4 ms·

No, you don't need religion to hang out and stuff but having matrimony as a sacrament sure nudges people to build families.

velcrovan 7y ago
> having matrimony as a sacrament sure nudges people to build families. Or, you know, a million years of evolution baking the instinct into our primate brains
- blotter_paper 7y ago
  I'm an atheist. I want to agree with you so bad, but having kids is different than building families. I think beasteurope is correct about religion encouraging families to stay together rather than breaking up. I'm not saying other social structures can't encourage this behavior, but I don't think relying on evolutionary instincts is going to keep families together as reliably as relying on evolutionary instincts combined with a social custom where potential parents promise commitment in front of the whole community (with the magical threat of eternal torture should they part ways for bonus points). Not the world I want to live in, just the world I think I live in. And again, I can imagine other social customs for building families (like matrilineal lines with strong social expectations of uncles participating in childcare, for example -- there's at least one hunter-gatherer example of this I'm forgetting the name of).
  - tathougies 7y ago
    > like matrilineal lines with strong social expectations of uncles participating in childcare, for example -- there's at least one hunter-gatherer example of this I'm forgetting the name of There is one matrilineal society with a culture that some anthropologists describe in terms you describe -- the Mosou people. However, more recent anthropological data indicates that this too is not the whole truth. While the Mosou are undoubtedly matrilineal, they typically know who the father is and children with involved fathers (rather than just involved uncles) do better. Moreover, Mosou society is not spontaneous. It developed as the result of a lower class being subjugated by a very patrilineal upper class nobility. The lower class was socially engineered to be compliant, while the upper class taxed them. The upper class was eventually disbanded by communist china, and the Mosou are now mistakenly used as an example of a stable matriarchal society. Nevertheless, even this fails to stand to scrutiny as exposure to the patrilineal mainstream Chinese society means most men just leave for greener pastures in mainstream Chinese society. Were it not for gawking tourists to prop up their economy, it's unlikely they'd be around still.
  - Shorel 7y ago
    I think our evolution even made us dependent on extended families. Like in having groups of at least 20 individuals in order to raise children successfully. The smallish nuclear family is a very modern invention. Going to high school (and the natural consequence of parents not educating their own children) is even more recent.
    - blotter_paper 7y ago
      Agree completely. Prussian-style education is good at promoting fascism and perhaps at preparing people to fit into a poorly-designed workforce, but not much else. Some combination of homeschooling, tutors, and (around age 12-16) apprenticeship programs would probably be better for the sorts of goals I have regarding society. The nuclear family is useful but insufficient given our biology; atoms alone are less useful than the higher-order molecules that supervene them.
  - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
    > I think beasteurope is correct about religion encouraging families to stay together rather than breaking up. Which really means: Encouraging families that don't work to stay together, no matter how much it hurts the people involved. Helping people to resolve conflicts so they want to stay together is a completely different thing than just encouraging people to stay together.
    - endgame 7y ago
      I think that's a black-and-white interpretation of the point. Seems like there's a set of marriages that would hold regardless of social pressure, and a set of marriages that would be miserable if forced together, and a grey zone in between with marriages that would work well if encouraged to stay together but would also dissipate if not encouraged by society.
      - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
        But the point is that you shouldn't encourage staying together, you should encourage working out differences, because they should not stay together if they can't work out their differences, but they will generally stay together anyway if they do manage to work out their differences.
        mickelsen 7y ago
        Once the children are born, the happiness of them takes over your differences with your spouse. Thus the pressure to make the family work as it is. I think it makes sense as long as there are not unworkable differences or violence, therefore IMO societal pressure has worked.
        zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
        I can't figure out whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me. I said people should not stay together if they can't work out their differences, you say they should not stay together if they have unworkable differences ... which seems to be the same idea? But then, the overall impression is not like you are intending to agree with me. I am confused.
- tathougies 7y ago
  Human male instinct is to have sex with lots of females and leave. Religion / transcendent philosophy and civilization and family are a self reinforcing loop that has resulted in human prosperity. Take one component out, and it all falls apart. That is why people say 'family is the building block of civilization'.
andrepd 7y ago
[citation needed] Seriously though, I'm sure we can attribute our urge to procreate to 4,500,000,000 years of evolution, not to churches.

