Hello beautiful people. Absolutely fascinating episode, enjoy! Here's the timestamps: 0:00 Intro 01:01 Defining Love 07:59 Were Humans Always Monogamous? 13:12 Telling Dating Preferences by Finger Length 19:08 How Love is Adaptive 25:38 Love in Arranged Marriages 36:18 Female Primates During Maternity 48:00 The Show-off Hypothesis 52:17 What is Commitment? 1:06:08 The Use of Human Kissing 1:16:01 Optimal Rubbing Speed 1:24:01 Why We Love People After They Die 1:31:33 Men’s Vasopressin Reactors 1:35:49 Where to Find Robin
Thanks Chris. Evolutionary psychology is my favourite subject, and for me, it gives all the answers. Of interest - did you know that Darwin hypothesised that this would be a major area of interest in "The Origin of Species" ? "In the distant future I see open fields for far more important researches. Psychology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation. Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history."
Okay, “Robin go, Robin stab, Robin bring back” was not just hilarious, it was a demonstration of just how skilled an interviewer Chris Williamson has become. It is the ability to deeply and inventively engage with the guest that produces the great value of the long-form, and this is precisely the opposite of both the skills and the outcomes of legacy environments, like television. ✊👍
This is quickly becoming my favourite podcast because Chris has such a relaxed and calming influence on the speaker who is able to speak more fully. Then he steers the conversation in interesting directions by asking the right questions. I'm starting to like this more than triggernometry because it is not fast-paced and random and it is more positive.
Here, here Been watching since.. probably just a little before he was being promoted by Sargon I would have Chris on par with Lex Fridman, oh and that guy from Uncommon Knowledge - that guys pretty great too, especially when he's with Thomas Sowell
He is really good at articulating relatable and relevant questions and really gives his guests his full undivided attention. He also does his homework before each interview and it really shows.
I love the curio cabinet behind Professor Robin Dunbar. Feline knickknacks are safely displayed near the drawings of the k-nines. Equal index finger lengths here.
One of my favourite interviews. Robin Dunbar really is wonderfully skilled at explaining psychology to laymen like me. I will have to pick up his books.
Chris, your podcast has become my go to for any type of interest because you talk to so many people about so many topics unbiasedly. A very rare thing to happen nowadays.
There is plenty of bias in this podcast, it just matches YOUR bias, so it doesn't bother you. I am a left-anarchist, so when I watch Chris, I see clearly his bias toward the preservation of Euro-American traditional cultural hegemony. He completely ignores the scholars that are critical of his perspective and platforms those that flesh out his perspective. This is most pronounced in his discussion of the demographic crash that is happening or will happen in many countries. His contention is that there aren't enough people in these (mostly) European ethnostates to support the aging population. The solution to this "problem" isn't make more babies, it is to entice more people to come into the country. But, as people like Murray make so abundantly clear, that isn't a comfortable option for old men because they can't stand the change in skin color of their neighbors (or neighbours, Britishly). I don't mind him. He is a tolerable male-centric traditional conservative. But, like another similar guy, Lex Friedman, he is very obviously biased, based mostly on his choices of guests and his line of questioning. I hope you take all of this (if you even read it all) in good spirits. You are wrong about his lack of bias, butt he puts on a good show nonetheless.
While love is described as an emotion in reality it is nothing more than absolute trust in the other person. So when someone says their heart was broken what they are really saying is that their ability to trust has been completely destroyed.
Regarding polygyny, he strangely forgot to mention the reason it has worked for most of human history: 1. Invariable preponderance of females to males so rather than one man taking “all” the females, it’s more likely that fewer females get left behind 2. Taking care of war widows. War was an ever-constant throughout much of history. 3. Building strong tribal solidarity.
Yes, the polygyny that people practise today has very little in common with that of our ancestors where it was much more about creating small ingroups within the context of a bigger tribe than sleeping with everyone and anyone in the tribe and then on to rinse and repeat with the next tribe.
@@twhiteofrd_1102 It isn’t practiced in the West and I can’t comment on its application in the Muslim world. It probably still functions exactly as it was always meant to since much of Arab culture is still very tribal. Obviously it’s something that had been and still is abused by a tiny minority of wealthy men. Its imperative in the Qur’an is clearly qualified with a proviso: that the individual contemplating it must be prepared to do justice between his wives. It further states that such a justice is near impossible, meaning that although it allows it, it allows it with grave reservations. An examination of early Islam shows it to be primarily used for the sake of protecting vulnerable women and the wives and children of martyrs in the cause. It provided tremendous social stability and cohesion and kept women out of helpless prostitution.
