Saying cheating is biological is not an excuse

[Trialbyfire]

The Salmon are born with the ability to map out magnetically, that's the biological part. Depending where they are born their ability to map out because they evolved that way then allows them to map it out.

You're avoiding my questions. Where did it start? Who or what put this into their brain, when salmon evolved?

[sally4sara]

You can cheat and don't have to lie about it......

 

Many people reveal to their partners later that they've cheated, because the guilt drives them to.

 

Word it differently then. The act of being monogamous is not actually biological. It's a Judeo Christian belief system. You do know that Islam allows 4 wives right?

 

Many cultures have tried to allow multiple partners because they know just one is not sustainable. Cheating is a natural result of a human biologically driven to want more than just one person, but society (ours) saying that they should only have have one person.

 

The Koran states that for a man to take on another wife beyond his first wife, the first wife must agree to it and he must be able to provide for both of them and any potential children. What actually happens varies depending on the cultural attitudes of where they live. This is one of the examples I use to point out how people who convert (choose with adult understanding) to a religion, generally practice their chosen religion more correctly than those who were born to a religious culture. People who practice the religion they were born to, tend to use it to justify the behaviors they want to act on.

 

What part of that religious guidence is biological? I guess I don't get why you used it as an example for your point.......

 

If you cite it because you feel it is part of that religious culture because it was believed to be the proper way to manage what you call natural biological drives, then wouldn't they apply it to women choosing multiple husbands as well? They don't. What biological drive is responsible for that?

 

I do believe the urge to seek sex is a biological drive. When one is single and they go out on the town to meet someone new, they may be looking for someone with particular qualities, but it is the subconscious biological drive that makes them feel attracted to a particular person over another.

Once you are in a relationship however, it isn't a biological drive that would cause you to lie and sneak in order to have sex with someone else. It is probably a biological drive to feel attracted to someone else, but to lie and sneak?......that is not. Biological drive would compel a person to never commit to ONE person. So what makes people choose monogamy?

[Hkizzle]

You're avoiding my questions. Where did it start? Who or what put this into their brain, when salmon evolved?

 

No one put it in their brain. It developed because having the mapping system allowed them to have a greater chance of survival.

 

If you're a creationist, this debate stops right here, because creationists don't understand science.

 

If you simply just don't understand how evolution works then you have to study it yourself.

[Hkizzle]

The Koran states that for a man to take on another wife beyond his first wife, the first wife must agree to it and he must be able to provide for both of them and any potential children. What actually happens varies depending on the cultural attitudes of where they live. This is one of the examples I use to point out how people who convert (choose with adult understanding) to a religion, generally practice their chosen religion more correctly than those who were born to a religious culture. People who practice the religion they were born to, tend to use it to justify the behaviors they want to act on.

 

What part of that religious guidence is biological? I guess I don't get why you used it as an example for your point.......

 

If you cite it because you feel it is part of that religious culture because it was believed to be the proper way to manage what you call natural biological drives, then wouldn't they apply it to women choosing multiple husbands as well? They don't. What biological drive is responsible for that?

 

I do believe the urge to seek sex is a biological drive. When one is single and they go out on the town to meet someone new, they may be looking for someone with particular qualities, but it is the subconscious biological drive that makes them feel attracted to a particular person over another.

Once you are in a relationship however, it isn't a biological drive that would cause you to lie and sneak in order to have sex with someone else. It is probably a biological drive to feel attracted to someone else, but to lie and sneak?......that is not. Biological drive would compel a person to never commit to ONE person. So what makes people choose monogamy?

 

The vast majority of human cultures have been polygamous. From Chinese having many wives to the Aztecs. I simply used Islam as an example because it's a modern equivalent, and most people don't know history well.

 

It's more advantageous for women to pick monogamy (and fewer women cheat than men) because a woman has to carry a child in the womb for 9 months. The best strategy is for a woman to find a capable man, not random guys that don't offer the best genes.

 

Men do naturally chose monogamy as well, because monogamy works best for men that are not capable of attracting lots of females. The strategies are well mapped out.

 

There are many books on these subjects. What to read them? I'll list them if you really want to.

[Trialbyfire]

No one put it in their brain. It developed because having the mapping system allowed them to have a greater chance of survival.

