Re: [evol-psych] Digest Number 1778
- On Aug 1, 2004, at 10:01 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org
> But you must be referring to the "first marriage" ON RECORD in theI find it fascinating that anthropologists make such sweeping claims
> tradition. Because some form of marriage (including the concept of
> marriage and some simple ritual, even if it is only moving into the
> settlement and giving food to her mother) is recognized in every
> society I
> have ever read about. Human marriage is very old. In fact, I would
> speculate the marriage was one of humanity's oldest social
> traditions, as
> it is a good device for defining mating privileges.
for "marriage" without ever really defining what is meant by the term.
it's easy to claim something to be universal if our definition is
sufficiently vague. "some form of marriage" appears to refer to
everything from the contractual form george bush recently called "the
most sacred institution in civilization" to a very casual re-hanging of
the hammock. as helen fisher writes, some form is recognized in every
society she's read about. but who wrote those monographs? is "marriage"
considered to include sexual monogamy, property rights, child custody
issues and other essential components of what we call marriage?
doubtful. but we still insist in calling it "marriage." is this
C. Ryan, Ph.D.