This man's a genius. I'd like to know his hypothesis on why the spectrum of variance on human intelligence is so high given the fact that intelligence is such a high predictor of success. I think it's because it makes forming social hierarchies more simple but I don't know.
I love the part on the immune system. It meshed well with what I remember from microbiology and the immune system's relationship with genetics. Super cool 😎
Western cultures are about "falling in love" but they don't do very well in long term relationships, especially marriage. Eastern, especially religious cultures don't "fall in love" but show long term love through caring, commitment, raising the family etc. The main difference is western cultures are more individualistic and materialistic. Being individualistic makes westerners more lonely as they don't value community. When you are lonely, the experience of feeling somebody cares about you goes to your head more. That combined with the fact that individualistic people don't want to show love to many people, it is easier to fall in love with "the one". The materialistic side of individualistic culture turns people into objects. Just like people get excited about buying the next iPhone, they also get excited about acquiring the next trophy girlfriend/boyfriend. But once they get what they want, they quickly fall out of love, because it is all about the chase.
@@impudentdomain I would say that until about 100 years ago, Americans still had “arranged marriages”. In so that the family and particularly the parents had great influence or total control of who their children married. We weren’t marrying for love. So if you didn’t get married because of the high you got from infatuation/love, then you wouldn’t get divorced because you didn’t feel it anymore. Marrying for love is not working for us. It’s just a blip in comparison to our entire evolutionary history.
@@impudentdomain I agree that the loss of religious faith has massively effected the length of time people stay married. Truly religious people do things for a higher cause. I can understand that some bag things have happened in the name of religion that had put people off it but also an increasingly materialistic focus erodes our spiritual sensitivity, which makes us less religious.
Great episode Robin is one of your best interviews ever. The show off hypothesis, please look up the handicap principal term coined by professor Amotz Zahavi, much more accurate description of the situation.
love Robin's voice and character on the Spotify podcast had to see what he looked like. lovley jovial session here Chris always a pleasure listening to your content!
Materialistic "Love" is nothing but a manifestation of Power which is fueled by desire. Evolutionary, this kind of infatuation was necessary to build pair bonding for the survival of the offspring. The real Love is the concept that is used by Sufi and Christian Mystics which has nothing to do with materialistic love. It is the essence of being and it is the inter-connected pure consciousness.
@@kstepk5003 Yes, It has become sociopathic lust due to the social media and hookup culture, which is why it is a manifestation of power. Evolution doesn't apply to real Love.
Great work Chris. I really appreciate the vastness of themes you covered. Not only is it an enjoyable listen , it also helps understand everyday life on a much more deeper level. Keep up the majestic work and i can't wait to see your next interview with Robin Donbar.
I worked as an ethologist researching cognition and behavior in chimps and western lowland gorillas. I’d sit and score their behaviors for hours and had a very intimate view of them. The silverback is, imo, much more involved with his offspring than chimps. I’ve seen them regularly play and entertain the kids. He will also resolve tension between the other females. If he can get it away from mom, I’ve seen them take the young kid and gently hold it. There does appear to be a lot of tenderness in them
I had a thought... what if love is nature's match maker (not necessarily in terms of hierarchy but more so in compatability.) And the reason it doesn't work out most of the time is because we don't know ourselves well enough to do what's good for us in a relationship. This idea/random thought is something I haven't thought through, so any critique would be much appreciated.
Jesus H, what a superb guest. Awareness of Dunbars number but not of the man. Charming, personable humorous but most of all intelligently interesting and fluid. Books being bough next Robin.
Very enlighting and humbling at the same time ..... "look how good my genome is" ....phylogeny carried patterns everywhere ....Thank you Chris for your skills in picking speakers and facilitating the sharing :)
@@bperez8656 It is kind of a lot to explain. But, Chris was referring to how some nuns were forced to be nuns and if they killed their sister, they wouldn't have to be nuns anymore. That would likely make for some "particularly wiry nuns"
I've only had true love for a romantic relationship once in my life. It lasted 7years. All others have been simply crushes or interests but not true love. I don't know if I will ever feel that deeply again for a man.
@@FreeAgent99 he cheated on me and chose to marry her in less than 3 months. I was devastated and heart broken. I never knew our relationship had problems. It took me a few years to heal onwards. They now have 2 kids together and he has complained how unhappy he is with her. He told a mutual friend that his wife will never be me. He made his choices now he must live with it.
