Do we have soul mates? I think not

A place to discuss deeper topics

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Ikku
Sir Toke-a-lot
Sir Toke-a-lot
Posts: 2689
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:12 am
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by Ikku » Mon Dec 26, 2011 12:45 am

Are you not reading what I'm writing? :dunno:

Worker bees never reproduce. What is their fitness? Why do they still exist? Because the genome is species wide, not restricted to the individual. Same thing with gay people. They make the species more successful, and the same genes in the gay people are in the straight people, including the gene for homosexuality although it wouldn't be expressed, perhaps due to dominance/recessiveness. Look up kin selection, especially in the order Hymenoptera.

I never said anything anywhere ever about genes being altered by external influences or whatever magic hocus pocus you think I'm claiming.
I personally recommend checking oneself for OCD at least once every 5 minutes.

User avatar
Ikku
Sir Toke-a-lot
Sir Toke-a-lot
Posts: 2689
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:12 am
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by Ikku » Mon Dec 26, 2011 12:49 am

Do you think homosexuality is a choice? It's not. Do you think it's caused by some kind of childhood trauma or has something to do with their upbringing? It doesn't. You can often tell a kid will be gay when he's like 5 years old. It's genetic, and some genes are even well documented with their correlation with homosexuality. Knowing that, the genes would have been obliterated from the human genome as soon as they arose, they never would have made it this widespread unless there is an advantage it gives the genome.
I personally recommend checking oneself for OCD at least once every 5 minutes.

User avatar
SToNeR ChRiS
The Duke of Dope
The Duke of Dope
Posts: 1550
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:20 am
Location: Where gravity no longer exists
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by SToNeR ChRiS » Mon Dec 26, 2011 2:45 am

Ikku wrote:Do you think homosexuality is a choice? It's not. Do you think it's caused by some kind of childhood trauma or has something to do with their upbringing? It doesn't. You can often tell a kid will be gay when he's like 5 years old. It's genetic, and some genes are even well documented with their correlation with homosexuality. Knowing that, the genes would have been obliterated from the human genome as soon as they arose, they never would have made it this widespread unless there is an advantage it gives the genome.
I'm not entirely sure how sexual orientation got brought up in this topic as I haven't read the whole thread. With that being said I agreed with most of what you said until this post. There may certainly be some genetic factors involved when it comes to an individual's sexual preference but environmental factors certainly play a role as well. There are many 5 year old kids out there who may demonstrate some type of "curiosity" towards other kids of the same gender at a young age but never turn out to be gay. From someone who brings up psychology a lot you should know that correlation does not mean causation. My personal stance is that in some cases yes, homosexuality can be a choice and indeed caused by their upbringing or other environmental factors. I do not have any stats to back it up but it would not surprise me in the very least if the percentage of homosexuals would be larger in a society where same sex relationships are encouraged rather than frowned upon. If that's the case, then obviously environment plays a role as well.

As for your argument about homosexuality playing a positive role even in terms of evolution, I can agree with that.
I saw on TV today, this man lost his son, his son died...
So he had him cremated, took his ashes, and then made it into a Diamond ring...
Now he watches his son shine every day.
I just thought about that, while I sit here ashing in this ashtray...

User avatar
Ikku
Sir Toke-a-lot
Sir Toke-a-lot
Posts: 2689
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:12 am
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by Ikku » Mon Dec 26, 2011 3:36 am

Actually I'm remembering more about childhood development and it's not entirely -genetic- but one of the most important "environmental" factors contributing to homosexuality is prenatal hormone exposure. For example, a woman who has had 5 kids is likely to have a gay son as her youngest child because the hormone levels in utero while she is pregnant are whack because she's had so many kids.

HOWEVER I know a gay person who had a fraternal twin who is NOT gay, despite having the exact same environment as their brother, even in utero. The fraternal twins were the firstborn to this family. The parents later had another son who also was not gay. The gay one was obviously gay since kindergarten (I went to school K-12 with the fraternal twins). Also my girlfriend's brother is gay and his family can attest to his gayness (:3) as a child (he liked playing with barbies, pretending to vacuum, wearing high heels, stuff like that, not "being curious with guys" since a child typically isn't interested in sex until puberty).

My developmental biology classes + the couple of people close to me that are gay has led me to my current stance, and I think it's a pretty coherent and sound "theory of gayness". I don't think it has ANYTHING to do with choice (who would choose the persecution associated with it?) and very very little to do with environmental factors, if they have any effect at all. I'm interested in why you would think otherwise, and I do accept anecdotal evidence, I mean half my evidence is anecdotal anyway.
I personally recommend checking oneself for OCD at least once every 5 minutes.

