The next moment, he heard the eyeball sounding.

It's the voice of a woman.

Then, his eyes fell on the spiritual body that looked like a "pirate captain".

The other party lacks an eyeball.

In his memory, he found a doctrinal view on the mechanism of the occurrence of erotic desire.

People often talk about "love".

But has anyone accurately analyzed what "love"?

From the perspective of depth of observation, with the object as the goal, it can be divided into love, family, friendship, etc.

If you go deeper and dissect these emotions, you will find that love.

Just like most cognition and judgment, the relevant judgment of love is itself a synthetic judgment.

Love can be said to be the synthesis of one individual to another at the level of consciousness and desire.

Companionship, communication, possession, control, etc.

To use a simple and rough description, it can be understood as different proportions of desires and can synthesize different emotions.

Humans themselves are animals that live in clusters. Before entering the stage where they can influence cognition and interfere with reproduction, they have undergone screening again and again.

Group organisms have a strong desire to accompany and communicate.

If a person does not contact and communicate with his or her kind in any way, he or she will develop a strong sense of loneliness.

Before the arrival of the electronic and Internet era, this kind of contact and communication was generally direct communication and contact, but it was not completely direct.

How to say, organisms such as ants and bees communicate with their companions through pheromones.

By releasing something outward, it retains some substance and releases information, while another individual, by contacting this information, then "translates" it into information that they understand.

This is a kind of communication.

There is a difference between communication and companionship, but the relationship is very close.

In other words, human beings have entered the stage where communication can replace companionship.

There is no need to directly intake and contact with substances. You only need to observe "traces of the same kind" and find out that "I have the same kind" can complete the initial desire for communication and companionship.

Organisms with vision often have similar situations, but humans, as highly developed organisms of information processing, are different from other organisms.

The highly developed cognitive ability allows humans to have stronger "brain-compensation" ability.

A little bit of "communication" can make humans satisfied.

From this point of view, even if there is only one person left in the world, as long as the person himself does not confirm this fact and still has "hope", he will not completely fall into loneliness.

But because of this, his desire to accompany and communicate directly with his companions will continue to rise.

But this situation basically won't happen.

In his lifetime, people were able to communicate with other similar people through electronic networks.

Even whether it is "same type" does not matter.

As long as people think it is.

From this perspective, other creatures are still at the stage of "this medium is left by companions, I have companions", while humans have reached the situation of "this trace is left by companions, I have companions".

Even if it is not a human, it doesn’t matter. As long as it is an object that can communicate, it is an object that can communicate information.

Just like...

Spiritual creatures at the level of phenomena and regularity?

Thoughts flashed by.

Even if it is not the same era, even if the "object" that people can clearly recognize has "dead", as long as people can observe the things left by the other party, it is fine.

This is the general manifestation of "the desire for companionship" and "the desire for communication".

Other desires are also like possessiveness.

Possessibility is not just the possession and competition for real matter. From an evolutionary perspective, this kind of "absorption" and "eating" behavior of external matter by organisms that originate from a very old level and still stay at the cellular level.

Those with this function will survive and live better.

This is to find the reasons from the perspective of evolutionary psychology and to find the reasons from the perspective of evolutionary psychology.

Emotionally, this expression of desire is more common.

Children will be upset because their friends get along well with others, and even have thoughts such as uneasiness and resistance.

If people who have raised animals, especially carnivores, such as chickens, cats and dogs, will also find that they have more or less food protection behaviors.

From the perspective of the mechanism of occurrence, human possessiveness is an extension of this food protection behavior.

There is also the desire to control, which often comes from anxiety-

Lack of security, so it is necessary to control, dominate and avoid uneasiness.

It can be said to be a manifestation of inner fear.

And in group organisms, this desire will be strengthened.

Control over yourself and your companions.

To sum up, from the perspective of generology, this type of action mechanism originated from various ancient creatures and is engraved in DNA is the source of various emotions.

If the desire for companionship and communication accounts for a large proportion, it will be reflected in the form of friendship.

If the sense of security is lacking and the desire for security increases, the desire for control will increase and possessiveness may also increase.

After exploring the principles of the occurrence of various emotions and desires, this view believes that love, friendship, family affection, etc. are actually synthetics formed by different proportions of various desires.

What, even so, there should be a desire to match in the elements of love?

Indeed, but why do you feel that there is no desire to "J-matching" in other feelings?

Or, what makes you anchor this desire as a "J-matching" desire.

Or, why don’t you think that this desire is not a synthetic product?

There is a very classic and considered outdated theory.

There is a person's name in this theory, which many people also knew during Yao Yan's lifetime.

Freud.

Some people say that his doctrine is pseudoscience, some people say that his doctrine cannot be authentic or false, some people think that his doctrine should be classified as mainland philosophy, some people think that it has a huge impact on psychology, and some people think that his influence is not that great.

This chapter is not finished yet, please click on the next page to continue reading the exciting content later! Use a brief description to describe it, and this Mr. Freud can be roughly described using "pansexualism".

When he talks about most issues, he will inevitably turn to the desire for "sex".

What kind of dreams you have, this dream reflects your sexual desires in some aspects...

Such things.

But the problem is.

Is the desire for "sex" a synthetic substance?

Genetics, evolutionary psychology, etc. have all discussed a question more or less.

Is it related to the function of "sex" and its related desires that promote DNA double helix binding and exchange?

As I said just now, possessiveness comes from the eating of ancient creatures, and the related behaviors of ensuring eating can be traced back to the absorption of ancient creatures and the acquisition of functions combined with external substances.

At this time, distinctions such as "gender" do not exist in themselves.

How much connection will the so-called desire for "sex" be combined with the DNA double helix after dissecting it?

PS: Well, if you have learned about love and desire economics, you can probably get a little bit?

Although I strive to explain it easily, I am not sure if my "translation" will cause misunderstandings, so don't care too much.

This is closer to the field of psychoanalysis.

If you are interested, you can learn about Lacan’s content about “desire”.

In short, in this theory's view, the desire for "J-matching" comes from the body's substances, gene binding and exchange mechanisms.

Of course, although most common is the relationship between the two genders, it has nothing to do with the two genders.

How to compare it? Let’s put it this way, steel is often used to make pots and pans, but steel itself does not exist to become pots and pans. At most, pots and pans are made to serve rice, but steel is still widely present in other substances.

To be retelled, it means that the formation of genders comes from the structural mechanism of gene binding and exchange, but it does not exist only between the genders. Family and friendship itself is also affected by this mechanism.
Chapter completed!