Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
2.1 The key features of the theories of attachment and the theorists and their theories
Psychology essay of attachment theory
Strength and limitation of attachment theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: 2.1 The key features of the theories of attachment and the theorists and their theories
Love is a Neurochemical Con Job Theoretical concepts are those that our mind can create but do not physically present themselves in the real world. One of the most famous, as well as most commercialized, is love. Love has been heavily rationalized, from religion to chemicals to even illness, to the point ideologies exist in our society as ‘absolute’ or ‘normal’. The straying from this fabricated society is seen as wrong, or more recently, recklessly independent. From movements about being single or dating yourself to having a desire to be married before 30 is attributed to common culture that perpetuates specific ideologies that we must then chose. But why does this seeming irrational thing happen? Science of the mind, commonly known as psychology, …show more content…
The whole point of sleeping with someone is to have children. So wouldn’t diversifying how much you spread your genes be a good tactic to ensure survival? That’s where monogamy really come into play. There are two types of monogamy we talked about: social and sexual. Social referring to a partnership, while sexual refers to sex partner. The notion of social partnerships being monogamist has been reinforced for multiple generations and with help from social analytics, is feasibly plausible. Research has backed this phenomenon, but sexual monogamy is a different story. Sexual monogamy, or having one sex partner, is an act that defies our natural chemistry to procreate as much as possible. But this contradicts the principle of social monogamy, because we think the two go hand in hand. The reality is the two terms are fundamentally different and therefore, they have a hard time relating. Emotional dependency is a foundation for the modern relationship, while more and more, we stray from sex as a basic principle. That’s the problem: we are sexual creatures and require sexual elements in a relationship. Now this is not to say base it all off sex, but honor the fact that our bodies use sex as a physical connection to another person. To truly live out the biological demise we put ourselves in, we must learn about the components of a relationship and then work with
Love has been instilled as the "sexual desire...or blood ties of kinship...special bond and commitment" by society and mainstream culture and the new knowledge simply interrupt a well established and accepted idea. The reality of the biological aspects gives a demeanor of an attachment of two minds or two bodies parse rather than embodiment of love between two individuals. The experimental reasoning has not only stripped the attraction but sentimental aspect of love . It is often said that when people fall in love their hearts just know and they have a special feeling and that is what most people try to find, the emotion of love. The biology of love seems to detach the emotion from the individual by making love a matter of the brain rather than the heart. Furthermore, the notion behind "love at first sight" looses all meaning; as Fredrickson quotes from a collaborator, there must be "a true meeting of the minds- a single act, performed by two brains" , in essence the brains have to be coupling in order for the connection to truly forge and thus making "love at first sight" a thing of the past. The new insight forces an individual to
Actually monogamy had developed long before religion became interested. According to Fisher’s estimate, nearly every human society has been monogamous to some degree (69), and she claims that human beings have a biologically natural preference for mo...
In Laura Kipnis Against Love, what I believe love to be is uniquely questioned and probed in every manner. Kipnis yanks at every part of a relationship that is, according to her, inevitably bound to fail. Unfortunately I believe she mostly writes about the negatives of marriage and infidelity rather than love. It is troubling to agree with her uncomfortable views on marriage and coupledom becoming a sort of renunciation of personal desires, but I think Kipnis is brave in creating this polemic suggesting the way love has been programmed into us by modern society, as an all encompassing, fantasy type of love, all about one person forever. Humans have been wired in a way to look for a meaningful view of life through love, which can
The individual desire to seek out a heterosexual romantic relationship is strongly shaped and reinforced by the dominance of heteronormative representation in mass media, which thus removes most personal agency from individuals who desire romance. Idealised notions of heterosexual romance are instilled as both descriptive and injunctive norms through their overwhelming portrayals in mass media, which then conditions individuals to internalise such notions as “socially approved and…popular” (Cialdini 2003, 105). Mass media thus serves as a pervasive social force with a wide reach that is capable of dictating acceptable and popular iterations of heterosexual love in society.
It is tempting to believe that when couples say that they are “in love,” they view their love in the same way –that they have successfully “defined their relationship.” Love after all, is the only legitimate reason for marriage in western society and one should at least be on the same page before entering into a perpetual union (Henslin 468). Sociologists like to say that romantic love is composed of two components: sexual attraction (a biological response) and idealization of the other (a societal created response that promotes a bond between two individuals) (Henslin 468). However this is a very simple definition of love because it turns out that romantic love is in the eye of the beholder. Researchers of heterosexual love have ...
Darwin's theory of sexual selection is an intriguing one because it offers an explanation of human striving and cultural value systems. The theory is that humans who are more sexually desirable will have more offspring and thus their traits will be passed on to future generations to a greater extent than those of less sexually desirable humans. As opposed to Darwin's other theory, natural selection, those who are the best adapted to their environment will be more likely to pass on their genes, or, "survival of the fittest", you might call sexual selection "survival of the sexiest." The theory is intended to in part explain why, when humans diverged from other primates, the human brain tripled in size in just two million years. At first glance, this theory also seems to explain much of the motivation behind human culture and achievement. Upon closer inspection, there are some fairly conspicuous problems with it, especially when it is extended to describe not only human evolution in the distant past but it the present, but it may still be the most plausible explanation available to explain why humans mental capacities have expanded so far beyond those of our primate relatives.
