Poll: (Thought Experiment) Understanding Anatomy.

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Edit: Actually, in my opinion, I think that the feral parents might end up actually being better parents than the ones of the world today, especially when the survival of their line matters more than almost anything else, even the life of the parents.

You're assuming a whole lot about human nature there that flat out cannot be assumed. That is not why people have historically had children and it isn't now. People have always had children out of social pressures and to help them survive. Same reason we have less now and the same reason that the real reason to stop population growth is to make it less profitable to have kids. Parents always have cared more about themselves and their mates by nature. They care more for their children out of socialization.

 

[balanovich]

Would they have sex? Sure, that is certainly possible. Unlikely, but possible. Would the child survive? Unlikely. Would the two of them have lived long enough to run into each other to begin with? Probably not. They wouldn't talk, they'd be terrible at walking and running, assuming they could do either, they'd have far more fear based reactions, they may just kill each other upon meeting, seeing as being feral as a human means an absolute lack of prior human interaction. They probably would have died as infants due to lack of interaction, and there's a good chance they would kill their own child due to lack of understanding how to deal with other humans.

In short, the situation is highly implausible, especially considering that you would have to have two living feral humans as a prerequisite, and they will only be interacting with other feral humans.

There has been many "feral" humans. They can survive and aren't savage and violent beasts. The OP assumed they survived to "maturity". From that point they would likely stick together, especially if they "knew" each other from their childhood. The tendency towards fear and violence on the first encounter is mostly civilisation induced. ... it's not well put, but you get the point.

 

[balanovich]

Edit: Actually, in my opinion, I think that the feral parents might end up actually being better parents than the ones of the world today, especially when the survival of their line matters more than almost anything else, even the life of the parents.

You're assuming a whole lot about human nature there that flat out cannot be assumed. That is not why people have historically had children and it isn't now. People have always had children out of social pressures and to help them survive. Same reason we have less now and the same reason that the real reason to stop population growth is to make it less profitable to have kids. Parents always have cared more about themselves and their mates by nature. They care more for their children out of socialization.

"That is not why people have historically had children and it isn't now. People have always had children out of social pressures and to help them survive."
No, people use to have children because they had sex.
We have less kids because we have contraception.

" Parents always have cared more about themselves and their mates by nature. They care more for their children out of socialization."
No, biological instinct to protect the young is very real and very strong. At least for women. Civilisation and global awareness allowed us to make the "best choice for the future' with a broader view than the needs of you newly ejected foetus.

 

[Biosophilogical]

I don't know. I mean, if you had never been told what a woman was, never seen one, never even conceived of a vagina (let alone that you put your penis there), and you randomly stumbled across a woman of a close age who had no idea what a man/penis/pregnancy was, what the hell would you do? What would be the ice-breaker?

M: "Grunt Groan, Grunt? (my piss-pole went hard, can I put it in your blood-hole?)"
F: "Grumble Growl, Grunt? (Sure, why not?)"

Frankly, the only reason I know what I can do with my penis (aside from peeing) is because I grew up with other people, and the information just kind of ... spreads ... virally. It's a verbal sex-virus.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

I think the instincts driving that are pretty strong without instruction. Totally not going to happen in reality but I think procreation would occur naturally between feral humans.

 

[Chicago Ted]

I don't see any reason two humans in the wilderness shouldn't figure out how to shag. Sex drives and all that.
They won't know it'll result in a child of course, but when the time comes they will most certainly be just as able to raise the baby as well as any other ape.

Of all the things that may be part of human nature, this is the most certain. The species wouldn't have survived otherwise.

"The species" has evolved alot during the last ice age... Its not really a valid argument. Since all humans since that time have lived in colonies.

It's all a part of instinct, built into the mind of every creature. Every creature knows how to reproduce, whether they are feral or not. The only difference is that it probably wouldn't be as much for recreation as we see it today, and more for reproduction. I mean look at children who are reaching puberty, some probably never discussed anything about sex with anyone else, but at that stage, they finds themselves being drawn to the opposite sex in a more intimate function.

