Aspects of Sex Differences: Social Intelligence vs. Creative Intelligence

F. Fellmann, E. Widmann
{"title":"Aspects of Sex Differences: Social Intelligence vs. Creative Intelligence","authors":"F. Fellmann, E. Widmann","doi":"10.4236/AA.2017.74017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we argue that there is an essential difference between social intelligence and creative intelligence, and that they have their foundation in human sexuality. For sex differences, we refer to the vast psychological, neurological, and cognitive science research where problem-solving, verbal skills, logical reasoning, and other topics are dealt with. Intelligence tests suggest that, on average, neither sex has more general intelligence than the other. Though people are equals in general intelligence, they are different in special forms of intelligence such as social intelligence and creative intelligence, the former dominant in women, the latter dominant in men. The dominance of creative intelligence in men needs to be explained. The focus of our research is on the strictly anthropological aspects, and consequently our explanation for this fact is based on the male-female polarity in the mating systems. Sexual dimorphism does not only regard bodily differences but implies different forms of sex life. Sex researchers distinguish between two levels of sexual intercourse: procreative sex and recreational sex, and to these we would add “creative sex.” On all three levels, there is a behavioral difference between men and women, including the subjective experience. These differences are as well attributed to culture as genetically founded in nature. Sexual reproduction is only possible if females cooperate. Their biological inheritance makes females play a decisive role in mate choice. Recreational sex for the purpose of pleasure rather than reproduction results from female extended sexual activity. Creative sex, on the contrary, is a specifically male performance of sexuality. We identify creative sex with eroticism. Eroticism evolved through the transformation of the sexual drive into a mental state of expectation and fantasizing. Hence, sex differences (that nowadays are covered up by cultural egalitarianism) continue to be the evolutionary origin of the difference between social and creative intelligence.","PeriodicalId":149660,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Anthropology","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/AA.2017.74017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In this article, we argue that there is an essential difference between social intelligence and creative intelligence, and that they have their foundation in human sexuality. For sex differences, we refer to the vast psychological, neurological, and cognitive science research where problem-solving, verbal skills, logical reasoning, and other topics are dealt with. Intelligence tests suggest that, on average, neither sex has more general intelligence than the other. Though people are equals in general intelligence, they are different in special forms of intelligence such as social intelligence and creative intelligence, the former dominant in women, the latter dominant in men. The dominance of creative intelligence in men needs to be explained. The focus of our research is on the strictly anthropological aspects, and consequently our explanation for this fact is based on the male-female polarity in the mating systems. Sexual dimorphism does not only regard bodily differences but implies different forms of sex life. Sex researchers distinguish between two levels of sexual intercourse: procreative sex and recreational sex, and to these we would add “creative sex.” On all three levels, there is a behavioral difference between men and women, including the subjective experience. These differences are as well attributed to culture as genetically founded in nature. Sexual reproduction is only possible if females cooperate. Their biological inheritance makes females play a decisive role in mate choice. Recreational sex for the purpose of pleasure rather than reproduction results from female extended sexual activity. Creative sex, on the contrary, is a specifically male performance of sexuality. We identify creative sex with eroticism. Eroticism evolved through the transformation of the sexual drive into a mental state of expectation and fantasizing. Hence, sex differences (that nowadays are covered up by cultural egalitarianism) continue to be the evolutionary origin of the difference between social and creative intelligence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性别差异的方面:社会智力vs.创造智力
在这篇文章中,我们认为社会智力和创造性智力之间存在着本质上的区别,它们的基础是人类的性行为。对于性别差异,我们参考了大量的心理学、神经学和认知科学研究,这些研究涉及解决问题、语言技能、逻辑推理和其他主题。智力测试表明,平均而言,两性的一般智力都不比对方高。虽然人们在一般智力上是平等的,但在特殊形式的智力上是不同的,如社会智力和创造智力,前者在女性中占优势,后者在男性中占优势。创造性智力在男性中的主导地位需要得到解释。我们的研究重点是严格的人类学方面,因此我们对这一事实的解释是基于交配系统中的男女极性。两性二态性不仅涉及身体上的差异,还意味着不同形式的性生活。性研究人员将性交分为两种层次:生殖性行为和娱乐性行为,我们会在这两种层次上加上“创造性行为”。在所有三个层面上,男性和女性都存在行为差异,包括主观体验。这些差异既可归因于文化,也可归因于自然遗传。只有雌性合作,有性繁殖才有可能。它们的生物学遗传使雌性在择偶中起决定性作用。以愉悦而非繁殖为目的的娱乐性性爱是女性延长性活动的结果。相反,创造性的性行为是男性特有的性行为表现。我们把创造性的性等同于情色。情色是通过性冲动转变为一种期待和幻想的精神状态而发展起来的。因此,性别差异(如今被文化平等主义所掩盖)仍然是社会智力和创造性智力差异的进化根源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cooperative and Problem-Based Learning Practice in Islamic Education in Bahrain: Strengths and Challenges The Engraved Pebble from Pavlo-Ochakovskaya Spit Critics of Delegation and Decentralization in Abdicating Authority and Upholding Ubuntu Philosophy in Social Welfare Organizations Archaeology of Human Consciousness: An Integrated Narrative of Cognitive Evolution from the Preanthromorphic Mind to Humanity’s Contemporary, Academia-Centric Culture Ayotzinapa 43: The Political Aesthetics of Drone Protest Graffiti
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1