Monogamy “Evolved” to Prevent Infanticide?

Evolutionists sure are inventive, always trying to explain everything as caused by natural selection. Now, an anthropological study claims that monogamy “evolved” to prevent infanticide. From the Guardian story.

Scientists in Britain have taken the puzzle of monogamy and boiled it down to one big question: how did it come about in the first place? A new study claims finally to have an answer. 

And what, pray tell, is that?

Next, they [the study’s authors] used simulated evolution from 75m years ago to modern day. As the simulation ran, it showed how monogamy rose and fell for different species. Having run the program millions of times, they found that the evolution of monogamy in primates was preceded by one thing only: infanticide by males. “You do not get monogamy unless you already have infanticide, and you do not get a switch to paternal care if you don’t already have monogamy,” said Opie, in research published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Opie says the findings are linked to increases in brain size. In primates, brain size expanded as social groups grew larger, which meant that mothers were infertile for longer and more males were close by. For males, infanticide was a strategy to make females fertile again.

Just what we need: Another rationale for Peter Singer to promote infanticide.

But let’s get real.  Monogamy did not “evolve.” It exists because of human exceptionalism.  

Here’s what I mean: Geese don’t “choose” to mate for life and felines don’t “cat around” because they are immoral. They have no choice in the matter. Their mating methods are instinctual.

In contrast, human societies have differed widely over views on sex and commitment to monogamy, with more ancient societies and some current cultures permitting polyamory. That’s because human cultural norms are not biologically determined, as in animal behavior.

Rather, humans have free will. We create, socialize, and enforce moral and ethical codes. In this sense, we are not slaves to impersonal evolutionary forces in our romantic lives. Indeed, the breathtaking refashioning of Western sexual morality just during my lifetime is a vivid example. 

Still, to be fair, there is a place for monogamy in evolution: If I wasn’t monogamous, my wife would kill me. That’s known as the evolutionary drive to survive!

Wesley J. Smith — Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism.

Most Popular

Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More