Edit: Actually, in my opinion, I think that the feral parents might end up actually being better parents than the ones of the world today, especially when the survival of their line matters more than almost anything else, even the life of the parents.

CraftOmega is right. The test actually has been done. A scientist once found a "savage" boy in the jungle. he never had contact with humans before. He was more or less 17 and physically fine. He brought in a few hookers and the boy could do anything.

I was extremely surprised about that, but it seems that we are the only specie so dumb we need to be taught how to fuck!

No offence here, but before you go around saying someone is right, you might want to source your claims rather than saying that "a scientist" has already performed this as an experiment or something. Until then, I can't really accept this as fact.

On topic though, I would assume so. After all go get a couple rabbits from a store, put them in the same cage and you'll see they don't need instructions.

 

[Jonluw]

I don't see any reason two humans in the wilderness shouldn't figure out how to shag. Sex drives and all that.
They won't know it'll result in a child of course, but when the time comes they will most certainly be just as able to raise the baby as well as any other ape.

Of all the things that may be part of human nature, this is the most certain. The species wouldn't have survived otherwise.

"The species" has evolved alot during the last ice age... Its not really a valid argument. Since all humans since that time have lived in colonies.

Biologically, humans haven't evolved much since the stone age. Certainly not enough to get rid of our reproductional instinct.
Even if we were in a situation in which we'd evolved a lot since we used to live with nature, you would have to present a really compelling argument for why our reproductional instinct would have evolved away. Evolution doesn't just happen by chance, and of all the aspects of a human, our reproductional instinct is the one aspect least likely to disappear by evolution.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Would they have sex? Sure, that is certainly possible. Unlikely, but possible. Would the child survive? Unlikely. Would the two of them have lived long enough to run into each other to begin with? Probably not. They wouldn't talk, they'd be terrible at walking and running, assuming they could do either, they'd have far more fear based reactions, they may just kill each other upon meeting, seeing as being feral as a human means an absolute lack of prior human interaction. They probably would have died as infants due to lack of interaction, and there's a good chance they would kill their own child due to lack of understanding how to deal with other humans.

In short, the situation is highly implausible, especially considering that you would have to have two living feral humans as a prerequisite, and they will only be interacting with other feral humans.

There has been many "feral" humans. They can survive and aren't savage and violent beasts. The OP assumed they survived to "maturity". From that point they would likely stick together, especially if they "knew" each other from their childhood. The tendency towards fear and violence on the first encounter is mostly civilisation induced. ... it's not well put, but you get the point.

Fear and violence are not civilization induced. Every feral human they have discovered has been more violent and fearful than their socialized equivalent. They would jump and attack or cower at any loud noises they encountered and had huge trust issues (though this could be because to be feral they must be raised in a neglectful or abusive environment, but I digress). Certainly they aren't violent and savage beasts, they're crafty hunters and cowards who may be violent if provoked, whatever that means to them.

Would they have sex? Sure, that is certainly possible. Unlikely, but possible. Would the child survive? Unlikely. Would the two of them have lived long enough to run into each other to begin with? Probably not. They wouldn't talk, they'd be terrible at walking and running, assuming they could do either, they'd have far more fear based reactions, they may just kill each other upon meeting, seeing as being feral as a human means an absolute lack of prior human interaction. They probably would have died as infants due to lack of interaction, and there's a good chance they would kill their own child due to lack of understanding how to deal with other humans.

In short, the situation is highly implausible, especially considering that you would have to have two living feral humans as a prerequisite, and they will only be interacting with other feral humans.

I have to disagree, feral humans would be like chimpanzees in the wild. Humans (like chimps) are social animals so we have the basic instincts to band together and reproduce (and fight and kill members of other bands because they lack the awesomeness of our band). Also with maternal and paternal instincts that make us protect our young. Infants resemble the father in order to make him more likely to not abandon them.

Humans are not chimpanzees, not by a long shot. We have a much stronger in-built need for social interaction and being deprived of that has dire consequences. Shoot, try dealing with a feral chimp, see how that thing acts. Bet it would be far less functional than a normal chimp.

Edit: Actually, in my opinion, I think that the feral parents might end up actually being better parents than the ones of the world today, especially when the survival of their line matters more than almost anything else, even the life of the parents.