Love the podcast Chris subscribed immediately. WRT the telephone study I believe men almost automatically think women like them when they get a simple smile or hello. Imo this nearly automated belief plays into the males need to “chase” the girl. This is a stark contrast to being called by a girl which could be perceived as “what’s wrong with her” or she simply nullifies the game of chase.
Very little of these courtship aspects are well described in dating apps, this makes it hard to believe dating apps will ever be as efficient as going to parties or meeting people in person
Here's what I gathered for the simplest way to find a reproductive partner: Find an avenue of "competition" where you have the most genetic advantage. Display your competence through your deeds. Make yourself available to females, choose a female that chooses you. Profit.
@@impudentdomain game of life…? Life has always been extremely hard for all time. Part of being deserving of having your genes passed down is having the grit to endure the sheer insane suffering and unfairness of it all. If you can’t handle mating in the most survival friendly period in all of human history, then maybe you just don’t deserve to reproduce. It was never an entitlement, we were always supposed to struggle for it. It’s supposed to be hard. The harder the better because that shows you have the genes that will increase the odds of the survival of the human species. If it was easy, we’d eventually evolve into an immobile pile of goo and get eaten alive by cats.
There were a few things that I think Chris should've pushed back on in the discussion: - At one point, Dunbar says that people are secretly smelling babies - as if to evaluate their immune system or something. There's really no good evo-psych reason to claim that. What would be the purpose? The baby is already alive and has the immune system that it has. Nobody learns anything or can make any changes based on any supposed knowledge there. It's not like smelling a potential mate (which could hypothetically affect our mating choices). I straight-up don't believe it. I do agree that people smell babies because they smell different, and it's just a curiosity and humans are naturally curious. But, there's no evo-psych justification for it. - I'm also skeptical of the claim that people smell each other to determine immunology information and that it has more than a negligible effect on dating preference. I doubt that it explains much of anything in terms of human dating preferences, although I do think people might be turned-off by the smell of siblings. That also makes sense evolutionarily, because incest is bad for the child's genetics. (Admittedly, I have heard of cases where biologically related people are separated throughout their life - e.g. dads and daughters, or siblings - who end up meeting and falling for each other, which seems to contradict the idea that scent is a strong incest-avoidance system.) Also, there was a study of couples in Iceland through history, and it was determined that third cousins seemed to have the highest fertility. It was interesting that close relatives and more distant relatives had lower fertility rates than third cousins. Perhaps there's something with being "somewhat familiar" but also "not being too similar" to a potential mate. Also, there was a study of married couples a while back and they discovered there weren't any patterns in how similar or dissimilar their immune systems are, which strongly suggests that we aren't picking partners based on immunological information at all. - I'm sure the whole thing about kissing to exchange bacteria or immune system information is also total bunk. I don't buy that explanation at all. The stuff I mentioned sounds like wild hypothesis that someone dreamed-up with and continues to exist memetically because it's an interesting idea. I think there's quite a bit of stuff like that in modern society, and we should question their validity. It reminds me of that "bumblebees can't fly according to physics" claim that gets tossed around. It exists because it's an interesting thought, and that's why the claim continues to exist, not because there's good science behind it.
The more we work on our own selves, the better we attract, in this case, a better partner and a phenomenal relationship. There’s no such thing as the “right person” (to an extend) we have to become the right person first! You got this, I believe in you and invest into YOU! Best investment you can ever do is in yourself for your family, others, future and lives overall! 💯% back guarantee return on your investment! Have a great day! 🚀🎉❤️
1:18:30 This doesn't set with me from an evolutionary perspective. The idea that difficulty becoming pregnant is what leads to strong pair-bonds. Difficulty in getting pregnant could just as easily be overcome by mating with several partners which would not form a robust pair-bond. There must be another explanation.
I love myself, but I cheated on myself with a woman, punched myself in the face, then shouted at myself. She left, and now I don’t talk to myself anymore.
I have often thought that romantic love is a form of self love. I found it interesting that Robin said we are attracted to people genetically similar ( except for immune responses). So we are falling in love with someone who is as like ourselves as possible.
"second and fourth" really? Who numbers the FINGERS starting with the THUMB as one? That's like counting the tires on the road starting with the spare.
chris, i have a question ... so you know they've got these "love languages" but it's such an oversimplification. it's like the personality tests. it's oversimplified. why is it that humans have to put ourselves into boxes and compartments that we just really don't fit in. thank you for all you do sir.
I think some people treat it as an either or, but the way I view it is like a priority list. some people prefer one "love language" over another, which really just means "how does this person gauge affection?" that's why you see couples getting into fights over someone not telling them they love them but they're constantly doing all sorts of services for them.