Oh so you're saying that if behaviours allow greater opportunities for species survival, that it becomes ingrained biological behaviour aka instinct, right?

 

So, we've evolved society so we don't run around killing each other, thus increasing the chance of species survival, no?

 

With all this in mind, who's to say we can't adapt enough to not cheat? It can also be localized behaviour, in that the same species of animal, will have different "instincts", when the species has lived in different environments for milleniums. Adaptation...

 

If you're a creationist, this debate stops right here, because creationists don't understand science.

 

If you simply just don't understand how evolution works then you have to study it yourself.

The argument still stands from a creationists perspective. God gave us a brain. He also gave us a set of rules for social behaviour. Lust is a sin and so is greed.

[Hkizzle]

Oh so you're saying that if behaviours allow greater opportunities for species survival, that it becomes ingrained biological behaviour aka instinct, right?

 

So, we've evolved society so we don't run around killing each other, thus increasing the chance of species survival, no?

 

With all this in mind, who's to say we can't adapt enough to not cheat? It can also be localized behaviour, in that the same species of animal, will have different "instincts", when the species has lived in different environments for milleniums. Adaptation...

 

The argument still stands from a creationists perspective. God gave us a brain. He also gave us a set of rules for social behaviour. Lust is a sin and so is greed.

 

You don't understand genetics or evolution then.

 

Genetically we've changed very little in the last 500 thousand years, so our inherited behavior has changed very little.

 

Learned behavior is not past on genetically. It dies with you, and is not passed on to the offspring.

 

The maps those salmon learn don't get past on to their offspring........only their ability to learn. Just like you have the ability to learn not to cheat, but the temptation to cheat is biological =).

 

God may have given us a brain, but creationism is a bunch of crap that's not science but touted as science to support a religious belief.

[sally4sara]

The vast majority of human cultures have been polygamous. From Chinese having many wives to the Aztecs. I simply used Islam as an example because it's a modern equivalent, and most people don't know history well.

 

It's more advantageous for women to pick monogamy (and fewer women cheat than men) because a woman has to carry a child in the womb for 9 months. The best strategy is for a woman to find a capable man, not random guys that don't offer the best genes.

Men do naturally chose monogamy as well, because monogamy works best for men that are not capable of attracting lots of females. The strategies are well mapped out.

 

There are many books on these subjects. What to read them? I'll list them if you really want to.

 

I've read a few books that assert this belief, but it really is a chicken/egg theory and I was trying to see which perspective you draw this belief from. Here is the problem:

 

You point out that it is advantageous for a woman to choose a capable man with good genes, but then also say the men who would further this strategy are men who experience difficulty attracting women. It is a hugely conflicted theory in that a woman seeking the best genes will be casting her eye on a man who would embody the qualities many other women would want too. If we are to find the best situation as women with the focus on bio drive, women would seek the best looking, strongest, healthiest men to mix DNA with while also looking for a man or two willing to stick around for the day to day stuff.

 

But then you ALSO assert that it would mostly be a bio drive for multiple spouses for men rather than women even though it would be MORE DIFFICULT for one man to support multiple wives who don't have other men helping them.

 

What you describe is a set up that only favors WEALTHY men. And wealthy men have been the ones through our history that write the religious guides and social laws we still act on and call "biological drives".

 

So we don't really know how much of a man's drive to seek multiple partners is a "bio drive" and how much of it is social conditioning to admire and aspire to the life of the most successful man of their village.

[sxyNYCcpl]

In fact the reason why relationships are so hard and confusing is because contrary to what most people realize what drives us in relationships is very primal. Relationships have to do with our drives to find partners and reproduce (even if we don't want babies). These drives are often primal and make people make bad choices.

 

Not all people desire children, nor do all people desire monogamous relationships. Yet society tells us we're supposed to be monogamous, and we're supposed to have children. Some people say "screw you, I'll live how I feel" while others try to live how they think they're "supposed to" with differing results. Some are successful in forcing themselves into that box, others are not. Seems to me it's better to be who you are rather than faking it, successfully or not.

 

Is the desire for multiple sexual partners biological? Absolutely, everything we do is in one way or another related to our biology. Is the desire for monogamy biological? I think it is, as well, though our societal and religious institutions insisting that it's the only acceptable option forces people who don't desire it to pretend they do.

