|
|
|
|
|
by cyphunk
4032 days ago
|
|
Bonobos do not have social penalties for promiscuity, however. So, interesting, we've come back to social constructs from evolutionary biology. Outside of religious communities humans don't have intense social penalties either. So this then is rather limited application of evo bio. The reason bonobo was presented was to illustrate the limitations of application of evolutionary biology. At some point it's use feels like darwinphilia. |
|
From a historical/global perspective, this is a bit of a "HUH!?" Religion of some form has played a major role in the majority of human lives for most of recorded history. Also, even when religion is absent, there are almost always some form of societal norms around sexual behavior. (Though, arguably less restrictive ones.)
The reason bonobo was presented was to illustrate the limitations of application of evolutionary biology. At some point it's use feels like darwinphilia.
I don't see any limitations highlighted. Please cite an example. I only see more data increasing the complexity of the discussion, but the products of natural selection are complex by nature. How is your above statement distinguishable from name calling and silencing-tactic FUD?