I’ve always thought true honest love was the death of the ego, death of the “me” to give birth to the “we”, obviously not how it seems to work today but that’s how it worked for me
Precisely. I believe it can only be achieved through a lifelong covenant relationship. Unfortunately, being willing to choose it for yourself is not enough, as it takes more than one person(s) making the same decision at the same time. Still, I wish there were more like you in the world.
Yes probably but if u look at the vast majority of human history polygamy was the dominant practice plus human beings arent really and were never monogamus by nature
This conversation actually shed a lot of light on the current dating market in the west. The west is like a polygamist society at the moment, 80% of the women chasing 20% of the men. Western men therefore are going overseas to find wives. Just like how Portuguese had to travel abroad, so are western men. The pattern is strikingly similar.
@@bperez8656 You're assuming that 80% of western women are top tier. They're not, they're just chasing the top 20% of men. In fact, I would rank western women below foreign women, who are more traditional. They make better partners.
Robin doesn’t seem to appreciate the malleability of humans. Dads these days are stepping in far more often to help in the tearing of young children. Especially when female relatives aren’t around to help out.
Could monogamy be an evolutionary byproduct of the need for biodiversity? If only a few males are having multiple kids it increases the risk of incest and genetic defects being passed around, And diseases could easily kill out populations as immunity is passed down slower 🤷♂️
"Why would evolution have exposed us to this extreme sensation with huge potential for catastrophe and pain?" - Chris If one has catastrophe and pain when engaged in the 'extreme sensation' that is an OPPORTUNITY to *Grow Up*, put simply. Details matter whether one Grows Up or not.
For much of human history people did not choose their partners, so commitment came first and love sometimes followed, so I imagine there was less risk of emotional pain from romantic love.
Hello beautiful people. Absolutely fascinating episode, enjoy! Here's the timestamps:
0:00 Intro
01:01 Defining Love
07:59 Were Humans Always Monogamous?
13:12 Telling Dating Preferences by Finger Length
19:08 How Love is Adaptive
25:38 Love in Arranged Marriages
36:18 Female Primates During Maternity
48:00 The Show-off Hypothesis
52:17 What is Commitment?
1:06:08 The Use of Human Kissing
1:16:01 Optimal Rubbing Speed
1:24:01 Why We Love People After They Die
1:31:33 Men’s Vasopressin Reactors
1:35:49 Where to Find Robin
Bring more evolutionary psychologysts please!
Bring the author of the ape that understood the universe
Thanks Chris. Evolutionary psychology is my favourite subject, and for me, it gives all the answers.
Of interest - did you know that Darwin hypothesised that this would be a major area of interest in "The Origin of Species" ?
"In the distant future I see open fields for far more important researches. Psychology will be based
on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by
gradation. Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history."
I read that in a Freddie Mercury voice lol
@@tonycatman visionary
Okay, “Robin go, Robin stab, Robin bring back” was not just hilarious, it was a demonstration of just how skilled an interviewer Chris Williamson has become.
It is the ability to deeply and inventively engage with the guest that produces the great value of the long-form, and this is precisely the opposite of both the skills and the outcomes of legacy environments, like television.
✊👍
Bring more evolutionary psychologysts!
This is quickly becoming my favourite podcast because Chris has such a relaxed and calming influence on the speaker who is able to speak more fully. Then he steers the conversation in interesting directions by asking the right questions. I'm starting to like this more than triggernometry because it is not fast-paced and random and it is more positive.
You are slowly becoming my new favorite podcaster on RUclips Chris. Love this interview!!!
I second this.
Mine tooooo
Same man. I love the evopsych discussions.
Here, here
Been watching since.. probably just a little before he was being promoted by Sargon
I would have Chris on par with Lex Fridman, oh and that guy from Uncommon Knowledge - that guys pretty great too, especially when he's with Thomas Sowell
He is really good at articulating relatable and relevant questions and really gives his guests his full undivided attention. He also does his homework before each interview and it really shows.
I love the curio cabinet behind Professor Robin Dunbar. Feline knickknacks are safely displayed near the drawings of the k-nines.
Equal index finger lengths here.
One of my favourite interviews. Robin Dunbar really is wonderfully skilled at explaining psychology to laymen like me. I will have to pick up his books.
Chris, your podcast has become my go to for any type of interest because you talk to so many people about so many topics unbiasedly. A very rare thing to happen nowadays.
There is plenty of bias in this podcast, it just matches YOUR bias, so it doesn't bother you.
