upnorthkyosa said:
I've read Richard Dawkins' book, in it he addresses this...
Evolution is not a perfect process. It naturally produces systems with flaws. Getting pregnant in humans is horrendously difficult because of the flaws in the system. Therefore the tendancy towards lots of sex and pleasure HAD to evolve in order to pass on our genetic information.
I am concerned when I hear science types talk about an observable process like evolution as an "it" and discusses 'it' as if it were a conscious entity. I am not nailing you individually UpN, but your comment reminded me of this pattern by many who discuss evolution (in any of it's theoretical constructions).
Evolution does not plan anything whether perfection, efficiency, flaw...because it isn't an entity. It is a term/system of discussion designed to codify the natural process of how things change over time so that people can understand it. It is a human construct designed to allow for easy communication about a topic.
As far as sex for procreation/other.... if sex was strictly a procreative function, then humans would follow the same 'heat' cycles that other mammals do such as deer. Yes, women have periods of higher or lower sexual drive depending on the point in the mentral cycle, but that is not the same as the 'heat/rut' season that other mammals go through to take advantage of the seasonal weather patterns to create the optimal bearing/birth/rearing timing given a particular environment.
We are 'higher thinkers' than other mammals and tend to engage in sex for many reasons: comfort, control/domination, lonliness, boredom, stress, pleasure, love, sadness, anger, demonstrative alliance....you name it, people have had sex because of it. I would say that the side benefit of those multitudes of reasons for sex to occur improves the likelihood that humans, who don't have mating seasons, will be more likely to have sex more often and therefore create more offspring.
I don't remember the type, but one naturalist/biologist spent many years observing a certian type of Chimp/monkey where troops used the act of sexual intercourse as a way to defuse internal power struggles, create alliances, reduce anger/apologize to each other while the males and females were 'out of heat.' During the mating seasons, the females were biologically capable of procreative results, but other than that they were not. These findings were all based on observable behavior. The funny thing (peculiar) is that compared to other types of chimps/monkeys, this type had far less violence within or between the different troops.
That said, of course the primary
biological function of sex is procreation, but to say that the 'reason' that sex 'exists' is because 'evolution' wanted us to have more babies and not for other reasons is deification.
I would say that those who were/are more sexual by nature survive to create offspring who will carry on that trait and have more sex and so on down the line. Therefore, in times of genocide/disaster, this will improve our chances as a race of continuation.
