Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
The whole point about being human is that we are not restricted to what is "natural" (and still less, to any person's theory about what might be "natural").

The idea that we should give free rein to certain behaviours which might (or might not) be innate, and which might have been adaptive for hunter-gatherer societies, is just a bit weird. As you note in the diary, the Stanford prison experiment (and all of human history, actually) show us that people will do horrible things to each other (perhaps encouraged by primal impulses) if they are covered by a hierarchy and a doctrine. What I take away from this is that education and social engineering should be employed to take us as far away as possible from situations where this can occur. Likewise, for male dominance over women, one of the greatest causes of human suffering.

On the other hand particularly male emotional perceptions are "naturally" supposed to be malleable.

Perhaps you would like to expand on that? There seems to be a subtext here which is easily perceived to be a chip on your shoulder, but perhaps it's something else?

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Mon Jun 16th, 2014 at 11:07:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series