Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: wants vs needs, luxury vs necessity
Message-ID: <2635@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 12:32:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: randvax.2635
Posted: Fri Aug  9 12:32:49 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Aug-85 22:02:01 EDT
References: <735@lll-crg.ARPA> <1742@reed.UUCP> <765@lll-crg.ARPA>
Reply-To: edhall@rand-unix.UUCP (Ed Hall)
Distribution: net
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 49

From a posting by Andy Beals (bandy@lll-crg) quoting Lady Godiva
(purtell@reed):

> > [...] I think that hugs are very necessary and important. People need
> > that kind of physical contact.
>
> This sort of physical contact is NOT important and is definitely NOT
> necessary. [``Kin yew say "hermit"? Iah knew ya could!''] It is purely
> a luxury, like eating chocolate or or not having to work on the weekend
> or having a *friend.

Hermits are quite uncommon, and are generally considered to be maladjusted.
Sure, they exist, but so do other unusual type.  Existance does not prove
a generality.

> > People need to be loved and accepted like that.
>
> Again, posh. Some people who have warped their minds such that they will
> be Unhappy if they do not have this "love and acceptance" will invent
> an imaginary being that "loves" and "accepts" them. Sometimes these
> people will gather in groups and all fantasize about One Being.

Haven't you just proved yourself wrong here?  It must take a pretty
strong *need* to motivate folks into creating such a ``fantasy''.

> > I've
> > known all kinds of people: Christians, college students, street kids (I
> > was there once myself), very poor, very rich, very accomplished, etc.
> > etc. and
> > [...] I've never found a group of people under any circumstances, who
> > didn't need that kind of thing.
>
> Are you sure that you don't mean "appreciate"? "Need" is a very strong word.

Yes, *need*.  Babies who aren't touched but otherwise are well cared-for
generally *die*--something discovered in turn-of-the-century orphanages
where the mortality rate approached 100%. (For references, check out
Ashley Montagu's ``Touching--The Human Significance Of The Skin'', pages
77-81 and associated notes and bibliography).  There is considerable
evidence that touching remains an important need throughout life.
Grown-ups don't die without it, of course, at least not in a physical
sense.  They can find substitutes.  But distaste for all touching is
generally a powerful sign of a severe personality disorder and a person
that is profoundly unhappy.  Hugs are *good* for you.

> andy beals, bandy@lll-crg.arpa, {seismo,sun,gymble,mordor,dual}!lll-crg!bandy

		-Ed Hall
		decvax!randvax!edhall