I am a left-anarchist, so when I watch Chris, I see clearly his bias toward the preservation of Euro-American traditional cultural hegemony. He completely ignores the scholars that are critical of his perspective and platforms those that flesh out his perspective.
This is most pronounced in his discussion of the demographic crash that is happening or will happen in many countries. His contention is that there aren't enough people in these (mostly) European ethnostates to support the aging population. The solution to this "problem" isn't make more babies, it is to entice more people to come into the country. But, as people like Murray make so abundantly clear, that isn't a comfortable option for old men because they can't stand the change in skin color of their neighbors (or neighbours, Britishly).
I don't mind him. He is a tolerable male-centric traditional conservative. But, like another similar guy, Lex Friedman, he is very obviously biased, based mostly on his choices of guests and his line of questioning.
I hope you take all of this (if you even read it all) in good spirits. You are wrong about his lack of bias, butt he puts on a good show nonetheless.
I share the same sentiments with you.
While love is described as an emotion in reality it is nothing more than absolute trust in the other person. So when someone says their heart was broken what they are really saying is that their ability to trust has been completely destroyed.
Regarding polygyny, he strangely forgot to mention the reason it has worked for most of human history:
1. Invariable preponderance of females to males so rather than one man taking “all” the females, it’s more likely that fewer females get left behind
2. Taking care of war widows. War was an ever-constant throughout much of history.
3. Building strong tribal solidarity.
Good point
Yes, the polygyny that people practise today has very little in common with that of our ancestors where it was much more about creating small ingroups within the context of a bigger tribe than sleeping with everyone and anyone in the tribe and then on to rinse and repeat with the next tribe.
@@twhiteofrd_1102 It isn’t practiced in the West and I can’t comment on its application in the Muslim world. It probably still functions exactly as it was always meant to since much of Arab culture is still very tribal.
Obviously it’s something that had been and still is abused by a tiny minority of wealthy men. Its imperative in the Qur’an is clearly qualified with a proviso: that the individual contemplating it must be prepared to do justice between his wives. It further states that such a justice is near impossible, meaning that although it allows it, it allows it with grave reservations. An examination of early Islam shows it to be primarily used for the sake of protecting vulnerable women and the wives and children of martyrs in the cause. It provided tremendous social stability and cohesion and kept women out of helpless prostitution.
@@AereForstwhat is "helpless prostitution"?
@@zinknot Obviously vulnerable war widows with mouths to feed who would end up in prostitution simply to survive. This phenomenon was near universal.
This man's a genius.
I'd like to know his hypothesis on why the spectrum of variance on human intelligence is so high given the fact that intelligence is such a high predictor of success. I think it's because it makes forming social hierarchies more simple but I don't know.
The index finger discussion was hilarious
I love the part on the immune system. It meshed well with what I remember from microbiology and the immune system's relationship with genetics. Super cool 😎
Western cultures are about "falling in love" but they don't do very well in long term relationships, especially marriage. Eastern, especially religious cultures don't "fall in love" but show long term love through caring, commitment, raising the family etc. The main difference is western cultures are more individualistic and materialistic. Being individualistic makes westerners more lonely as they don't value community. When you are lonely, the experience of feeling somebody cares about you goes to your head more. That combined with the fact that individualistic people don't want to show love to many people, it is easier to fall in love with "the one". The materialistic side of individualistic culture turns people into objects. Just like people get excited about buying the next iPhone, they also get excited about acquiring the next trophy girlfriend/boyfriend. But once they get what they want, they quickly fall out of love, because it is all about the chase.
This is a massive over simplification
💯 True 👏
@@impudentdomain I would say that until about 100 years ago, Americans still had “arranged marriages”. In so that the family and particularly the parents had great influence or total control of who their children married. We weren’t marrying for love. So if you didn’t get married because of the high you got from infatuation/love, then you wouldn’t get divorced because you didn’t feel it anymore. Marrying for love is not working for us. It’s just a blip in comparison to our entire evolutionary history.
@@impudentdomain I agree that the loss of religious faith has massively effected the length of time people stay married. Truly religious people do things for a higher cause. I can understand that some bag things have happened in the name of religion that had put people off it but also an increasingly materialistic focus erodes our spiritual sensitivity, which makes us less religious.
Or maybe it's cus they beat their wives
Great episode Robin is one of your best interviews ever. The show off hypothesis, please look up the handicap principal term coined by professor Amotz Zahavi, much more accurate description of the situation.
He is spectacular! Please invite him again 🌹
love Robin's voice and character on the Spotify podcast had to see what he looked like. lovley jovial session here Chris always a pleasure listening to your content!
