Conhecido nos meios academicos como aguerrido evolucionista, o professor biologo e autor do Pharyngula, PZ Myers, mais uma vez se mexe inquieto ao ler um scientific paper sugerindo que o orgasmo feminino tenha uma utilidade no processo da reproducao, por isso, ele teria sido criado por um proposito. Ora, para os evolucionisas e ateistas, nada no Universo pode ter sido feito por algum plano previo, a toda pergunta sobre o porque existe tal fenomeno natural, a resposta sera sempre a mesma: Nao existe razao para isto, pois isto e’ justamente acaso e circunstancias”. Entao a reacao de Myers ao cientista autor do “paper” foi exposta neste interessante e bem informado artigo com link abaixo, sempre repetindo nas suas proprias palavras o orgasmo feminino e todo orgasmo simplesmente existe porque existe, ou, nas suas proprias palavras “there is no reason for it, it’s just chance and circumstance”.
E’ possivel que Myers esteja correto, porque nao? Alias, a maioria dos professores universitarios hoje acreditam nisso e estao ensinando isto `a geracao de humanos que vao governar os destinos da Humanidade amanha. Ninguem tem nenhum fato comprovado, cientifico, racional, para derrubar esta teoria. Mas eu,,, sempre que me faco uma pergunta do porque aqui nesta biosfera existe um fenomeno natural, eu saio for a da pele de humano e subo as estrelas para olhar de la’ e dar uma resposta. Pois como estabelece o teorema de Goethe, ” ninguem, estando dentro de um sistema, pode saber a verdade do sistema”. E eu vejo la no ceu sombras, imagens esparsas e confuses as quais tento interpreter. E dentre estas imagens penso ter visto aquelas que explicam porque existe aqui estes curiosos fenomenos do orgasmo, sexo, reproducao, etc. Entao, nao pide resistir e postei um comentario no artigo do Myers expressando minha diferente resposta, mas fiz questao de salientar que nao acredito nela, apenas acho que e’ a mais racional, por enquanto.
Vale a pena ver, e aqui abro mais este capitulo para pesquisar este tema. Existem no artigo links para trabalhos que precisam serem lidos.
The mystery of the orgasm
Perhaps we need to think more about human psychology. There’s an interesting phenomenon that goes on all the time when people read about evolution: they shoehorn the observations into some functional purpose. There’s just something so satisfying to our minds to be able to say “that thing exists for this particular reason”, and we find it frustrating to say, “there is no reason for it, it’s just chance and circumstance”. It shouldn’t be so, but our minds just try to fit everything into that particular mold.
Now watch: some people — maybe even you — are going to now try and develop an adaptive scenario for why having brains that work that way is a good thing. We try to build a teleological framework around everything, and so it must have a purpose that is being fulfilled, and we rarely stop to think about whether it may be actually limiting us. Maybe it’s not good. Maybe there are other ways that brains can work, and this particular mode of thinking is just a clumsy kludge that resulted from the gradual agglomeration of stuff, mostly unselected, that built up the substrate for human cognition.
A case in point: the female orgasm. There’s a new paper out on the subject, and there are lots of articles being written on it, and they generally start out by pointing out that there’s something puzzling about the phenomenon: shouldn’t it have, you know, a reason for existence? It can’t just be, it has to do something useful for women, or reproduction, or pair bonding, or any of dozens of hypotheses that have been proposed.
Perhaps we need to think more about human psychology. There’s an interesting phenomenon that goes on all the time when the modern academic mindset read about evolution: they shoehorn the observations into the nihilist world view’s purpose which is ” there is no reason for it, it’s just chance and circumstance”. There is this teleological framework around everything, and not maybe but it is for sure, it is not good. Universal absolute answer has proved to be disastrous by all religions which says same thing: ” There is no mystery, it is the whish of God”. So, female orgasm is not a mystery, we have the answer. But, always happened that the evolution of human knowledge should that all absolute answer were wrong. For instance, the modern knowledge of Astronomy is suggesting that orgasm is product of a driven tunneled evolution, so, it has a naturalistic purpose.
Life was produced here by this astronomic system. Or someone knows some force or element that came from beyond this system surrounding us which produced this planet also? Of course, not. There are two possible reasons for explaining this event:
- A fortuity event by chance when common forces and elements existing in the long chain of events coming from the Big Bang met just here and just at the same time; since the chain is not driven from outside it, there is no reason for life, it’s just chance and circumstance;
- This developmental Universe is merely a process of genetic reproduction, or self-recycling, of a finished Universe (which can be a different thing, being universes merely a temporary embryonary shape) existing before the Big Bang, so, the event of life obeyed this reproductive purpose.
There are no scientific proved fact debunking any of this alternatives. But, psychologically, humans has the tendency to believe in one and refusing the other. Ok, Mr. PZ Myers is human so he choose one, and the first one. I am human and I bet at the second.
I have built a different theoretical model of astronomic systems that connects evolutionary this astronomic system to these biological systems. So, every biological property existing here that was approved by natural selection for to be established into the evolutionary tree, must be existing in its simplest shape as expressed or not expressed potential force/element composing the astronomic system theoretical model. So, the questions now is: why is there – at biological systems – female orgasm? Why is there sex? Why is there orgasm? Why is there reproduction? All answers are there, in this theoretical model – which still was not debunked by any scientific proved fact. The model of LUCA – the last universal common ancestor – which is this astronomic system, was hermaphrodite and had orgasms, but, for getting it, it was necessary that its female and male organs should be stimulated, by the natural course of its forces flawing inside its internal systemic circuit, a property of our ancestors thermodynamic systems. The modern son of LUCA is not an individual human, but the Humanity, and Humanity still is hermaphrodite. Can you explain why and how genes are counting the total number of men and women for to know if the next one will be female or male for keeping this marvelous balance through millions years?
But there is a third hidden alternative.
3 – The two alternatives above are non complete or wrong.
The difference between me and Myers is that I consider the third alternative, so, I have no beliefs that mine is the ultimate absolute answer. I have no beliefs at all, I am still looking all hypothesis and theories.