Was evolution or the big bang "smart" enough to make sex pleasurable?

[wesmorris]

I once did a college essay on this and I wanted to come up wih something unusual combining philosophy and science. This is the short version. Note: Injecting sex into a university paper is worth at least 25-50 marks and even that estimate may be low. Try it, it works.

No two people share the same 'now'. Each of us view the other from different spacetime co-ordinates. A 'now' is a very lonely existence. Sex provides an opportunity for 'nows' to get as close as they ever will be in time or space. The closeness of sex is a sharing of the moment for two 'nows' (or more than 2, preferences you know), perhaps life's most pleasing experience. Therefore nature has made it certain that sex in any fashion is pleasurable.

Now some of you will wonder about the difference between masturbation and partner sex. Another topic all together.

Funny that when you deliberately try to have children it doesn't seem to be as much fun. Its like work.

That is so funky. I've never heard someone say that besides the voice of my internal dialog. Neato.

 

[D H]

ya this is true but how was nature know to make sex pleasurable? It seems to me that making reproduction pleasurable requires some sort of intelligence..

Evolution doesn't "know" anything. If something inheritable characteristic appears that works better than the status quo, that new characteristic will tend to take over. Now consider sex. Most animals (most animals being arthropods) are too dumb to know that sex leads to reproduction and are too dumb to know that reproduction is necessary to ensure that the species lives on. Arthropods are forced to have sex by undergoing irrestible hormal urges. How else can one explain praying mantises and black widows?