This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← The brain in love

Kentrel's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by Kentrel


You have no real physical need to listen to music, but I guarantee you there are one or two powerful songs that generate intense physical feelings in your body.

Why can't romantic love be the same?

You don't have to have a baby everytime you listen to music (it would certainly mess upthe dancefloor!), but listen to a Jack Johnson song (or whatever's to your taste) and suddenly you understand the term "Babymaking music".

Is it a coincidence that music and sexual relationships are closely related? Few people will die if you starve them of music or even love, but their personalities will change and their ability to find a suitable mate will be very much affected.

Music generates the feelings that make it more likely for two people to reproduce. That doesn't mean a middle aged post menopausal woman can't enjoy music too, but the body isn't that smart. It doesn't know to switch off these feelings just because reproduction is impossible.

Its not a romantic notion to imply that love is a purely physical need like all the other great things in life that make us more likely to survive reproduce, but it certainly doesn't make it wrong, scientifically.

Romantic love, music, the need for status all generate powerful feelings that push us into situations where we maximize our mating success.

It's not the stuff of great poetry, but either was Newton's view of the rainbow. I hope people don't make the mistake that John Keats did, and miss the point that in life there is the scientific view (the truth), and then there's the poetic romantic emotional way in which we experience the truth. They're both different sides to the same coin.

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:19:00 UTC | #203847