Evolution is what has made death mandatory. We'd be living much longer lives if it gave our species an evolutionary advantage.

For example, in many species, the male dies promptly after mating. Evolution has no further use for him, so his life is forfeit. In fact, survival of the progeny may be advanced by getting rid of the old folks.

The reason people live to be grandparents is grandparents turned out to be useful in ensuring the survival of the grandkids. Beyond that, off to the ice floe.

These ideas are not mine. See "The Red Queen" by Matt Ridley https://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/0... for the various strategies around sex and mortality that evolution has produced.

Nothing says, however, that we cannot tinker with our genes to produce what we want.

> The concept of "mine" also exists in socialism.

Nope, even your shoes officially belong to the collective. I was told this by a former subject of the USSR.

> family

As I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, children are not fully formed humans, and have only a subset of adult rights. Families have evolved to deal with this issue. Extending the family to society does not work.

> why don't you tell us what human nature is

Two excellent books on the topic:

"The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature" by Matt Ridley https://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/0...

"Noble Savages" by Napoleon Chagnon https://www.amazon.com/Noble-Savages-Dangerous-Yanomamo-Anth...

I can sum it up with human nature is our evolved behavior, rather than learned behavior.

Eating one's own species is a fairly complex topic, and there are many local optimas. For a detailed read on this topic, see "The Red Queen" by Ridley.

https://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/0...

If you guys are interested in this stuff, I highly recommend "The Red Queen" by Matt Ridley.

http://amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/006055...

I disagree. The amount of DNA you have will affect the rate of mutation. Mutations are mostly a bad thing, however, in an environment where a species must constantly create defenses against parasites or disease, it's important to mutate new defenses. As a result, in a low disease/parasite environment it makes sense to get rid of "junk dna" to reduce the rate of mutation, while in a high disease/parasite environment it makes sense to increase "junk dna" to increase it.

Red Queen is a good read on this topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Queen_hypothesis

http://www.amazon.com/The-Red-Queen-Evolution-Nature/dp/0060...

I'm not the OP, and I haven't read these books, but many people swear by:

Influence: the psychology of persuasion, by Robert Cialdini

http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-Busine...

The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature

http://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/00...

One I HAVE read, and I strongly recommend is How To Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influenc...

Also, I've read many people mention a lot about Neuro-Linguistic Programming. I'm usually skeptical of this stuff, but I want to read about it.

I did read "The Game" by Neil Strauss... while it is not something I want to do, it is really intriguing, and he advocates NLP a lot in that book.

And while I'm nerdish/socially awkward, I have a long-term relationship with my girlfriend so I don't "need" to go picking up girls :) .

I look forward to the original poster's list :)

It does imply that. I know a lot of guys who have gone through a period in their life not being able to sympathize with women after learning about this. They would question why even bothering marrying a woman if she is just going to be a cheating whore?

The second point you make is very interesting and I have the perfect rebuttal. Unfortunately I don't have the book with me right now but a quote from a review on Amazon will suffice:

"And on pages 217-218 [Matt Ridley] explains why women cuckold their mates: "This is because her husband is, almost by definition, usually not the best male there is-else how would he have ended up married to her?" She wants the parental care of her husband and some other man's superior-she thinks-genes."

Here is the link to this book (one of the best I've read): http://www.amazon.com/The-Red-Queen-Evolution-Nature/dp/0060...

And although I haven't read this book (if you do, tell me what you think), I know that it talks more about how x% of children are not genetically related to their fathers: http://www.amazon.com/Sperm-Wars-Infidelity-Conflict-Bedroom...

An ad hominem attack with a dash of appeal to authority...enlightening. If you require proof of sexuality's impact on human behavior, I recommend reviewing the extant literature. Here are some examples:

1. http://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/00...

2. http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Animal-Science-Evolutionary-Psyc...

1) I'm not seeing any discussion of group survival. At an individual level, a lot of human behavior can look counterproductive, but makes sense at the group sense. If a genetic line evolves to support other members of the same (or similar) line, then that line as a whole has a better chance of lasting.

2) If anyone's interested in longer discussions of these (and they are interesting):

- _The_Red_Queen_ (why we sleep around) http://www.amazon.com/Red-Queen-Evolution-Human-Nature/dp/00...

- _The_Dark_Side_Of_Man_ (why we rape, kill) http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-Man-Michael-Ghiglieri/dp/073...

Note that the 2nd tries to make political/policy conclusions which IMHO don't hold up. However, the scientific work in the text is pretty enjoyable.