Jump to content
While the thread author can add an update and reopen discussion, this thread was last posted in over a month ago. Want to continue the conversation? Feel free to start a new thread instead!

Recommended Posts

Posted
It's entertainment.

 

It wouldn't be entertaining if there weren't any drama.

 

Why do you think James Cameron's Avatar is a billion times more popular than Andy Warhol's five hour film of a man sleeping?

 

A story needs conflict and resolution to appeal to a broad demographic. That's why you don't see shows on TV that don't have drama in them.

 

In Avtar though in the end the Navi win and peace and contentment is restored to Pandora. If the Navi thought like most women they would invite the human's back because they get bored with peace.

Posted
Best post in thread.

 

Question is: WHY is this a stereotype of masculine men? Quite possibly because men who act this way are actually better for making babies with? Hmmmmmmmm.

 

I doubt it. Evolutionary psychologists have pushed this idea, but I'm not convinced. Evolutionary psychology's propositions are often intuitively plausible, and thus ring "true" in the minds of many people. They also seem consistent with Darwinian theory. The trouble is, however, that few of EP's propositions are either verifiable or falsifiable. In the end, EP is just learned speculation masquerading as hard science.

Posted
In Avtar though in the end the Navi win and peace and contentment is restored to Pandora. If the Navi thought like most women they would invite the human's back because they get bored with peace.

 

Is it possible for you to write a post where you don't show everyone how much you hate women?

 

I doubt it. Evolutionary psychologists have pushed this idea, but I'm not convinced. Evolutionary psychology's propositions are often intuitively plausible, and thus ring "true" in the minds of many people. They also seem consistent with Darwinian theory. The trouble is, however, that few of EP's propositions are either verifiable or falsifiable. In the end, EP is just learned speculation masquerading as hard science.

 

Agreed, evopsych is mostly crap. Lots of post hoc rationalizations and fallacies floating around, especially post hoc ergo propter hoc. You can come up with conflicting "intuitive" theories fairly easily, present each separately to different people, and have all of them go, "Ohh, that makes perfect sense."

Posted

I don't think settling is bad in itself. I think when either sex settles they tend to meet equally whether it be in looks, financial standing, values, culture (family), etc etc. YOu can also meet in equal terms where one trait overcompensates (ugly rich man, attractive young woman). I see people who have 'settled' go for people who are very much like themselves.

 

The idea that we tend to deviate and go for the 'bad boys', 'players', 'b*tches', etc etc seems to be from striving to the western ideal of romantic love (eros). Because with romantic love- passion, excitement and the freedom to choose any lover is the be all and end all and it must override any social (or physical) barriers. It makes love free and exciting. This is very hard however.

 

I think this is where that 'league' scale also comes into play. Sticking to your league means loving someone that has very much the same similarities to you. I think this type of love is called storge, which is whats very common throughout western culture-where similarity is more a defining term and form of loving > which gets boring and dull. It also feels restrictive because we seem to be hard wired to stick to our own 'leagues'.

 

Romantic love for me is the best ideal to come around. It is free, exciting and non constraining. It is also very hard to achieve because western culture has social barriers that really prevent it from happening.

×
×
  • Create New...