You're assuming a whole lot about human nature there that flat out cannot be assumed. That is not why people have historically had children and it isn't now. People have always had children out of social pressures and to help them survive. Same reason we have less now and the same reason that the real reason to stop population growth is to make it less profitable to have kids. Parents always have cared more about themselves and their mates by nature. They care more for their children out of socialization.

"That is not why people have historically had children and it isn't now. People have always had children out of social pressures and to help them survive."
No, people use to have children because they had sex.
We have less kids because we have contraception.

" Parents always have cared more about themselves and their mates by nature. They care more for their children out of socialization."
No, biological instinct to protect the young is very real and very strong. At least for women. Civilisation and global awareness allowed us to make the "best choice for the future' with a broader view than the needs of you newly ejected foetus.

Why do first or second generation immigrants to western nations not give a fuck about having less children then? Is it because they have some mystical lack of understanding about the existence of condoms, because that certainly wouldn't apply to second-generation middle-class Mexican-Americans, who still have far more children. The main difference is a shift from an agrarian society and culture to a western one, and having less children is a part of our society because you just don't want to pay to raise that many children.

I'll give you that mothers care a bit more for their children than men naturally, but I doubt that they are truly selfless about it, and far less selfless than a modern parent. I was really just trying to make a point that feral humans would make for the most fucked up parents feral humans would be and that socialization and progress has only led to better parenting.

 

[kouriichi]

We had to have learned at one time right?
Im sure we could do it again.

 

[balanovich]

I don't see any reason two humans in the wilderness shouldn't figure out how to shag. Sex drives and all that.
They won't know it'll result in a child of course, but when the time comes they will most certainly be just as able to raise the baby as well as any other ape.

Of all the things that may be part of human nature, this is the most certain. The species wouldn't have survived otherwise.

"The species" has evolved alot during the last ice age... Its not really a valid argument. Since all humans since that time have lived in colonies.

It's all a part of instinct, built into the mind of every creature. Every creature knows how to reproduce, whether they are feral or not. The only difference is that it probably wouldn't be as much for recreation as we see it today, and more for reproduction. I mean look at children who are reaching puberty, some probably never discussed anything about sex with anyone else, but at that stage, they finds themselves being drawn to the opposite sex in a more intimate function.

Edit: Actually, in my opinion, I think that the feral parents might end up actually being better parents than the ones of the world today, especially when the survival of their line matters more than almost anything else, even the life of the parents.

CraftOmega is right. The test actually has been done. A scientist once found a "savage" boy in the jungle. he never had contact with humans before. He was more or less 17 and physically fine. He brought in a few hookers and the boy could do anything.

I was extremely surprised about that, but it seems that we are the only specie so dumb we need to be taught how to fuck!

No offence here, but before you go around saying someone is right, you might want to source your claims rather than saying that "a scientist" has already performed this as an experiment or something. Until then, I can't really accept this as fact.

On topic though, I would assume so. After all go get a couple rabbits from a store, put them in the same cage and you'll see they don't need instructions.

Fair enough...but I can't give my sources. I saw that on tv, late at night, it was a documentary on how sexual development is affected by our surroundings. I tried to find it on wikipedia and google but I couldn't find anything.

This isn't a science convention and no important decision are going to be taken because of this thread so I don't see the point of doing more research.

 

[craftomega]

I don't see any reason two humans in the wilderness shouldn't figure out how to shag. Sex drives and all that.
They won't know it'll result in a child of course, but when the time comes they will most certainly be just as able to raise the baby as well as any other ape.

Of all the things that may be part of human nature, this is the most certain. The species wouldn't have survived otherwise.

"The species" has evolved alot during the last ice age... Its not really a valid argument. Since all humans since that time have lived in colonies.

It's all a part of instinct, built into the mind of every creature. Every creature knows how to reproduce, whether they are feral or not. The only difference is that it probably wouldn't be as much for recreation as we see it today, and more for reproduction. I mean look at children who are reaching puberty, some probably never discussed anything about sex with anyone else, but at that stage, they finds themselves being drawn to the opposite sex in a more intimate function.

