Case for offspring Part - II
I had some interesting comments for my previous post and of course heaps of offline conversations on ego and the "ego-leads-to-kid" theory.
The argument, which I was trying to put forth, was that kids are nothing but a natural outcome of every living organism. The ego theory could be a recently social constructed hypothesis, which could be true, but they are not a necessary condition for the underlying action. I certainly believe that people would have kids irrespective of whether they have or don't have egos or even managed to relinquish them one day.
Let me draw an analogy. If somebody asks us the purpose of sugarcane, it might be true that it is to make sugar in the current context. It’s purely incidental that we use sugar to sweeten our pastries, confectionaries and desserts. The entire gene pools of sugarcane would continue to persist till their gene pools have enough fitness to scrape through. The sugarcane is there not because we have grown them, its there because they are part of the entire natural evolutionary process.
It's the same case with kids, might be that people have found a use to them by identifying their egos with them. Some even go the extent of gratifying their ego's by begetting. This is just a case for utilizing the resource and exercising controlling resources, which are near and close to them. I feel that individuals with such egos without a kid would find a scapegoat by identifying and creating a homogeneous group, which helps to identify their egos.
I feel that intelligence which is the basis for rationality and ego is a tool, self-developed by the human species to solve the more fundamental problem of quest for survival. The single cell organisms that have little intelligence (No sixth sense at least) procreate because it’s how the chromosome is coded. The chromosome coding is of course due to the natural inheritance or the nurture phenomenon (environmental). It certainly influences the behavior, may be the cognitive ability to have kids to replicate their egos but the more fundamental characteristics of any species is to grow, adapt, mutate and evolve to survive!!!
Labels: evolution
Actually, I would repeat the same comment I left in the last post. And I would add that your analogy fits perfectly to it. It fits perfectly, if you can agree to the simple fact that life seldom is lived on rational terms. Rational thought is reverse engineering. At least, most of the time.
Posted by
Jubin George |
10:18 am
Sara, man is the only organism in the known universe which can live for its pleasure of sex. We can revel in the pleasure and still be childless out of choice. So if someone thinks a child is an outcome of an ego, then he is refusing to accept that he had the choice to not have the kid.
That sex is a sin, a forbidden fruit is a conclusion drawn from more than one popular religion. There is no second guess that this is just a simpleton's way of analyzing the shit he is in!
btw, SK's post seems to be just pun, while you are analyzing it at the chromosome level.
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:30 am