abraham maslow defined in his hierarchy that sex is a physiologic need of man. alongside with water, air, food etc... do u really thnk that man cannot live without sex???
2007-08-20 01:26:15 · 14 answers · asked by janelle g_7 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
i use maslow alot but i have never thought of it as a physiological need - food, water and air clearly are...but shelter is kind of woolly! i think of maslow meaning basic needs, rather than physiological ones, on the grounds that some of our basic needs are emotional...cultural even.
you make a really interesting point though - if maslow's basic needs aren't necessary for survival...are they necessary pre-cursors to moving up the ladder to self-realisation?
man can survive without sex...can he THRIVE without sex?
there are many people who take vows of celibacy in order to progress, as they understand it, as people...are they simply mistaken?
to take an approach from history of science, it seems like a useful criticism to ask how/where/when maslow decided on what is and is not a basic need. modern psychology has been hugely influenced by the success of science and has often merely accepted presumptions from science(largely biology)...a supposed need for sex in man can be seen as being derived wholly from the study of animals who, on the whole, seem really very keen on sex!
it's interesting to note that freud's theories are influenced by theories of evolution that led to people looking at chimpanzees as close relatives...seemingly making study of THEIR behaviour useful in understanding OURS...i wonder how different our present psychologies would be if the bilobo monkey(as close to us genetically as the chimps) had been studied instead - they aren't aggressive, co-operate with other troupes of bilobo, have alot of sex and are vegetarian...most unlike the chav chimps!!!
man can clearly live without sex(why study monkeys when we have monks!?!?)...but can he become all that he is capable of? clearly not - specialise your personal development at your own peril!!!
2007-08-20 01:43:11 · answer #1 · answered by mlsgeorge 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sex is one of the God-given knowledges along with the need for food, water and shelter. Without sex, the species would cease to exist. I do think it's a physiologic need; the body certainly releases chemical changes that calm and relax. It's the ultimate feel-good time. A person can live without sex but not to the fullest extent.
2007-08-20 08:42:02 · answer #2 · answered by missingora 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes it is for men, for women it's different. The need for sex is different for men than woman & something very difficult for women to really understand. Men are insurance that the human race will continue, women are population control. A man can go without sex but it must be "replaced" by something as the monks do with their devotion. Even then we have journal upon journal entries on how they struggled
2007-08-20 09:44:04 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes, without a shadow of a doubt it is.
It is both stimulating for certain areas of the brain, as C.A.T scans have found, and it is an exercise that burns a lot of calories.
It has been found that sex releases endorphins in the brain that help add to the neural makeup.
2007-08-20 08:36:51 · answer #4 · answered by BCB Productions 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Individual needs will vary. Some people will want more, some less. But as a species, I think it's pretty important. We can't clone people yet, and I really wouldn't want to depend on parthenogenesis to keep H. Sapiens around for another 100 years...
2007-08-20 08:35:25 · answer #5 · answered by Ralfcoder 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Definately agree with Abraham.
2007-08-20 08:31:05 · answer #6 · answered by holly 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think it is a natural feeling, and actually, yes it is a need. At least it is a need when you are in your prime. I have sat around without sex for a while (before I met my wife), and it WILL drive you insane. It might even make you gay. It seems to be a bigger problem with men (I wonder why).
2007-08-20 08:34:38 · answer #7 · answered by Jadochop 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Of course it is for men and women - the whole idea is to keep making more people.
The better question is: why would we want to live without it?
2007-08-20 09:05:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
One can live without it but it would not be as much fun living.
Love and blessings Don
2007-08-20 09:50:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, when one doesn`t need it, it phyzzles, that`s what physiologic stuff does.
2007-08-20 11:11:13 · answer #10 · answered by canron4peace 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