User avatar
JokersAce
The Duke of Dope
The Duke of Dope
Posts: 1388
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 5:00 am
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by JokersAce » Mon Dec 26, 2011 10:45 am

Ikku, you are the one who is not reading what I am saying. Bee hives and ant colonies all share extremely similar genetic code, therefore that sort of colony maintenance without sexual reproduction is very beneficial to genetic survival. Despite being social creatures, humanity in itself is not a beehive nor is it an ant colony, otherwise we would be perfectly communist and not rely on such selfish economic systems in our social order. The primary argument with homosexuality that you are referring to is that homosexuals pass on their genes through social influence than direct sexual methods*... and I have already addressed why I think this is false.

*
Because the number of the next generation is mostly insensitive to the number of males engaging directly in procreation in the current generation, males are in fact instinctually more free to dedicate time and energy to matters wholly divorced from their own direct procreative prospects. Males are simply under less evolutionary pressure to procreate successfully. A male is nearly as effective at propagating his genes indirectly, by attending to the logistical and strategic interests of his congenetic community, as by actually procreating directly. In some cases this may even be more effective than direct propagation. Upon close examination, it is my impression that male homosexuality is a bona fide physiological condition in most cases. This is quite congruous with the reduced evolutionary pressure on males to procreate directly. In fact, it can be argued that the incidence of male homosexuality is evidence of a selection for community members who contribute only indirectly to the evolving genetic corpus of the community.

http://www.mega.nu/gender.html
I never said anything anywhere ever about genes being altered by external influences or whatever magic hocus pocus you think I'm claiming.
Not necessarily altered, but obtained/passed on, and you did:
Just because they aren't passing on their genes per se, the evolution of homosexuality may indeed have benefits for mankind. They will use their fashionista skills to make us all look fabulous, increasing our reproductive chances, while their recessive genes slip on by into the next generation, especially from closet homosexuals, as they are necessary for building our society as it is! Not really true, but I mean, think of humanity as a bee hive, do a couple gay bees fuck the whole hive up or do they make it tidier?

Do you think homosexuality is a choice? It's not. Do you think it's caused by some kind of childhood trauma or has something to do with their upbringing? It doesn't. You can often tell a kid will be gay when he's like 5 years old. It's genetic, and some genes are even well documented with their correlation with homosexuality. Knowing that, the genes would have been obliterated from the human genome as soon as they arose, they never would have made it this widespread unless there is an advantage it gives the genome.
Please don't attempt to put words in my mouth and assume I believe homosexuality to be an environmental thing.I too have seen children who were quite obviously going to be gay. Maybe if you had read my post you would also have noticed that I had even brought up the 'homosexual' gene. Though a gene in itself may not be the only causation, some evidence points out a correlation between homosexuality and a sickness acquired by a pregnant mother during a certain stage in fetal developement (this was found through similar patterns in regards to fingerprints, brainstructure among other body parts and organ that developed within the particular stage) which may also lead to the altered testosterone levels which you mentioned. For this argument I was accused of being homophobic by some people I assumed were very open minded until I told them that the scientist who discovered this phenomenon was a homosexual himself, and was shocked at the discovery but nonetheless published it because science outrules any side of ethics or preferences one may have. I cannot provide the exact source because I no longer possess the psychology textbook where I first read it (Psychology in Modules by David Myers).

I don't believe every action undertaken by any animal is entirely for the sake of survival, but is based on whatever neurons are fired off at the time.* The firing off of these neurons of course, are based on evolutionary principles of surival but can be corrupted into firing off from stimuli that doesn't benefit survival. For example, I don't see how pedophilia, zoophilia, incest, and dare I say homosexuality benefit an organism genetically, but people's neurons get excited and they do these things. The sad part is that if pedophilia, zoophilia, and incest had the lobbying and social power of homosexuality**... there is no doubt in my mind that there would be some academic scholar writing theories on its evolutionary causation and purpose. And why not? Such behaviors are also widespread (granted, it doesn't seem as widespread as homosexuality, but homosexuality in itself was kept very much on the downlow until the sexual revolution) , so why wouldn't they have their own reasons? :roll:
* http://www.petandwildlife.com/rats/rats ... obots.html
** http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/usa08.html#usa1108c
When the going gets weird, the werid turn pro.
HOW CAN SO MANY YEARS COME TO PASS WITHOUT ANYONE TELLING ME I SPELLED WEIRD WRONG?