Great listen
You guys have such a great dynamic. Really looking forward to the next episode with you two.
Materialistic "Love" is nothing but a manifestation of Power which is fueled by desire. Evolutionary, this kind of infatuation was necessary to build pair bonding for the survival of the offspring. The real Love is the concept that is used by Sufi and Christian Mystics which has nothing to do with materialistic love. It is the essence of being and it is the inter-connected pure consciousness.
So has love evolved over time?
@@kstepk5003 Yes, It has become sociopathic lust due to the social media and hookup culture, which is why it is a manifestation of power. Evolution doesn't apply to real Love.
Yeah ok bro
🐂💩
Great work Chris. I really appreciate the vastness of themes you covered. Not only is it an enjoyable listen , it also helps understand everyday life on a much more deeper level. Keep up the majestic work and i can't wait to see your next interview with Robin Donbar.
Thanks Chris, fantastic interview tons of information.
I worked as an ethologist researching cognition and behavior in chimps and western lowland gorillas. I’d sit and score their behaviors for hours and had a very intimate view of them. The silverback is, imo, much more involved with his offspring than chimps. I’ve seen them regularly play and entertain the kids. He will also resolve tension between the other females. If he can get it away from mom, I’ve seen them take the young kid and gently hold it. There does appear to be a lot of tenderness in them
I had a thought... what if love is nature's match maker (not necessarily in terms of hierarchy but more so in compatability.) And the reason it doesn't work out most of the time is because we don't know ourselves well enough to do what's good for us in a relationship. This idea/random thought is something I haven't thought through, so any critique would be much appreciated.
excellent guest
Brilliant way to start the podcast, not even having to say who he is, just that he’s is the Dunbar
I loved it!!!! As I loved the one with Roy Baumeister!!! You are doing an incredible job. Chris!
Great episode! Super interesting! I loved you guys chuckling with each others' jokes. That was so funny!
Be
Robin's my ultimate favorite lecturer
Thanks
Rosslyn you're a hero. Thank you
Jesus H, what a superb guest. Awareness of Dunbars number but not of the man. Charming, personable humorous but most of all intelligently interesting and fluid. Books being bough next Robin.
This was interesting, thank you so much. Us humans are so complex and fascinating!
Bring dr dunbar back on soon! He's great
The best podcast i have everseen
A very interesting discussion!
Very enlighting and humbling at the same time ..... "look how good my genome is" ....phylogeny carried patterns everywhere ....Thank you Chris for your skills in picking speakers and facilitating the sharing :)
Best podcaster in the world !
"A particularly wiry little nun." -Chris X
Dude, that was the best phrase I have heard all year!!! Awesome!
@@bperez8656 It is kind of a lot to explain. But, Chris was referring to how some nuns were forced to be nuns and if they killed their sister, they wouldn't have to be nuns anymore. That would likely make for some "particularly wiry nuns"
I've only had true love for a romantic relationship once in my life. It lasted 7years. All others have been simply crushes or interests but not true love. I don't know if I will ever feel that deeply again for a man.
What happen to that 7 year relationship?
@@FreeAgent99 he cheated on me and chose to marry her in less than 3 months. I was devastated and heart broken. I never knew our relationship had problems. It took me a few years to heal onwards. They now have 2 kids together and he has complained how unhappy he is with her. He told a mutual friend that his wife will never be me. He made his choices now he must live with it.
@@memastarful thanks for sharing, yea, it’s too late for him and you have to move on, it’s hard I know, all the best for you
@@FreeAgent99 God bless you too and thanks for listening
Thanks for sharing that
Love helps you to overlook the shortcomings of the other person. It is essential.
Good day everyone
When is he coming back? So interesting...many thanks
agree
Well, this was eye-opening. Why does my index have to be so much shorter than my ring finger. My life has been torture
Love the podcast Chris subscribed immediately. WRT the telephone study I believe men almost automatically think women like them when they get a simple smile or hello. Imo this nearly automated belief plays into the males need to “chase” the girl. This is a stark contrast to being called by a girl which could be perceived as “what’s wrong with her” or she simply nullifies the game of chase.
This was awesome. I now have two of his books in the queue
Very little of these courtship aspects are well described in dating apps, this makes it hard to believe dating apps will ever be as efficient as going to parties or meeting people in person
Random question out of left field here, who is the artist for this episodes thumbnail? Thanks for the great conversations and keep kicking ass Chris.
Great interview and great guest. Very charming man and fascinating to listen to!