[Hkizzle]

I've read a few books that assert this belief, but it really is a chicken/egg theory and I was trying to see which perspective you draw this belief from. Here is the problem:

 

You point out that it is advantageous for a woman to choose a capable man with good genes, but then also say the men who would further this strategy are men who experience difficulty attracting women. It is a hugely conflicted theory in that a woman seeking the best genes will be casting her eye on a man who would embody the qualities many other women would want too. If we are to find the best situation as women with the focus on bio drive, women would seek the best looking, strongest, healthiest men to mix DNA with while also looking for a man or two willing to stick around for the day to day stuff.

 

But then you ALSO assert that it would mostly be a bio drive for multiple spouses for men rather than women even though it would be MORE DIFFICULT for one man to support multiple wives who don't have other men helping them.

 

What you describe is a set up that only favors WEALTHY men. And wealthy men have been the ones through our history that write the religious guides and social laws we still act on and call "biological drives".

 

So we don't really know how much of a man's drive to seek multiple partners is a "bio drive" and how much of it is social conditioning to admire and aspire to the life of the most successful man of their village.

 

Ok, first of all best genes and commitment are two different things.....

 

Thus that explains why so many people say they want nice guys but attracted to jerks.

 

Histroy........as in modern history? Judeo-Christian-Islamic laws are a few thousand years old. Go back a bit more to see the harems of the kings before that, or the tribe leaders, or alpha males of ape species.....

 

Even the men that write the laws can be hyporites. I just found out recently Martin Luther King cheated on his wife, I was terribly disappointed with that one. The thing is modern religion is a very new concept compared to our biology which stretches back millions of years.

[Trialbyfire]

Learned behavior is not past on genetically. It dies with you, and is not passed on to the offspring.

Like salmon?

 

The maps those salmon learn don't get past on to their offspring........only their ability to learn.

Can you explain this in more detail? Are you saying that each generation of salmon learn where to go? If so, who teaches them?

Just like you have the ability to learn not to cheat, but the temptation to cheat is biological =).

Mating is biological. Cheating is not. Cheating is a learned behaviour.

God may have given us a brain, but creationism is a bunch of crap that's not science but touted as science to support a religious belief.

As I'm not a creationist, thanks for the judgement!

[Hkizzle]

Like salmon?

 

Can you explain this in more detail? Are you saying that each generation of salmon learn where to go? If so, who teaches them?

Mating is biological. Cheating is not. Cheating is a learned behaviour.

As I'm not a creationist, thanks for the judgement!

 

No, not like salmon. The maps are not passed on. I already told you that. Just inherit the ability to learn them because it increases survival chances.

 

No one teaches them, they're salmon, they don't sit in a classroom.

 

Ok, if you're not a creationist, you still don't understand evolution from your inability to understand a concept as simple as salmon inheriting their ability to learn, but not the maps themselves.

 

Cheating is not learned.......no one taught most cheaters how to cheat.......

[sally4sara]

Ok, first of all best genes and commitment are two different things.....

 

Thus that explains why so many people say they want nice guys but attracted to jerks.

 

Histroy........as in modern history? Judeo-Christian-Islamic laws are a few thousand years old. Go back a bit more to see the harems of the kings before that, or the tribe leaders, or alpha males of ape species.....

 

Even the men that write the laws can be hyporites. I just found out recently Martin Luther King cheated on his wife, I was terribly disappointed with that one. The thing is modern religion is a very new concept compared to our biology which stretches back millions of years.

 

I am talking about our history as an entirety of our species reproductive strategies as well as how our different cultures devised their social standards.

 

None of which has to do with the choice to lie and sneak in relation to sex. This is where I struggle to agree with the thread topic. It is a bio drive to seek many people for sex. It is not a bio drive to lie and sneak. To lie and sneak would be a strategy of the poorer men of a society if we believe your assertion. They cannot actually qualify for what the women of their area are looking for so they lie and sneak to gain the sex without having the qualities to justify taking on multiple partners.

 

You're also believing a theory that debases men. This theory supposes that men are less evolved to human advances, less likely to follow socially designed organization that seeks stability for it's population. This is the same theory that supports a negative sexist ideals. It follows that people adhering to these beliefs would not trust men, not depend on them, believe they bring harm to society, think men are more like animals who lack self control. All while supporting the belief that women should breed with the more animalistic men and dupe the more human men into fatherhood.