User avatar
Ikku
Sir Toke-a-lot
Sir Toke-a-lot
Posts: 2689
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:12 am
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by Ikku » Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:00 pm

I wasn't putting words in your mouth man, I was addressing a potential argument against me just in case you did think that, which ended up opening up a can of worms with someone else.

The idea that it has to do with the mother's physiology I can buy, except that it doesn't explain how one fraternal twin can be gay while the other is straight since they share the same in utero environment.

The beehive analogy still holds for me. You say it has to do with the genetic closeness of the workers. This is only true for the Hymenoptera but there are other social insects (termites for instance) that don't have the haplodiploid sex determination of Hymenoptera and their workers aren't 75% identical like they are in Hymenoptera, yet they still behave the same way. And I think humanity is closer to a beehive than people think, but let's drop the analogy now since it's starting to miss the point.

I'm having trouble following your argument. You said you already addressed why you think this is false, and then you quote an article that is supporting my argument. The next few paragraphs from that link talk about homosexuality as a "collective adaptation" that reduces unnecessary male competition for females. I almost brought this up in my previous post, except that I still don't buy the physiological argument since it doesn't account for one member of a pair of fraternal twins being gay while the other is not, nor does it account for the firstborn son being gay while subsequent sons can turn out straight.

And animals acting on neural impulses, sure, that explains drugs for instance. But homosexuality is hard wired in and has a drastic effect on life strategy. To claim that it is just an animal acting on a neural impulse implies that homosexuality is an urge that everyone has, and that out of the closet homosexuals are just those who made the choice to be gay. And you already said you know that isn't true.

As for pedophilia, zoophilia, incest, maybe these are hard wired in, maybe not, but they are immoral either way because they perpetrate harm on someone else whereas homosexuality does not. So it's kind of a moot point. Those behaviors will never be socially acceptable.
I personally recommend checking oneself for OCD at least once every 5 minutes.

User avatar
JokersAce
The Duke of Dope
The Duke of Dope
Posts: 1388
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 5:00 am
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by JokersAce » Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:10 am

Apologies, but it was a bit frustrating to read that post when I had already stated I believed homosexuality to primarily be a genetic thing. With regards to fraternal twins.... they don't share entirely similar genetics... so while it seems simple, it's logical that one may have acquired the genes that lead to homosexuality while the other didn't. There's always the thing about the strong twin and the weak twin due to one getting a different/unfair proportion of nutrients/various other chemicals from the mother in utero, but I don't remember much with regards to its exact mechanism of occurence.

While you may tire of the analogy speak, I can't help it. Termites are physically evolved to form and survive in extremely interdependent caste systems . The organisms of each caste all possess differing physical characteristics which together make up a unified body that insures the survival of all the colony's organisms (unlike humans whose castes are primarily social constructs and not unchangeable biological dispositions). Not to mention they are like a large family that at least share a good amount of genetic code, regardless of wether or not they are all of an extremely similar genetic composition like ants or bees. Besides, I don't hear anything about ants, bees, and termites having gay sex :lol: , if the purpose of human homosexuality is also to reduce the amount of "unnecessary" males in a given community then why aren't they just asexual as opposed to being sexually attracted to members of their own sex? Bear in mind that I referenced that link to show you that what I was referring to wasn't just "magic hocus pocus", but an actual scientific theory (or at least an academically backed belief/possibility) that I disagree with.

With regards to the neuroscience: I don't know how you construed my statement as meaning everyone has a capacity for homosexuality (although you do not need to be a biologically destined homosexual to do "gay" things). All I mean is that people do what they feel and it doesn't always benefit an organism from an evolutionary standpoint, and while things such as drug use may be best explained from an environmental perspective, there is of course the belief in a genetic predisposition to alcohol and drug use but I cannot fathom how that may increase an organism's survivability.

What is morality in the face of fact? Morality is a subjective social construct and I believe you are aware of that. Hell, homosexuality was always considered extremely immoral and a taboo topic not even half a century ago (still is in most places), so why shouldn't other sexual practices be brought up? Because they are percieved as hurting others? Is that a fact or is that a social construct? Many other cultures in the history of mankind had varied sexual practices that constitute utmost immorality and evil in the eyes of Judeo-Christian ethics. Including homosexuality. So why all those other "taboo" sexual practices shouldn't get a scientific review (or justification) with regards to their causation and purpose much like homosexuality is getting now is completely beyond me.
When the going gets weird, the werid turn pro.
HOW CAN SO MANY YEARS COME TO PASS WITHOUT ANYONE TELLING ME I SPELLED WEIRD WRONG?

