Well...let us pretend that values and reason are not involved? Let us pretend that values such as honesty, kindness, dependability, lawfulness, and such are not involved. Let us pretend that you and I can make no distinction between a woman of high values and some emaciated prostitute who knocks out her tricks with a drug and then robs them?
I didn't see the conclusion of this set of proposition in later comments, so I will guess that you were being sarcastic. (?)
Is it possible for a woman of mature moral values to love the rapist who has attributes that she rationally despises?
Yes, I think it's possible. He might have told her that he was really drunk once and after some intense shared passion, the victim was not able to provide legal consent, and he was later convicted of statutory rape. He apologized to the victim and she eventually forgave him. Once he got out of jail, he went to church and got baptized in this other woman's church, and he never stole or did drugs or ever boozed again. After he asked Christ for forgiveness, the woman decided that he was a changed man and then she fell in love with him.
If you were not being sarcastic earlier, I apologize for this example.
Else-wise, if the women despises the man, it doesn't matter whether it was rational or irrational repugnance. She won't want to love him. If the rapist was the woman's son, she might still love him from a maternal instinct, and hopes he can change his ways.
It seems to me that what you call love ("a biochemical process") is something I understand as sexual attraction? Perhaps I am misunderstanding your meaning.
I suppose that I didn't properly address your idea of love in terms of the Objectivist philosophy. I was making comments about love within a cold framework of evolution. My earlier posts were meant to focus on evolutionary biology, but I reflexively strayed into your Objectivism discussion. For the record, my view is that a sexual attraction that doesn't produce offspring is irrelevant to evolution.
Anyway, you asked some questions so I'll try to answer as honestly as I know how.
Are we that much different biologically than all the other animals who procreate through some form of sexual attraction?
No, I don't think we are that much different than other primates that procreate out of a sexual attraction. I think sexual attraction is a visual assessment on health and vitality. Some visual cue are facial symmetry near the top of the list, with body symmetry a close second. After that, for men, breast size and waist-to-hip ratio, with the hour glass figure being a fairly wide-spread ideal for fecundity. As these features fade, the sexual attraction fades for some men. Still, couples will stay together for many reasons other than sexual attraction.
I think there is some truth to the notion that 'love is blind' and that we might love someone enough to overlook imperfect honesty, kindness, dependability or lawfulness.
We don't generally speak of two mice or two foxes mating out of "love"
Ok, but that does mean that we shouldn't. Here's a snip from Wikipedia on cranes:
Cranes are perennially monogamous breeders, establishing long-term pair bonds that may last the lifetime of the birds. Pair bonds begin to form in the second or third years of life, but it may be several years before the first successful breeding season. Initial breeding attempts often fail, and in many cases newer pair bonds will dissolve (divorce) after unsuccessful breeding attempts. Pairs that are repeatedly successful at breeding will remain together for as long as they continue to do so. In a study of Sandhill Cranes in Florida, seven out of the 22 pairs studied remained together for a 11-year period. Of the pairs that separated 53% were due to the death of one of the pair, 18% due to divorce and the fate of 29% of pairs were unknown. Similar results had been found by acoustic monitoring (sonography / frequency analysis of duett and guard calls) in 3 breeding areas of Common Cranes in Germany over 10 years.
Isn't love a higher order of attachment that has evolved in humans concomitant with the development of our reasoning capacity--and thus the choosing of values?
I really don't know the answer, nor have I ever read an article about the evolution of human love. In small tribal units, even today, a man or woman may have very few choices for a partner and it may come down to the availability of a partner rather than some long-term search of the perfect soulmate. If there is some love and some sexual attraction from time to time, then that's good; if not, well there could be kids to take care of. Sorry, but this reminded me of the song, Thunder Road:
So you're scared and you're thinking
That maybe we ain't that young anymore
Show a little faith, there's magic in the night
You ain't a beauty, but hey you're alright
Oh and that's alright with me
There were ghosts in the eyes of all the boys you sent away
They haunt this dusty beach road
In the skeleton frames of burned out Chevrolets
I think we can become too strategic in waiting for a deep sense of love that will be based on those Objectivist ideals.
Isn't the ability judge precisely what permits us to choose the better over the worse--although oftentimes quite imperfectly or irrationally?
Well, that is what I want to believe, but my wanting it doesn't make it so. The problem is that even with the perfect judgment of 12 wise men, the choice can still be a colossal mistake over time. There is no perfect way to have judgment, so I am not comfortable with the phrase 'judge precisely.' Maybe the love that two people share for a lifetime of happiness was never determined by their rational judgements when they first fell in love.
I should say that I highly value rational judgement, but there is no way I would make bets about how long people stay in love.
Isn't every rational move we make a question of judgement?
That is a deep philosophical question. I guess so, however...
I can make a rational move with false information and have a bad outcome.
I can make a rational move with good information and have a bad outcome.
I can make an irrational move with no information and have a good outcome.
I always hope to make a rational move with good information and a have a good outcome.
I should always avoid an irrational move with or without good information.
Everything from not touching a hot stove to painting your car a new color to deciding you are chasing the wrong woman for marriage?!
That is an interesting set of examples. A bad marriage can be like a hot stove.<g> Personally, a never had a car long enough to repaint it. I guess that guy really loves his car. Is that autoerotism or something else?
It does not appear that society has anything to fear from you!
Well, I do criticize the Chinese Communist Party on another board with strongly-worded posts.
Yes, well probably not. The society that we have is better than a post-nuclear conflagration. We are just going to have to accept some bad marriages and failed loves here and there. |