 

I feel placing responsibilty for our behaviors on the "bio drive" keeps us from accepting the wisdom of self control. So unless you don't believe in evolution, what do you feel you have to gain from saying cheating is a biological impulse and not an excuse?

[BUENG1]

I think some of the people here that don't want to admit cheating is biological still don't understand the facts behind why scientists now know it's biological.

 

Saying that cheating is biological doesn't mean it's an excuse to cheat or that it's a good thing. It's simply presenting the facts about why something happens in the first place.

 

Take aggression for example, it's biologically driven. Animals have aggression to compete with each other and to defend themselves against threats. That doesn't mean in modern human beings it's ok for me to punch someone I don't like. Society, my parents and teachers taught me long ago that I can't just hit people when I get angry.

 

In the same way cheating is not a socially created behavior but a biologically driven one. Just like aggression is not socially created, nor is hunger socially created. It can be augmented, you can exert willpower over it, but it exists in the first place because it is biological.

 

Take dieting for example. You can consciously want to lose weight and want to eat less, but your body will send out hunger signals and drive you to eat even when you don't want to. You then have a fight between higher reasoning and a biological drive.

 

It's the same with cheating. In fact the reason why relationships are so hard and confusing is because contrary to what most people realize what drives us in relationships is very primal. Relationships have to do with our drives to find partners and reproduce (even if we don't want babies). These drives are often primal and make people make bad choices.

 

We're animals, just smart ones, and we have morality. That's why most of our undesirable behaviors are actually biological. That's why we often have conflicts and need willpower to do the right thing. We need to consciously exert control over our primal animal instincts.

 

Cheating however is still biological however you cut it. To not admit that is to not understand the facts and the scientific explanation. Science is not about creating excuses or finding politically correct answers. It is however about finding the truth.

 

I hope I've presented the explanation in the most simple easy to understand form here.

 

Peeing your pants is also biological whats your point?

[norajane]

Many cultures have tried to allow multiple partners because they know just one is not sustainable. Cheating is a natural result of a human biologically driven to want more than just one person, but society (ours) saying that they should only have have one person.

 

Cheating is not a natural result, if by natural you mean uncontrollable. Cheating is a choice some people make to fool around behind their partner's back, but it is not a choice everyone makes.

 

If committing to one partner is just not "sustainable", there are other options. Such as never committing to just one partner with expectations of loyalty, monogamy and exclusivity. Such as serial monogamy where you leave one partner and move on to another so there is no cheating and deception involved. Such as having an open marriage where both partners are free to have sex with other people with their partner's consent.

 

And, as was noted earlier in the thread, cheating is not always driven by a desire for sex, nor is sex always involved. Emotional affairs do not involve sex, yet they are just as damaging in that they involve betrayal and deception just as much as sexual affairs do.

 

As you said in the quote above, cheating is not the result of a biological NEED, but a WANT.

 

And it involves CHOICE and is completely controllable.

[Trialbyfire]

No, not like salmon. The maps are not passed on. I already told you that. Just inherit the ability to learn them because it increases survival chances.

 

No one teaches them, they're salmon, they don't sit in a classroom.

 

Ok, if you're not a creationist, you still don't understand evolution from your inability to understand a concept as simple as salmon inheriting their ability to learn, but not the maps themselves.

 

Cheating is not learned.......no one taught most cheaters how to cheat.......

Insulting me and backpedaling, isn't going to make your point any less weak.

[Hkizzle]

I am talking about our history as an entirety of our species reproductive strategies as well as how our different cultures devised their social standards.

 

None of which has to do with the choice to lie and sneak in relation to sex. This is where I struggle to agree with the thread topic. It is a bio drive to seek many people for sex. It is not a bio drive to lie and sneak. To lie and sneak would be a strategy of the poorer men of a society if we believe your assertion. They cannot actually qualify for what the women of their area are looking for so they lie and sneak to gain the sex without having the qualities to justify taking on multiple partners.

