[extropy-chat] Effective relationships [Resend]

[Keith Henson]

At 01:06 PM 11/4/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>Robert Bradbury wrote:
>
> > One may ask under what conditions are survival probabilities enhanced 
> by partnering?
>
>Some time ago I posted what I thought was a provocative and insightful 
>idea, but didn't get much feedback.  I'd like to try again here:
>
>Might it be that the most effective relationship structure in terms of 
>cost/benefit might be the triad? I'm not talking about polyamory or ménage 
>à trois but rather a stable, committed triadic relationship between three 
>individuals in any combination of genders.
>
>I recognize that this would require individuals of greater than average 
>self-awareness to avoid destructive two-against-one dynamics. I also 
>recognize that nature settled on diadic relationships in most cases, but I 
>think human culture represents a more highly developed phase that may 
>support and reward more highly developed relationship structures at 
>various scales.
>
>The advantages I see are significantly increased synergies, built-in 
>tie-breaking, and possibly an inherent 3D structural stability similar to 
>that of a tetrahedron over a planar object.
>
>Comments?

Geometry is the wrong place to look.

The combination of 2 (or even more) women with a man of high status is 
fairly common and often stable.

The only place where more than one man (2 and sometimes more brothers) 
entered into a marriage contract with one woman was in Tibet, where it was 
a population limitation in a place where the farming plots could be reduced 
no further--and for some reason they didn't use the more normal mechanism 
of killing each other off in wars.

The natural organization at levels higher than family is the band or 
tribe.  Those usually top out at 100 people.

And a high fraction of what goes on in relations happens well below the 
conscious level.

Read up on evolutionary psychology to get the background.

Keith Henson