Brandy Bush
Dr. Isabelle Cherney
Honors Genes and Behavior
March 1, 2004
Behavior and Evolution Commentary
Most of what today’s scholars believe about behavior is predicated on the assumed validity of the processes of evolution. However, evolution is still just a theory and although it appears to make sense, it has not yet been proven fact. With that in mind, imagine for a moment that the theory of evolution was proven to be inaccurate. A cornerstone of the current understanding of behavior may cease to exist, because some of life’s most frequently pondered questions are now answered by deeming it an evolutionary remnant left in this society by our ancestors of old.
For instance, male and female preferences desired in a potential spouse are linked to our evolutionary history. In general, women seem to be attracted to men with plenty of resources and an athletic build. Within the evolutionary schema these traits are preferable because they would signify that if chosen, the male would be able to provide for the female and their ensuing children. However, analyzation of the trends devoid of the evolutionary interpretation might give way to some new ideas. Perhaps such preferences are simply innate, not necessarily genetic but a behavior automatically instilled in us much like the rooting reflex in babies. On the other hand, such preferences may just be coincidental and may not have any correlation with science or evolution.
Both of the previous explanations are completely unfounded and are merely the first alternatives thought of. Yet think of the implications if such was the case. If spousal preferences were innate, no variation in mate selection would occur. Thus humans would all be attracted to the same types of people, leaving those not meeting such standards out of the reproduction loop. Eventually, we would all begin to look alike because mating between the same types of people would yield similar looking children. Such an idea is a far stretch from “reality” and is still tainted by evolution. If spousal preferences were innate, the idea that all humans would reproduce with only those possessing specific traits is actually predicated on the concept of “survival (or reproduction) of the fittest.” This proves that my thinking in particular, is so indoctrinated with the rules of natural selection that it is hard to even imagine a process that does not involve it.
Whether or not one may agree with the theory of evolution as the explanation for the beginning of human kind is not important to this discussion. For example, I personally believe in creationism but I still believe that since the creation of human kind, natural selection and evolutionary processes having been taking place. These processes feasibly explain why spouse preferences seem to be what they are today and to eliminate them from the behavioral equation would be to leave a considerable void in our understanding of behavior.