Tuesday, February 24, 2009
The Sex Analogy and Nature's Control
Today the example of human sexual reproduction was brought up in class. It was said that the action of having sex causes the creation of a child, but it is really nature that “creates” the child, because we as humans do not directly and consciously control the biological processes involved in the creation of an embryo. While this does have much merit, I believe an argument can be made. Is it not our genes and chemistry that causes us to have sex in the first place. Is it not the pheromones emitted from the body and subconsciously detected by the opposite gender (usually) that cause us to want to have sex in the first place? Everyone of our actions are controlled by some chemical reaction that takes place in the brain, and these chemical reactions, including our genes, are what Aristotle uses to classify objects in the world as nature. If they have an internal motion that causes an object to evolve, then it is nature. Well if chemical reactions are internal motion that cause objects to alter their form or actions, then are not chemical reactions nature? If chemical reactions are nature, then nature controls the actions that humans use to create a child, and thus nature causes the creation of the additional human beings. Thus are we not entirely just pawns in the game nature is playing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that sex in the natural world is supposed to be for reproduction only. In a perfect world that is. But what gets complicated is with humans we have sex for a source of pleasure and it doesn't always mean reproduction at all. This also goes for dolphins, monkeys, and other animals as well. But for animals such as deer, cats, horses and so on, this is a natural biological thing that depends on the existence of the species. I see the point you are making about being pawns but I must say that I don't think we are. We chose who, when, and where we have sex (I know there are exceptions to the rule but I'm excluding rape etc). This makes me believe that we have some control over this aspect of our lives.
ReplyDeleteI sort of agree with Meagan here. Although the actual process of creating a child is something out of our hand, the process that causes it is not. These are two different chemical reactions. One, the pheromones that make us want to have sex or like someone are completely voluntary produced by us. The other, occurs involuntary in the woman's body. The point I want to make is that by causing the process of creating a baby, are we not causing the whole thing? If people don't have sex, a baby will not be created. So is it really nature that creates the child or is it us, humans?
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very interesting topic as Morgan brings up a good point by saying; nature does play some part in influencing our sexual attractions. I am not saying that we could somehow blame an unwanted birth on nature but the truth is that there are forces that we feel and find hard to suppress. I think some people find it harder to restrain their sexual feelings than others and we have to accept that we are humans and we make mistakes, I mean I think if two dolphins wanted to have sex they would have sex, I don’t think they would hold back in case of pregnancy. Maybe I’m wrong but what role does sex play in a perfect world?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alex's reply that by causing the process of creating a baby, humans are causing the whole thing. Even though the consequences of sex may be unwanted, the act is controlled by feelings created by chemical reactions, as Morgan explained. This then relates back to Pollan and the question of desire. Do humans instinctively have sex for a desire of pleasure?
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that nature has control over sex and reproduction in humans. Yes the process of the actual development of the child is uncontrolled, but sex is a voluntary action. The instinctive urges are uncontrollable, however, humans have the willpower as a higher being to suppress these urges, where as many animals do not.
ReplyDelete