User avatar
Weedguru_Fire_Inside
Sir Toke-a-lot
Sir Toke-a-lot
Posts: 3687
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 1:03 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by Weedguru_Fire_Inside » Thu Feb 16, 2012 1:55 pm

I think i will be bringing the banhammer out soon.
Death is the only certainty. EVERYTHING else is variable.

User avatar
omnific.dc
Herbal Assassin
Herbal Assassin
Posts: 659
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:30 am
Location: ..not home.
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by omnific.dc » Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:24 am

No soulmate for four years now. Amazing I'm not dead..

helenF9867
Casual toker
Casual toker
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by helenF9867 » Thu Aug 30, 2012 1:32 pm

I think not too. Many people live on earth and it would be hard to have a soul mate, it sounds very metaphysical and almost impossible.

User avatar
weedguru_animal
Ganja God
Ganja God
Posts: 6648
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 6:07 pm
Location: south
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by weedguru_animal » Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:46 am

I am more inclined to believe that there is a plane of existence, perhaps not confined to our ideas of physical life and death, where our souls exist...something along the lines of a forest, sometimes leaves touch leaves, branches touch other branches, blossom falls from the flowers and can create new souls which find a place to grow via winds which can somehow be affected by the trees themselves. Some trees are connected by their roots. And are destined to be before their roots have ever touched. In some way, they are meant to connect...Its a hazy idea, which is never anywhere near solid in my mind's eye, at best, its this forest idea, but its so tricky to ponder such things using a mixture of tangible and fantasy. One always seems to dominate the other.

I am of the opinion that souls can entangle, can caress and can become so closely aligned that at times they feel truly as One. This only happens when the hearts, or whatever you wish to call the feeling facets, are also entangled in a beautiful manner. Some couples are more ego meshing well with ego, others more passion, others more heart and soul. Its the last three which interest me the most, and attract me the most, for the most decent folk I have known are guided much more by the passions, hearts and souls, than their egos.
Image
News, football and ranting
http://thedissolutefox.com/

User avatar
blackxs
Herbal Assassin
Herbal Assassin
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by blackxs » Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:46 pm

Weedguru_Fire_Inside wrote:I think i will be bringing the banhammer out soon.
Ah yes, threatening to ban in an otherwise fairly respectful debate in the "Mass Debate" section

...now I remember why I left this site
If you agree with the above post, please decrease my karma

User avatar
Mate
Chess Expert
Posts: 3435
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Desrever os
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by Mate » Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:31 pm

I don't know bout soulmates..
But there is for SURE, somewhere in this world, someone that suits you more than anyone else on this planet.
"In Life, everyone starts out as a pawn, Every journey begins with a single move. . It's the decisions we make along the way that shapes our endgame."

User avatar
allan93
Why Hello There !
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:28 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by allan93 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:08 am

Soul Matches is a nice term for it, and I definitely agree with the premise. I think the concept of soul mates is unfeasible, but there are definitely people you just click with, whether because of personality or similar interests/passions/values or just general compatibility. I think they can be romantic soul matches, or friend soul matches or if you're incredibly lucky, family soul matches.
~ Every day, in every way, it's getting better and better ~

User avatar
weedguru_animal
Ganja God
Ganja God
Posts: 6648
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 6:07 pm
Location: south
Contact:

Re: Do we have soul mates? I think not

Post by weedguru_animal » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am

allan93 wrote:Soul Matches is a nice term for it, and I definitely agree with the premise. I think the concept of soul mates is unfeasible, but there are definitely people you just click with, whether because of personality or similar interests/passions/values or just general compatibility. I think they can be romantic soul matches, or friend soul matches or if you're incredibly lucky, family soul matches.
Concise and well written. And welcome to the boards, Allan...I hope to see more of such engaging input to the forums.

My own ideas are loosely towards your own, loosely towards others...I do feel, from my own experience, that I can fall in all consuming love with a girl who is not my soul mate, a meeting of passions always ready and eager to burn in our veins. The soul can wrap itself around such a mate, but can it feel complete?? Can it feel like it has found its home?? I do not think so...For when both the heart and the soul find a match or mate, it feels and appears over time, very different, far more a revealing of intertwined roots which already exist, as the days and weeks move on, its not so much anything particular happens which makes you love them more, its more a case of light is shone on a connection which was always there, before you even met...Some could see that as soul mates. I see it and feel it as something different. And I do believe, as much as like to believe, that there is a natural force guiding us towards collisions with those whose roots have and will always be wrapped around our own. Whether we make something of that, find the switch to the light which reveals that, is a different question entirely...
Image
News, football and ranting
http://thedissolutefox.com/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users