 

You're also believing a theory that debases men. This theory supposes that men are less evolved to human advances, less likely to follow socially designed organization that seeks stability for it's population. This is the same theory that supports a negative sexist ideals. It follows that people adhering to these beliefs would not trust men, not depend on them, believe they bring harm to society, think men are more like animals who lack self control. All while supporting the belief that women should breed with the more animalistic men and dupe the more human men into fatherhood.

 

I feel placing responsibilty for our behaviors on the "bio drive" keeps us from accepting the wisdom of self control. So unless you don't believe in evolution, what do you feel you have to gain from saying cheating is a biological impulse and not an excuse?

 

Ok I will borrow this from another thread I am debating with trailoffire on players:

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4072816/

 

It's well documented that kids know how to lie at an early age. No one teaches them that. Unfortunately it seems that lying seems to be biological too.

 

If someone is tempted to cheat and they know the consequences of their actions, then wouldn't they lie too?

 

Again, I am not justifying, I'm just debating on the source of the behavior.

 

I also disagree that only poorer men lie. Powerful men lie even more to get where they are! Just look at powerful businessmen and politicians. Whilst wit and intelligence is required, very few successful men get where they are without applying wit to underhanded tactics. From Bill Clinton to Elliot Splitzer, you name it.

 

Humans have advanced because of civilisation and our ability to pass knowledge down. We're blank slates when we are born with the ability to do good or wrong. We're genetically very similar to our ancestors, because 500 generations or about 10 thousand years of human civlisation doesn't change us much genetically.

 

Many people that don't understand evolution think that learned behavior is past on in the genes. It's not........ Every generation is a new slate with only the ability to learn.

 

I didn't advocate sexist ideals btw.......nor am I advocating cheating. But in my origianl post I clearly stated.....

 

Science is not about being politically correct. It's about finding the correct answer.

[Hkizzle]

Cheating is not a natural result, if by natural you mean uncontrollable. Cheating is a choice some people make to fool around behind their partner's back, but it is not a choice everyone makes.

 

If committing to one partner is just not "sustainable", there are other options. Such as never committing to just one partner with expectations of loyalty, monogamy and exclusivity. Such as serial monogamy where you leave one partner and move on to another so there is no cheating and deception involved. Such as having an open marriage where both partners are free to have sex with other people with their partner's consent.

 

And, as was noted earlier in the thread, cheating is not always driven by a desire for sex, nor is sex always involved. Emotional affairs do not involve sex, yet they are just as damaging in that they involve betrayal and deception just as much as sexual affairs do.

 

As you said in the quote above, cheating is not the result of a biological NEED, but a WANT.

 

And it involves CHOICE and is completely controllable.

 

Yeah, I never said there was no choice........

 

Why do people assume I say there's no choice just because I say it's biological? Just like anger is biological but I had a choice to kill my last boss that I hated but didn't.

 

I control myself........

 

It's still biological though.

 

As for lying and deception, unfortunately, that's biological too. Look at the link I posted. That's well know info too, that kids don't need to be taught how to lie. NO ONE TEACHES THEM.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4072816/

[MrFun]

My personal opinion is that cheating is a learned behaviour pattern.

 

Biologically speaking, I assume, that women seek the best genes in the pool. To achieve this, women need to test a man to see if he will provide shelter, food, and security to their offspring. Women can bare many children in their lives (10 or so), so they are also biologically wired to have multiple partners throughtout their lives, just at a lower frequency than men.

 

Men seek as many women as possible to "spread their seed" as efficiently as possible. However, they also need to secure their offspring's survival. They can afford to have a million children, but cannot do so because their offspring would have little chance of survival without protection.

 

Therefore both genders seek time-limited monogamous relationships. -> symbiotic/interdependent relationship.

 

To protect loss, women and men have jealous emotions (like all mammals). Women fear the man running off when she's raising their offspring and men fear rearing a child of another man, or in other words, wasting his resources.

 

That's the biological part.

 

However, all animals cut corners and try to benefit from "sneaky" or cunning behaviour. They learn this through learned experience an d behavioural patterns only.

 

Men and women that cheat, I believe, learn to get away with it and repeat successful behaviour.