Here's what I gathered for the simplest way to find a reproductive partner: Find an avenue of "competition" where you have the most genetic advantage. Display your competence through your deeds. Make yourself available to females, choose a female that chooses you. Profit.
Fuckit, too much work 😂
@@impudentdomain The goal is to reproduce offspring that can also reproduce. Everything else is accidental. Your “stuff” is of no consequence.
@@noahbrown4388 haha, do it for evolution!
@@impudentdomain game of life…? Life has always been extremely hard for all time. Part of being deserving of having your genes passed down is having the grit to endure the sheer insane suffering and unfairness of it all. If you can’t handle mating in the most survival friendly period in all of human history, then maybe you just don’t deserve to reproduce. It was never an entitlement, we were always supposed to struggle for it. It’s supposed to be hard. The harder the better because that shows you have the genes that will increase the odds of the survival of the human species. If it was easy, we’d eventually evolve into an immobile pile of goo and get eaten alive by cats.
1:28:30 That explains the creonte culture in BJJ
There were a few things that I think Chris should've pushed back on in the discussion:
- At one point, Dunbar says that people are secretly smelling babies - as if to evaluate their immune system or something. There's really no good evo-psych reason to claim that. What would be the purpose? The baby is already alive and has the immune system that it has. Nobody learns anything or can make any changes based on any supposed knowledge there. It's not like smelling a potential mate (which could hypothetically affect our mating choices). I straight-up don't believe it. I do agree that people smell babies because they smell different, and it's just a curiosity and humans are naturally curious. But, there's no evo-psych justification for it.
- I'm also skeptical of the claim that people smell each other to determine immunology information and that it has more than a negligible effect on dating preference. I doubt that it explains much of anything in terms of human dating preferences, although I do think people might be turned-off by the smell of siblings. That also makes sense evolutionarily, because incest is bad for the child's genetics. (Admittedly, I have heard of cases where biologically related people are separated throughout their life - e.g. dads and daughters, or siblings - who end up meeting and falling for each other, which seems to contradict the idea that scent is a strong incest-avoidance system.) Also, there was a study of couples in Iceland through history, and it was determined that third cousins seemed to have the highest fertility. It was interesting that close relatives and more distant relatives had lower fertility rates than third cousins. Perhaps there's something with being "somewhat familiar" but also "not being too similar" to a potential mate. Also, there was a study of married couples a while back and they discovered there weren't any patterns in how similar or dissimilar their immune systems are, which strongly suggests that we aren't picking partners based on immunological information at all.
- I'm sure the whole thing about kissing to exchange bacteria or immune system information is also total bunk. I don't buy that explanation at all.
The stuff I mentioned sounds like wild hypothesis that someone dreamed-up with and continues to exist memetically because it's an interesting idea. I think there's quite a bit of stuff like that in modern society, and we should question their validity. It reminds me of that "bumblebees can't fly according to physics" claim that gets tossed around. It exists because it's an interesting thought, and that's why the claim continues to exist, not because there's good science behind it.
The Purpose is to detect compatibility, how similar or different are our immune systems.
@@drorahavkin Not sure what part you're responding to.
Same length!!
The more we work on our own selves, the better we attract, in this case, a better partner and a phenomenal relationship. There’s no such thing as the “right person” (to an extend) we have to become the right person first! You got this, I believe in you and invest into YOU! Best investment you can ever do is in yourself for your family, others, future and lives overall! 💯% back guarantee return on your investment! Have a great day! 🚀🎉❤️
This is so true ! Our partners are an investment sometimes a really bad one but other times , it can be extraordinarily rewarding
Wow very true
So exciting to hear the latest hypothesis!
Pair bonding between dog and master is for life. If he's a good master
One of my favorite ep
Another fascinating discussion!!🫶🏼
Dunbar seems like good guy to talk to, about everything and nothing
So could ovulation kits be faulted for interrupting couple bonding previous to pregnancy?
So does the shorter index goes for women also? I only hear about this for men. All the men and women have a shorter index in my family.
Same, I also want to know
He is very prideful of his number. The social status is strong with this one.
Thanks!
Thank you!
Robin Dunbar is brilliant. Really enjoyed the conversation, thanks!
1:18:30 This doesn't set with me from an evolutionary perspective. The idea that difficulty becoming pregnant is what leads to strong pair-bonds. Difficulty in getting pregnant could just as easily be overcome by mating with several partners which would not form a robust pair-bond. There must be another explanation.
I love myself, but I cheated on myself with a woman, punched myself in the face, then shouted at myself. She left, and now I don’t talk to myself anymore.
