavior has natural limits.
I'm trying to understand what this has to do with sex at all much less homosexuality, i am really trying....
Quote
Relative to gay, one may show this in natural to many animals including apes. The next science question should be what are the natural limits? If we exceed these natural limits, even with the dynamics of a behavior defined as natural, one is not behaving naturally.
If you define human behavior completely by the behavior of our closest relatives then having sex with children should be ok, what do you mean by natural limits? For this to make sense you have to define natural limits...
Quote
With gorging we can show animals do this. But we are hard pressed to find drastically overweight animals as a result of this behavior. There is a natural limit. With humans, we define this natural behavior, but the final human result does not coordinate with the natural; lacks the natural limitation. The question becomes, why doesn't science include the natural limits of animal behavior since this is being used as the gold standard for human behavior?
Over weight animals? Ever see a bear just before winter? Some human cultures being what westerners call obese is a good thing to be striven for, you are judging humans by western culture ideals which even western culture fails to achieve as a majority, if humans were wild and living in a cold climate i can see how storing body fat is a good thing since food is scarce in the winter or during the dry season or what ever. Since humans are not in their "natural" state and haven't been since we developed culture (I'm defining natural here as close to being the wild primitive state, in many ways humans are more like animals in captivity who also get fat) For humans in their natural being fat might have been a good thing, it's known that the primitive European cultures used obese depictions of women as talisman and are though to have worshiped a fat women as personifications of the earth goddess so the western idea that fat woman are somehow flawed is new human behavior not the natural state of humans... And I still don't see how this has anything to do with homosexuality....
Life is the poetry of the Universe
Love is the poetry of life
You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...
"Nothing unreal exists"
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking
"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson
Check out my YouTube channel here.
If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->
Love is the poetry of life
You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...
"Nothing unreal exists"
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking
"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson
Check out my YouTube channel here.
If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->
- Posts: 3,436 | Joined: 21-September 08
- Reply
