2. Does human instinct always predominate?

Human infants take far longer to mature and become independent than most animals...in the scenario you describe it is doubtful they could survive and find food as newborns...but let's play along--assume perhaps an animal comes along to at least nurture them...we do have many instincts that are based on our long human history, and survival instincts could eventually kick in. I would also assume the two might become very interconnected to survive, and also become attached to any animals that helped or nurtured them...I would also think they would evolve as wild animals, fending for themselves, living off nature, with a focus on survival and basic needs--food, shelter, comfort...and probably also develop some communication skills unlike the languages we all learned, but more practical...they would probably far more independent and skilled than most of us, who are raised in the midst of all kinds of civilized institutions...

Wow. Something to really make your brain go "Hmmmmm......" I think God has instilled a basic instinct for us to know, feel and show love. I think and feel they could find love and would know how (or even to figure it out) to procreate. Deserted islands usually have animals. They probably watched some of them procreate. 🤔

i feel like... in a situation like this—where there is only 1 boy and 1 girl—anything can happen. instincts can dominate, or not. whatever. but once the population grows, then human instincts kick in/show/become relevant: these instincts exist for a reason: they helped our ancestors blah blah blah and now we're here, with these instincts (that helped our ancestors): our ancestors had to deal with environments that included (challenges etc) other humans (more than 1), and the instincts helped them (the ones with unhelpful instincts probably didn't get to pass on their genes/instincts). so...once the population get s big enough, instincts will be relevant again (just my intuition talking)

I think they have to copulate. It may be traumatic for them, and they won't have an emotional supportinve shoulders to cry on, but it has to happen. Maybe they'll generate a genetic freak with gills that can swim away to get them help and rescue them - but yes - I think they defo mate.

This scenario reminds me of an old movie from 1980 .💁🏼‍♂
The Blue Lagoon
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080453/

About the procreation part, maybe they can explore each other's parts in between the legs, it can start with simple touch, the woman can play with his thing and she how his body reacts, just because of sheer curiosity and the man can choose to smell and finger her pussy and spread her labia wide to see what's inside. This play can lead to a conclusion where they might experiment with penetration.

If they survived that long, yes

Our basic instincts would kick in
Without society's manipulation they would develop naturally
They would procreate as that's a basic instinct

Firstly, newborn humans cannot survive without being taken care of, so there may be a fault in your starting premise.

Ok, given that they are not newborn but at an age that they can fend for themselves, it's still not certain by any means that they would be able to find food and water or build a shelter. If they did manage to do any of these, it would be by sheer luck. The highest chances are that they would be malnourished and die from either malnourishment or diseases due to underdeveloped immune systems.

If they did manage to survive until puberty and are somehow healthy, then lack of parental love and supervision, and lack of contact wiht other humans or a society would likely make then more violent than normal humans towards each other, which would manifest as actual physical violence from the boy towards the girl and withholding of resources from the girl towards the boy (each fighting with what natural weapons they have). Again, this is assuming that there is no moderating material in their genetics. If they are high-IQ individuals, then they could even be compassionate towards each other... because compassion is a function of IQ.

If they reach puberty, their basic instincts would definitely take over and sex would happen ultimately, firstly as a simple exploration of the differences of each other's post-pubescent bodies, and then actual sex as they get to know their own and the other's bodies. Arousal would happen during the simple exploratory phase, which would be instantly visible in the boy. This would intrigue both and further exploration would ensue. When periods start for the girl, this would further heighten the intrigue for both, and lead to more exploration. All this would ultimately lead to sex, as this is a natural instinct that does not need to be taught.

If sex happens and they are healthy, then they would procreate. And if the girl delivered a baby successfully and survived, then that's where love would begin... as another natural and basic instinct of loving your offspring would take over. This is the beginning of love and through the love for their offspring, the two individuals would start developing love for each other.

However, the entire scenario is highly unlikely, because if two humans that are so young are thus deserted, they would not survive.

This sounds like a classic discussion question from the late 19th century; men in their clubs reading the news, smoking cigars / pipes, drinking, dining/having tea, and discussing matters of both real and speculative natures...

Assuming that your givens result in them getting to puberty, I think the sex drive and curiosity could easily create a situation where they would discover copulation, and eventually get the girl pregnant.

I would classify that as a broad instinct across most any species, not confined only to humans.

[Whether or not the birth is successful is a different matter.]

---

An important aspect of note in the "Nature v. nurture" discussions is that the rôle of the individual's own determination / drive is typically ignored, in spite of being a really important third element (moldable by both Nature and nurture), a non-trivial oversight.

So Brother and Sister or completely unrelated? The answer may well determine expected outcomes.

They would, I think, at an early age become partners/friends/companions and as time went on, their natural instincts would prevail. I don't think they would necessarily fall in love (the classic love), but I do think they would bond and raise children free from any taboos society puts on us.

Look at what happens in nature around us...

You have two lions bred in captivity and kept in zoos. They are put together and... Lion cubs.

There must be some basic procreative force. We humans with our "intelligence" have so screwed ourselves up over it and love and society etc we've forgotten it.

But in your hypothetical example I feel that yes that they would mate.