I have often thought that romantic love is a form of self love. I found it interesting that Robin said we are attracted to people genetically similar ( except for immune responses). So we are falling in love with someone who is as like ourselves as possible.
Hahahahahaaaa!
Great work Chris!
Anyone care to explain why this finger thing came to pass? Why is the index finger an indicator of anything?
great show
Very cute podcast!
Didn't you guys see Mel Brooks' The 2000 Year Old Man?
"second and fourth" really? Who numbers the FINGERS starting with the THUMB as one? That's like counting the tires on the road starting with the spare.
chris, i have a question ... so you know they've got these "love languages" but it's such an oversimplification. it's like the personality tests. it's oversimplified. why is it that humans have to put ourselves into boxes and compartments that we just really don't fit in.
thank you for all you do sir.
I think some people treat it as an either or, but the way I view it is like a priority list. some people prefer one "love language" over another, which really just means "how does this person gauge affection?" that's why you see couples getting into fights over someone not telling them they love them but they're constantly doing all sorts of services for them.
I’ve always thought true honest love was the death of the ego, death of the “me” to give birth to the “we”, obviously not how it seems to work today but that’s how it worked for me
Precisely. I believe it can only be achieved through a lifelong covenant relationship.
Unfortunately, being willing to choose it for yourself is not enough, as it takes more than one person(s) making the same decision at the same time. Still, I wish there were more like you in the world.
I have many siblings. I really enjoyed holding them when they were babies because of their pleasant and soothing baby odor.
Hmmm stats show globally that monogamy is more practiced heavily (98%) compared to polygamy .
In the judeo christian world yes. It's not the case in the rest of the world.
@@arielnishri9491 It's also common in Hunter gatherer societies.
I saw a article that showed that. It looked like more propaganda to me.
Yes probably but if u look at the vast majority of human history polygamy was the dominant practice plus human beings arent really and were never monogamus by nature
How do you know, asking ?
Superchill episode! :)
"Love makes fools of us all" -???
Wine? I thought scotch, like it should be.
Makes sense why a fast massage by a hurried distracted massage therapist is so unsatisfying.
Quick! Someone tell Lex Fridman about this conversation!
Why :D
1:08:00 you are looking for different immune system
Can we get the videos on Spotify? 😁
@@Winterascent why
Also we have disguised polygamy ...high status men in particular who have multiple affairs
what about:
can humans love robots?
‘Fool me once... ya can’t get fooled again”
They don't, they just think that they do.
Let the man complete his sentence ffs Chris
Informative and probably true, but also depressing. This conversation has eroded my faith in human relationship potential.
This conversation actually shed a lot of light on the current dating market in the west. The west is like a polygamist society at the moment, 80% of the women chasing 20% of the men. Western men therefore are going overseas to find wives. Just like how Portuguese had to travel abroad, so are western men. The pattern is strikingly similar.
@@bperez8656 You're assuming that 80% of western women are top tier. They're not, they're just chasing the top 20% of men. In fact, I would rank western women below foreign women, who are more traditional. They make better partners.
What specifically made you feel like that?
So basically average men throughout history and now are disposable
yep
Robin doesn’t seem to appreciate the malleability of humans. Dads these days are stepping in far more often to help in the tearing of young children. Especially when female relatives aren’t around to help out.
I can assure you, lactation does not prevent menstruation in many women.
They dont.
Divorce Christ. Haha spot on!
So basically in the west women will never be happy
Could monogamy be an evolutionary byproduct of the need for biodiversity? If only a few males are having multiple kids it increases the risk of incest and genetic defects being passed around, And diseases could easily kill out populations as immunity is passed down slower 🤷♂️
nah man most species aren't monogamous.
@@zwiebelface185 most species can’t speak or build technology either 🤔
I cant smell. how fucked am I?
Pretty fucked.
Love is self slavery, for men.
No money, no honey
love is temporary
So when the ratio of men/women gets too high, Red Bull spontaneously appears. Hilarious.
Palms down or up? 😂
Yes
"Why would evolution have exposed us to this extreme sensation with huge potential for catastrophe and pain?" - Chris
If one has catastrophe and pain when engaged in the 'extreme sensation' that is an OPPORTUNITY to *Grow Up*, put simply. Details matter whether one Grows Up or not.
For much of human history people did not choose their partners, so commitment came first and love sometimes followed, so I imagine there was less risk of emotional pain from romantic love.
@@grannyannie2948 that's not true
@@ndndndnnduwjqams How so?
Meanwhile in China and India…
Garbage in garbage out thank the little harder maybe you’ll come up with a good idea but I don’t think so