Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima
From: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Of sex and philosophy (was: emergent properties)
Keywords: pleasure, stoicism, self
Message-ID: <20@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: 9 Oct 90 15:56:01 GMT
References: <3499@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <13197@cs.utexas.edu> <8@tdatirv.UUCP> <1990Oct7.005440.23109@watcgl.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Teradata Corp., Irvine
Lines: 20

In article <1990Oct7.005440.23109@watcgl.waterloo.edu> jwtlai@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Jim W Lai) writes:
>
>Would it not be more accurate to say the sex drive is a drive towards sex?
>Reproduction does not necessarily follow, and the conscious realization that
>sex is required for reproduction has not been universal in human societies.

True.  I was rather thinking about it from a different perspective, that of
an biologist.  From an evolutionary point of view the purpose of sex is
reproduction.  As in many other behaviors, the immediate purpose for the
being doing the action is different than the evoutionary purpose of the action.
So, yes, within the human mind the sex drive is implemented as a simple
response pattern that encourages sexual behavior.
[This kind of 'disagreement' comes from having different perspectives on
these matters, I always speak first as a biologist - in reality we really
agree in most essentials (I think)].


-- 
---------------
uunet!tdatirv!sarima				(Stanley Friesen)