Edit: Actually, in my opinion, I think that the feral parents might end up actually being better parents than the ones of the world today, especially when the survival of their line matters more than almost anything else, even the life of the parents.

CraftOmega is right. The test actually has been done. A scientist once found a "savage" boy in the jungle. he never had contact with humans before. He was more or less 17 and physically fine. He brought in a few hookers and the boy could do anything.

I was extremely surprised about that, but it seems that we are the only specie so dumb we need to be taught how to fuck!

Could you get me the name of that experiment or the guy who did it? I would love to read the journal.

Would they have sex? Sure, that is certainly possible. Unlikely, but possible. Would the child survive? Unlikely. Would the two of them have lived long enough to run into each other to begin with? Probably not. They wouldn't talk, they'd be terrible at walking and running, assuming they could do either, they'd have far more fear based reactions, they may just kill each other upon meeting, seeing as being feral as a human means an absolute lack of prior human interaction. They probably would have died as infants due to lack of interaction, and there's a good chance they would kill their own child due to lack of understanding how to deal with other humans.

In short, the situation is highly implausible, especially considering that you would have to have two living feral humans as a prerequisite, and they will only be interacting with other feral humans.

You didnt read the assumtions part did you?

 

[El Dwarfio]

You must mean feral, unless you mean Italian aluminum radiators.

And the answer is yes, it's the basis of biology and the most basic driving force of all living things.

I already fixed it... Why is everyone so sarcastic about misspelled words....

Because it's the internet.

Also there's no need for a thought experiment here. SCIENCE already has all the answers.

Step 1: Make sex feel awesome to encourage peeps to do it. Check.
Step 2: Have some form of hormonal 'sexual awakening' to show peeps that they can do it. Check.
Step 3: Give Babies neotonous features so the parents don't kill it. Check.
Step 4: Trial and Error.

By stating that they're feral removes any importance of their species history, so the point about living in 'colonies' (whatever that is supposed to mean) is invalid. Furthermore how do you think proto-humans kept the species going eh?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

You didnt read the assumtions part did you?

I did, I just consider the entire situation too implausible to really be considered. I also did put in an argument about how high the chance is they would just kill each other, or their child. I also did address the main question of the poll by pointing out that it is possible they would learn how to have sex. I just wanted to make it clear that feral humans rarely do a good job surviving past infancy. I believe the Nazis did a couple experiments concluding that babies that aren't interacted with have a tendency to die. A lot.

 

[craftomega]

You must mean feral, unless you mean Italian aluminum radiators.

And the answer is yes, it's the basis of biology and the most basic driving force of all living things.

I already fixed it... Why is everyone so sarcastic about misspelled words....

Because it's the internet.

Also there's no need for a thought experiment here. SCIENCE already has all the answers.

Step 1: Make sex feel awesome to encourage peeps to do it. Check.
Step 2: Have some form of hormonal 'sexual awakening' to show peeps that they can do it. Check.
Step 3: Give Babies neotonous features so the parents don't kill it. Check.
Step 4: Trial and Error.

By stating that they're feral removes any importance of their species history, so the point about living in 'colonies' (whatever that is supposed to mean) is invalid. Furthermore how do you think proto-humans kept the species going eh?

You don?t seem to get the point of this at all....

A thought experiment is not always supposed to get the right answer. It?s a way to share ideas. And no science does not have all the answers because it?s almost impossible to account for all the factors.

Also by Colonies I mean Tribes, Groups, Family units, other synonyms.

Where did I say anything about "species history"? I am looking at modern day humans who are in this senario.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Also there's no need for a thought experiment here. SCIENCE already has all the answers.

Step 1: Make sex feel awesome to encourage peeps to do it. Check.
Step 2: Have some form of hormonal 'sexual awakening' to show peeps that they can do it. Check.
Step 3: Give Babies neotonous features so the parents don't kill it. Check.
Step 4: Trial and Error.

By stating that they're feral removes any importance of their species history, so the point about living in 'colonies' (whatever that is supposed to mean) is invalid. Furthermore how do you think proto-humans kept the species going eh?