velcrovan 7y ago

> having matrimony as a sacrament sure nudges people to build families. Or, you know, a million years of evolution baking the instinct into our primate brains

blotter_paper 7y ago
I'm an atheist. I want to agree with you so bad, but having kids is different than building families. I think beasteurope is correct about religion encouraging families to stay together rather than breaking up. I'm not saying other social structures can't encourage this behavior, but I don't think relying on evolutionary instincts is going to keep families together as reliably as relying on evolutionary instincts combined with a social custom where potential parents promise commitment in front of the whole community (with the magical threat of eternal torture should they part ways for bonus points). Not the world I want to live in, just the world I think I live in. And again, I can imagine other social customs for building families (like matrilineal lines with strong social expectations of uncles participating in childcare, for example -- there's at least one hunter-gatherer example of this I'm forgetting the name of).
- tathougies 7y ago
  > like matrilineal lines with strong social expectations of uncles participating in childcare, for example -- there's at least one hunter-gatherer example of this I'm forgetting the name of There is one matrilineal society with a culture that some anthropologists describe in terms you describe -- the Mosou people. However, more recent anthropological data indicates that this too is not the whole truth. While the Mosou are undoubtedly matrilineal, they typically know who the father is and children with involved fathers (rather than just involved uncles) do better. Moreover, Mosou society is not spontaneous. It developed as the result of a lower class being subjugated by a very patrilineal upper class nobility. The lower class was socially engineered to be compliant, while the upper class taxed them. The upper class was eventually disbanded by communist china, and the Mosou are now mistakenly used as an example of a stable matriarchal society. Nevertheless, even this fails to stand to scrutiny as exposure to the patrilineal mainstream Chinese society means most men just leave for greener pastures in mainstream Chinese society. Were it not for gawking tourists to prop up their economy, it's unlikely they'd be around still.
- Shorel 7y ago
  I think our evolution even made us dependent on extended families. Like in having groups of at least 20 individuals in order to raise children successfully. The smallish nuclear family is a very modern invention. Going to high school (and the natural consequence of parents not educating their own children) is even more recent.
  - blotter_paper 7y ago
    Agree completely. Prussian-style education is good at promoting fascism and perhaps at preparing people to fit into a poorly-designed workforce, but not much else. Some combination of homeschooling, tutors, and (around age 12-16) apprenticeship programs would probably be better for the sorts of goals I have regarding society. The nuclear family is useful but insufficient given our biology; atoms alone are less useful than the higher-order molecules that supervene them.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
  > I think beasteurope is correct about religion encouraging families to stay together rather than breaking up. Which really means: Encouraging families that don't work to stay together, no matter how much it hurts the people involved. Helping people to resolve conflicts so they want to stay together is a completely different thing than just encouraging people to stay together.
  - endgame 7y ago
    I think that's a black-and-white interpretation of the point. Seems like there's a set of marriages that would hold regardless of social pressure, and a set of marriages that would be miserable if forced together, and a grey zone in between with marriages that would work well if encouraged to stay together but would also dissipate if not encouraged by society.
    - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
      But the point is that you shouldn't encourage staying together, you should encourage working out differences, because they should not stay together if they can't work out their differences, but they will generally stay together anyway if they do manage to work out their differences.
      - mickelsen 7y ago
        Once the children are born, the happiness of them takes over your differences with your spouse. Thus the pressure to make the family work as it is. I think it makes sense as long as there are not unworkable differences or violence, therefore IMO societal pressure has worked.
        zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
        I can't figure out whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me. I said people should not stay together if they can't work out their differences, you say they should not stay together if they have unworkable differences ... which seems to be the same idea? But then, the overall impression is not like you are intending to agree with me. I am confused.
tathougies 7y ago
Human male instinct is to have sex with lots of females and leave. Religion / transcendent philosophy and civilization and family are a self reinforcing loop that has resulted in human prosperity. Take one component out, and it all falls apart. That is why people say 'family is the building block of civilization'.

andrepd 7y ago

[citation needed] Seriously though, I'm sure we can attribute our urge to procreate to 4,500,000,000 years of evolution, not to churches.