4 ms·
Uh no. What you quoted was the reply. This is the original discussion. Sexual love is a human need as fundamental as food and shelter.
by codexon 16y ago
Uh no. What you quoted was the reply. This is the original discussion.
Sexual love is a human need as fundamental as food and shelter.
- philwelch 16y agoYes--sex is less fundamental a need than food and shelter. You can go without sex for years at a time, but it's hard to go more than a couple weeks without food or shelter.
- codexon 16y agoMaybe it is __less__ fundamental, but the point of this discussion (which you are confused about) is that it is __still__ fundamental. Maybe you won't die, but humanity wouldn't exist without it. And don't pretend that most people don't have a primal urge to have offspring, or at the very least, a sexual relationship.
- philwelch 16y agoNo, the point of this discussion is the claim that "sexual love is a human need as fundamental as food and shelter". That's an exact quote. "As fundamental as" is a comparative phrase which means sex is on the same level of fundamentality as food and shelter in the hierarchy of human needs. Since food and shelter are necessities for survival on a daily basis and sex is not a necessity for survival at all, it follows that food and shelter are more fundamental needs, hence the statement under contention is false.
- codexon 16y agoI was arguing using your incorrect assumption that the topic of the discussion was "which one could you live without", and tried to explain that the necessity to live was not the sole criteria for measuring the degree of fundamentality. I myself believe it is just as fundamental as food and shelter, as some people are willing to give up both food and shelter to attain it.