 

Women now know they can cut corners and test the gene pool without giving up their other partner and without getting pregnant (thanks to contraception). This satisfies their biological programming

 

Men generally take the next best opportunity when they cheat. Possibly deep down they love their wives, but are unsure of having surrendered their resources to the right woman. Kinda like a dog snatching food off the table when someone's not watching. They're still spending their resources on the right women, but also cutting corners by spreading their seed. This satisfies their biological programming

 

I try not to generalise, but I think "once a cheater always a cheater" fits the equation, because their learned behaviour gave them benefits that outweighed the negatives (heartthrob emotions, sex, biological programming etc. vs. getting caught or getting pregnant). They don't fear any negative consequences anymore (getting dragged their town and stoned or being killed by a rival male). Once people learn this behaviour, I believe, they are willing to repeat it.

 

I guess there are two types of people. People that try to get away with things, and people that don't feel the need to have to get away with anything. What do you give think? Flawed theory?

[westernxer]

Cheating is NOT biological.

 

It's cultural. LOL

[sally4sara]

Ok I will borrow this from another thread I am debating with trailoffire on players:

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4072816/

 

It's well documented that kids know how to lie at an early age. No one teaches them that. Unfortunately it seems that lying seems to be biological too.

 

If someone is tempted to cheat and they know the consequences of their actions, then wouldn't they lie too?

 

Again, I am not justifying, I'm just debating on the source of the behavior.

 

I also disagree that only poorer men lie. Powerful men lie even more to get where they are! Just look at powerful businessmen and politicians. Whilst wit and intelligence is required, very few successful men get where they are without applying wit to underhanded tactics. From Bill Clinton to Elliot Splitzer, you name it.

Humans have advanced because of civilisation and our ability to pass knowledge down. We're blank slates when we are born with the ability to do good or wrong. We're genetically very similar to our ancestors, because 500 generations or about 10 thousand years of human civlisation doesn't change us much genetically.

 

Many people that don't understand evolution think that learned behavior is past on in the genes. It's not........ Every generation is a new slate with only the ability to learn.

 

I didn't advocate sexist ideals btw.......nor am I advocating cheating. But in my origianl post I clearly stated.....

 

Science is not about being politically correct. It's about finding the correct answer.

 

Knowing how to lie "from an early age"s different from knowing how to lie from birth. To lie, they had to learn language and to learn language, they absorbed many other human nuances. Such as lying.

 

And I don't agree that cheating and lying are the actions only of the poorer men of society either which is why I'm struggling with pinning lying and cheating on a bio drive. You are correct when you state seeking sex is a bio drive. You are even correct when you state seeking many partners is a bio drive. But your thread title says "Saying cheating is biological is not an excuse" when seeking sex even with many people does not have to include lying or cheating or hiding it from your other partners.

The reasons you believe cheating (and lying and hiding) happens is not the fault of a sexual bio drive.

[Hkizzle]

My personal opinion is that cheating is a learned behaviour pattern.

 

Biologically speaking, I assume, that women seek the best genes in the pool. To achieve this, women need to test a man to see if he will provide shelter, food, and security to their offspring. Women can bare many children in their lives (10 or so), so they are also biologically wired to have multiple partners throughtout their lives, just at a lower frequency than men.

 

Men seek as many women as possible to "spread their seed" as efficiently as possible. However, they also need to secure their offspring's survival. They can afford to have a million children, but cannot do so because their offspring would have little chance of survival without protection.

 

Therefore both genders seek time-limited monogamous relationships. -> symbiotic/interdependent relationship.

 

To protect loss, women and men have jealous emotions (like all mammals). Women fear the man running off when she's raising their offspring and men fear rearing a child of another man, or in other words, wasting his resources.

 

That's the biological part.

 

However, all animals cut corners and try to benefit from "sneaky" or cunning behaviour. They learn this through learned experience an d behavioural patterns only.

 

Men and women that cheat, I believe, learn to get away with it and repeat successful behaviour.

 

Women now know they can cut corners and test the gene pool without giving up their other partner and without getting pregnant (thanks to contraception). This satisfies their biological programming

 

Men generally take the next best opportunity when they cheat. Possibly deep down they love their wives, but are unsure of having surrendered their resources to the right woman. Kinda like a dog snatching food off the table when someone's not watching. They're still spending their resources on the right women, but also cutting corners by spreading their seed. This satisfies their biological programming

 

I try not to generalise, but I think "once a cheater always a cheater" fits the equation, because their learned behaviour gave them benefits that outweighed the negatives (heartthrob emotions, sex, biological programming etc. vs. getting caught or getting pregnant). They don't fear any negative consequences anymore (getting dragged their town and stoned or being killed by a rival male). Once people learn this behaviour, I believe, they are willing to repeat it.