Truly, a new approach is being introduced, the idea that social conventions dictate the nature of love as we see it, that it all depends on the perspective of a person or a group.
In order to understand the present lifestyles relating to different approaches and tactics applied by humans in mate choice preferences, there is the need to refer to Darwin (1859, 1871) evolutionary perspectives. Darwin (1871) sexual selection is the driving force for males and females reproductive quest for their genes survival. These driving forces have been classified into two categories as intra-sexual and intersexual mate selection.Intersexual selection is male sexual selection process whereby males compete with other males and the females choose the strongest as their ideal partner. Intra-sexual selection occurs when the male species fight among themselves and the strongest gain access to females for
Sexual selection comes in two forms. One, is direct competition between males for access to females. The other is through the females’ choice among possible mates. (pg. 148) In both types of sexual selection, the males compete for the females. The classic sexual selection arguments that Darwin first presented, were improved when genetics discovered how significant sexual recombination was to genetic variability and speciation. In our class discussion we were asked if animals and humans selected their partners in different ways. I agreed as well as disagreed that we are different in our selection. Humans and animals essentially need the same things, and when looking for a partner there isn’t much of a difference. We all look for the partner with the physical aspects that appeal to another, and for protection, the strongest is typically the best mate in both animal and human worlds. But for humans, emotions come into play, and we also chose on personality. One can have all of the qualifications that are “necessary” in the choosing of a mate, but if their personality does not cohabitate with the other party member, they will not be chosen for a lifelong relationship. Nonetheless, emotional choses may be the only true difference we have to that of
...ause of their own free will. The theme of love is widely portrayed in the world. Love matters because it is what ties two people together through commitment and pain. However, there are those who pervert the idea of love and treat it as if it is filled with lust and pleasure-seeking opportunities. In society, young and reckless people “go out” with each other because they are desperate for excitement in their lives. Those who “go out” fail to realize that they shouldn’t be so committed to one another. Therefore, it is a waste of time at such a young age. Those who do should be paying attention to reality instead of their own fantasy. If adolescent people have love, it is only a hindrance from being who they want to be. In conclusion, love influences people to behave irrationally and to take chances that would otherwise seem irresponsible in the eyes of the mature.
...at to the stability of family life in our society. Sexual intercourse, explained by Haines (2011), is a special bond that is created for the aim of reproducing children despite not being able to, at times. It unites two dissimilar body parts in a way that can produce a reproductive effect. Thus, same sex relationships are opposed because male-female relationships are the only sort that can fully embrace the sexual complimentary (Haines, 2011). If we de-emphasize the procreative function of marriage, then it is only focused on the intensity of feeling between married couples (Pinkerton, 2014). Pinkerton (2014) said that no matter how deep and intimate one’s feelings may be, it can decrease after many years of raising children. This would ultimately lead to divorce and broken families which threatens the stability of family life in our society as stated earlier.
To begin with, romantic movies mold expectations of what love is really like. They portray that love is the only thing that matters. In the past, love was secondary. Relationships were arranged by parents because they wanted their children to join lands or kingdoms, and whether or not the couple actually loved each other was irrelevant. Today, parents have almost no say in who their children fall in love with. Romance movies over-emphasize love when it comes to “falling in love at first sight” and the idea that “true love conquers all”. I’m sure that almost everyone knows that real-life love doesn’t work like this, but that doesn’t mean that those illustrations of love that movies characterize doesn’t affect viewers’ hope for romance and true love in their own life. For example, after watching The Notebook, viewers might portray Noah’s l...
Polygyny is considered to be one of the most common forms of polygamy that you can find in all the region of the world where these practices are popular. Sociologists and anthropologists have made several efforts to find the cause of polygyny. These reasons vary from economically benefits to the barrenness of a wife. Though in the last couple of decades, polygyny has been the focus of a significant growth in public, political and academic awareness especially due to its effect on gender relations. The effects of this practice can be seen to be detrimental to women; psychologically and at times physically and sexually. Not only because the practice oppress and undermine women but also because it allows for gender inequality to persist. Polygyny reinforces a husband’s superiority whilst the wife occupies a subordinate role in marriage and ultimately in society.
We all fall in love at some point in our lives whether it be a passion, faith, or another person. Falling in love is a natural human behavior. It ensures the continuance of the human race through reproduction. Love is often considered a mystery because of its unexplainable feelings. It is the personal and affectionate relationship between two people. Researchers have discovered the biological reasons behind falling in love. The brain controls the signals that release chemicals and hormones in your body to give that rush that love brings.
Boston: Bedford/St. Martins,. 349. The. “Psychological Theories About the Dynamics of Love (I).” 01 Mar. 2005 http://psychology.about.com/library/weekly/aa022000a.htm Richmond, Raymond Lloyd.