Check literature on The Westermarck effect, also known as reverse sexual imprinting. It is a psychological hypothesis that states that people tend not to be attracted to peers with whom they lived like siblings before the age of six. This hypothesis was first proposed by Finnish anthropologist Edvard Westermarck in his book The History of Human Marriage (1891) as one explanation for the incest taboo.

Being “civilized” came from people discovering less need for instinct within developed societies. So I imagine those kids would be very instinctual initially, but if they developed far enough, they would have less need of those instincts.

Making to that age of puberty they would definitely figure things out, both will discover their erogenous zones and discover they are a good fit and will procreate

Pretty much the same thing has happened in the animal world so yes they would without any education couple.

I'm pretty certain they would work out what to do without too much trouble. They might not know how to do it without instruction (nobody does until they're told, do they?), but their arousal and natural fascination with each other's bodily-parts would soon lead them to the answer.

Having said that, I've known plenty of women to complain that various male partners had no idea what they were doing, so maybe it's not quite as obvious as I'm suggesting!

An interesting thought experiment. Providing they survive to puberty they would procreate. We are preprogrammed to do so. We are but vehicles to transport our dna and spread our seed. I'm sure some form of psychological and physical dependence would develop, you could call this love if you wish.

Apparently. Some people responding cannot deal with the hypothetical.
Interesting. They would probably develope some form of communication. I believe there would be some attraction.
Definitely lots of experimenting and exploring

They will probably see animals mate. That's enough to give them a clue.

Stephie, that is a truly fascinating conundrum (for lack of a better word) you posted circa 6 weeks ago. 👏 Quite detailed as well. My quick thought is also that instinct would be predominant. Hopefully, you will publish more like this in the future.

See various societies like the Click Language of the San Bushmen People:

[media=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c246fZ-7z1w]

See on YouTube if this is private:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=c246fZ-7z1w

Or the Zo' é tribe of Brazil

[media=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zYutcG14C7c]

https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/Povo:Zo'%c3%a9

In addition to the Link I gave on blue lagoon.

Sociologist take it from the neanderthal point of view.

Neither of the above never had neanderthal DNA! We do!

And here is some DNA evidence about some of the people in South America. Australia of all places...

https://www.science.org/content/article/ancient-dna-confirms-native-americans-deep-roots-north-and-south-america

They will develop their own language and will be able to communicate with only each other. Men and women have procreated hundreds of centuries before sex education and visual aids, they will probably be OK

I'm guessing they would figure things out and, like most humans, seek each other's company.

Probably, innate behaviour. Have you ever seen the movie "Blue Lagoon", Stephie?

It's an entirely implausible scenario but yeah. Their behavior would be entirely instinctual. Just like every animal. Because humans are animals.

I'm pretty sure that nature would take its course....

Yes they would for sure

Well you definitely need to change it from newborn to toddler his newborn is definitely cannot find food on their own but if there were some goats or something like that some other animal May nurse the newborn

I'm betting well before puberty they are becoming intimate sibling matter not when there is only the two of them, no other thersmon to cantend with

You have a fascinating mind for someone so young

They would explore each other by touching and develop from their
Or if their was animals on the island and get ideas from them

I would hope the would always have love in their hearts and enjoy each other sexually and have children. And somehow show love and affection for their offspring....

I think instinct would dominate there, yeah.
I wonder if they'd be able to speak to each other though, since they didn't acquire a first language as children.

Love, or at least attraction, and procreation will always happen naturally.

You know, it's interesting that you ask this. I thought I read somewhere about a Nazi experiment, the records of which I cannot currently locate. Allegedly, according to my memory of what I thought I read, they took a group of children from their parents at the earliest possible age they could without them dying of loneliness, then raised them in a room with nothing but each other for company. All their needs were met. There were enough beds for all of them, there was always enough food provided, albeit without any human contact other than each other. They did not want for anything, and so you would think they would be content and happy. But according to what I read, they became violent. The experiment ended when one of the children killed another.

As a behavioral specialist I can say that NO, basic instinct would NOT predominate and NO, they could NOT find love for each other and finally, yes, they would intuitively know how to procreate as two human beings but NO, they would NOT feel naturally inclined to procreate with each other. Keep in mind that humans have intuition, not instinct. Only animals have instinct, but animals do not have intuition.

The reason the answers above are "NO" is because of the boy/girl biological connection with each other as biological siblings. The biological connection we have with siblings and bio-parents is Nature's way of diverting us away from acts of incest.

That is why girls hate their biological brothers and why girls suddenly begin to hate their biological father as the girl approaches puberty.

IF on the other hand the brother and sister were adopted within the family or at least one of them was adopted, then all of my "NO" answers above would immediately turn to "YES".

If a girl was adopted into a family and her Dad was not her biological father, she would NOT feel naturally repelled at the sight of her adoptive Dad as she approached the age of puberty and therefore, would not feel naturally repelled from any sexual advances he might make toward her.

This occurs because of the absence of that natural, biological connection between the two of them which otherwise would be Nature's deterrent for incest to occur between father and his otherwise biological daughter.

A biological father to a daughter feels a natural sexual repulsion involving his biological daughter, but would NOT feel a natural sexual repulsion to a non-biological girl who was the same age as his biological daughter.