 

I guess there are two types of people. People that try to get away with things, and people that don't feel the need to have to get away with anything. What do you give think? Flawed theory?

 

MrFun, that's for presenting a logical arguement rather than just an opinion without analyzing the information.

 

I prefer to look at it this way. It's not learned, rather it's an unlearned behavior. Society teaches us that cheating is bad. People that cheat are more likely to do it again because they remove their social suppression and embrace biological drives.

 

As for this:

 

"Men seek as many women as possible to "spread their seed" as efficiently as possible. However, they also need to secure their offspring's survival. They can afford to have a million children, but cannot do so because their offspring would have little chance of survival without protection."

 

This explains the CAD or DAD strategies in mating that many animals including some men pursue (in terms of their behavior). You either stick with one woman and make sure the chances of offspring survival is very high. Or mate with many women (players or in tribes alpha males) and even if a smaller percentage of offspring survive then you pass on my genes.

 

Also most alpha males can afford to bring in more offspring compared to a lower member of the tribe.

[Hkizzle]

Knowing how to lie "from an early age"s different from knowing how to lie from birth. To lie, they had to learn language and to learn language, they absorbed many other human nuances. Such as lying.

 

And I don't agree that cheating and lying are the actions only of the poorer men of society either which is why I'm struggling with pinning lying and cheating on a bio drive. You are correct when you state seeking sex is a bio drive. You are even correct when you state seeking many partners is a bio drive. But your thread title says "Saying cheating is biological is not an excuse" when seeking sex even with many people does not have to include lying or cheating or hiding it from your other partners.

The reasons you believe cheating (and lying and hiding) happens is not the fault of a sexual bio drive.

 

No, google kids and lying. If anything adult humans try to keep their kids from lying. It's something they naturally figure out despite the efforts of adults to stop them from doing it. It's not learnt from anyone else lying.

 

"when seeking sex even with many people does not have to include lying or cheating or hiding it from your other partners."

 

It doesn't have to go with lying. But it goes hand in hand because humans naturally know how to deceive......

 

We don't take classes to learn how to lie and deceive, it's in our nature. We're just taught by society that it's wrong, so many of us refrain from doing it.

[Hi.P.O'Crit]

Mating is biological. Cheating is not. Cheating is a learned behaviour.

 

Cheating is a form of mating.

[sally4sara]

No, google kids and lying. If anything adult humans try to keep their kids from lying. It's something they naturally figure out despite the efforts of adults to stop them from doing it. It's not learnt from anyone else lying.

 

"when seeking sex even with many people does not have to include lying or cheating or hiding it from your other partners."

 

It doesn't have to go with lying. But it goes hand in hand because humans naturally know how to deceive......

 

We don't take classes to learn how to lie and deceive, it's in our nature. We're just taught by society that it's wrong, so many of us refrain from doing it.

 

Prove this please, because if you don't know how to speak, you can't lie. If you've learned how to form sentences and communicate with these sentences, you've learned an number or other behaviors (like lying) while doing so. Parents may not want their children to lie and may even attempt to discourage the act, but we tell lies everyday without even realizing we are doing it sometimes and in effect teaching the children exposed to us the art of lying while not intending to teach them how to lie.

[Hkizzle]

Prove this please, because if you don't know how to speak, you can't lie. If you've learned how to form sentences and communicate with these sentences, you've learned an number or other behaviors (like lying) while doing so. Parents may not want their children to lie and may even attempt to discourage the act, but we tell lies everyday without even realizing we are doing it sometimes and in effect teaching the children exposed to us the art of lying while not intending to teach them how to lie.

 

You need a certain level of development to do many actions or behaviors........

 

Lets say anger is a biologically inherited trait. Surely just because a kid isn't physically grown enough to throw a punch, doesn't mean he can't do it when he's 18 and angry?

 

You learn to speak then lie simply because your brain has to develop.........

 

Genetic predisposition is still there prior to physical development.