Proto-humans had sex with other proto-humans within their proto-human colonies, or are you very unfamiliar with the evolutionary model. Humans, upon becoming genetic humans, have always existed within hunter-gatherer societies. Equating early man to modern feral humans is like comparing a functioning tungsten light bulb with a broken fluorescent bulb. It's just wrong.

 

[El Dwarfio]

You must mean feral, unless you mean Italian aluminum radiators.

And the answer is yes, it's the basis of biology and the most basic driving force of all living things.

I already fixed it... Why is everyone so sarcastic about misspelled words....

Because it's the internet.

Also there's no need for a thought experiment here. SCIENCE already has all the answers.

Step 1: Make sex feel awesome to encourage peeps to do it. Check.
Step 2: Have some form of hormonal 'sexual awakening' to show peeps that they can do it. Check.
Step 3: Give Babies neotonous features so the parents don't kill it. Check.
Step 4: Trial and Error.

By stating that they're feral removes any importance of their species history, so the point about living in 'colonies' (whatever that is supposed to mean) is invalid. Furthermore how do you think proto-humans kept the species going eh?

You don?t seem to get the point of this at all....

A thought experiment is not always supposed to get the right answer. It?s a way to share ideas. And no science does not have all the answers because it?s almost impossible to account for all the factors.

Also by Colonies I mean Tribes, Groups, Family units, other synonyms.

Where did I say anything about "species history"? I am looking at modern day humans who are in this senario.

No, a thought experiment is where you use logic and theory to reach a conclusion on a topic that cannot be physically researched, ie to reach the correct answer.

Also why say you never mentioned the "species history" and then immediately proceed to use the term modern humans?

You don't seem to get the point at all.... by saying they are feral it is irrelevant whether they are modern humans or ancient humans or proto-humans the results will be the same. My answer stands, although feel free to debate it, if that is what this thought experiment is about...

 

[Sejs Cube]

1. Yes they could, reproduction and child-rearing behaviors are about as instinctual as it gets. Given the example mentions feral humans there would likely be a very high incident of infant mortality, but I'm confident that the pair would be able to get the ball rolling until things worked out.

2. Yeah, the hurr durr only guys understand/initiate/want sex is both pretty sexist and frankly kinda dumb. Both genders are wired for reproductive behaviors. Hell, women have a regular chemical reminder that tells them "Hey you know what sounds like a great idea? Having some kids. You should really look into that. No, really, like now."

 

[El Dwarfio]

Also there's no need for a thought experiment here. SCIENCE already has all the answers.

Step 1: Make sex feel awesome to encourage peeps to do it. Check.
Step 2: Have some form of hormonal 'sexual awakening' to show peeps that they can do it. Check.
Step 3: Give Babies neotonous features so the parents don't kill it. Check.
Step 4: Trial and Error.

By stating that they're feral removes any importance of their species history, so the point about living in 'colonies' (whatever that is supposed to mean) is invalid. Furthermore how do you think proto-humans kept the species going eh?

Proto-humans had sex with other proto-humans within their proto-human colonies, or are you very unfamiliar with the evolutionary model. Humans, upon becoming genetic humans, have always existed within hunter-gatherer societies. Equating early man to modern feral humans is like comparing a functioning tungsten light bulb with a broken fluorescent bulb. It's just wrong.

Yeah your missing the point here, the analogy is that the very evolutionary model you speak of will ensure that they end up procreating regardless of the societal construct you envision for them.

 

[jetriot]

Google feral children. Kids locked in an attic or basement their entire lives with no social interaction/speech anything. When I worked with DFS I came across a situation like this where a child had been locked up until he was 14 years old when we discovered him. He was essentially an animal and while he had those urges the capability of actually having children would have been well beyond him or a female counterpart. If they were able to have a child that child would die. There is no doubt in my mind.

Humans have lost all but the most basic animal instinct to care for their young and we now must be taught and experience through society that we must care for that annoying screaming infant. Animals have a genetic code that tells them what to do while I have come to believe that while we are each governed, in large part by our genetic code, we are the only species on Earth that can come anywhere close to Tabula Rasa.