The Idealization of Monogamy

Only 3-5% of about 5,000 mammalian species, humans included, are known to form monogamous bonds. But why is this, and what are the benefits?

Now, there’s a key difference between human monogamy and, say, french angelfish or bald eagles (amongst others) who mate for life, whereas humans may date multiple people, break up with them, marry and divorce, cheat, etc. “Monogamy”, Greek for “one unity”, is the “practice of marriage or sexual partnering with one spouse”, according to the New World Encyclopedia. Personally, I consider myself monogamous. But there are a variety of cultures that do allow polygamy, which is often dictated by one’s religion.

But here’s the kicker: we aren’t naturally monogamous. And we still aren’t.

Our close ancestor, the Neanderthal, was even a bit promiscuous (source). The reason for monogamy is still highly disputed amongst anthropologists. Meanwhile, our living relative the orangutan competes for access to as many females as possible. Some studies show that monogamous trends may have begun due to an increase in STDs, while others claim monogamous bonds help offspring, and others bring to light the simple fact that sperm is a pretty common thing, and therefore males have the natural desire to spread their DNA to as many hosts as possible. Yet, homo sapiens have more paternal investment in offspring than any other mammal.

So, then, we have consciously chosen to be monogamous. We weren’t “supposed to” evolve into either monogamous or polygamous creatures. Of course, our culture has evolved to suit a monogamous lifestyle; we live with a significant other, create a lifestyle with them, and presumably remain with them until death.

We practice monogamy for order and investment–not necessarily because it’s natural.

In that sense, there are two types of monogamy that make up our society:

• Sexual monogamy: a pair that mates with only each other
• Social monogamy: a pair that shares a 1:1 relationship based on social norms (ex. living together)

About 5% of Americans are polygamous (here is a list of areas of the world that practice polygamy), and are seen as a social taboo, as they stick out from the common practices of the society around them. But I think the fact that we as a species have the ability to choose between polygamy and monogamy stands as a testament to our complexity of a species as a whole.

“Like the other 97% of species, humans are not monogamous by nature. We just pretend that we are.”-Oliver Markus

That Voice In Your Head…

Why do we need words to think? We clearly need them to communicate between people, not so much when you’re the only one present.

Charles Fernyhough, author of The Voices Within, a new novel about the psychology of those voices that go on in your head, has broken down the reasons why we talk to ourselves. He believes talking to oneself can increase focus and motivation, which may be a reason why athletes talk to themselves before a performance. Another reason is to change one’s specific behavior, for example, you might whisper to yourself, “stop fidgeting”. Fernyhough stresses that these ideas have not been scientifically confirmed, as it’s hard to mathematically measure consciousness.

We can imagine certain visualizations without language, but it becomes more difficult when it involves an internal debate, tension, or deciding between options. Temple Grandin, an autistic author, describes how she thinks visually as not linguistic, but as a collection of images. She describes her concept of the word “dog” as being linked to every dog she has ever known, seeing images of them all at once.

It is possible to think without language, it seems.

There’s a difference between experiencing joy and sorrow and possessing the concepts of joy and sorrow. While our brain doesn’t need language to function, certain forms of thinking are made possible by language, such as analyzing and interpreting our environment (one of the main things that separates humans from other animals).

George Mason University conducted a study detailing whether or not 5-year olds perform motor tasks better or worse when they’re able to talk to themselves; 78% of the children performed the same as or better than their peers when they were allowed to talk to themselves instead of keeping quiet. The role of language in cognition plays a key part in the development of interaction skills for children aged 2-5.

Without language, we can still “think” visually with our five senses, although through language we can achieve extensive concepts and abstract thought. Both have their benefits; thinking without words is faster, and thinking with words is more concrete, as words are something tangible that we feel we can control. Instead of thinking word for word, “I like that painting of sunflowers”, we feel the pleasure of the thought in an instant.

Linguistic Relativity

Peter Carruthers, an American philosopher of language and ethics, discusses in his essay that language plays a large role in mental practical reasoning (introspection). A classic example is George Orwell’s novel 1984, which details a dystopian society in which the government slowly removes words from it’s citizens language to limit their thinking, thus forcing the population to conform their thoughts and ideologies. Without a word for freedom, the concept of freedom did not exist. Conversely, a “living language”, such as English, has the tendency to gain words, thus broadening awareness and knowledge. For example, the Oxford English Dictionary added 500 words to their dictionaries in September (see the list here) and are planning for another update this December.

Perhaps this is the reason why bi-lingual people tend to be more open-minded and can think in broad terms. The brain, like any muscle, performs better with exercise. Different languages allow for the expression of different ideas. For example, Arabic has 40 different words for “camel”, whereas in English, we simply put a different adjective in front of the same word to give it a different connotation.

So, it seems, the answer to the overall question “do we need words to think” is both yes and no. Both provide different avenues, and together, they create something innately human.

“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.”-Ludwig Wittgenstein