Originally posted by DragonFriendI define most things in terms of fear and desire, the latter usually related to the former in some way.
Scientifically speaking, does love exist?
I don't think anybody would disagree that love can be a powerful motivation, but does science say it exists? Since Christianity is built upon love, this seems a relevant question.
DF
Originally posted by DragonFriend'Love' as we all know is a very catch all term for a range of similarly related feelings. For example, a parent loves their children (hopefully) in a different way from their partner, some people love chocolate, whilst others love doing sport or drinking beer (although, admittedly, our chocolate eating friends really mean they really, really like it).
Scientifically speaking, does love exist?
I don't think anybody would disagree that love can be a powerful motivation, but does science say it exists? Since Christianity is built upon love, this seems a relevant question.
DF
Love does undoubtedly have a biochemical basis in the brain, and numerous studies have shown differences in brain chemistry between people 'in love' and non in-love people.
Evolutionarily, love is an adaptive response to maximise reproductive success. Initially, love is the desire to breed and (unconsciously) retain what is percieved by the brain to be a 'good resource' (i.e. partner). Happily, a good 'proof' of the evolutionary pudding is that guys and girls love in different ways. You see, a girl invests a whole lot in love, whilst guys invest substantially less in their offspring. A guy is required as a sperm source, and that's about it. A girl provides a large egg, then incubates it for 9 months, leaving herself vulnerable to predators etc during that time. Then, when the kid is born she has to nurse it for several years, until it is independant. Because of this large investment girls tend to choose more faithful mates, who will help to share that burden. It is in a males evolutionary best interests to mate with as many females as possible, thereby fathering as many offspring, and passing on his genes, as much as possible. Love, as we know it, is a mechanism which has been selected for which serves to maximise the reproductive fitness of the individuals in species that pair up for mating. It's been suggested that the human cycle for 'love' last 7 years, which is about the time required to reproduce and raise a child to an age where it is relatively independant (doesn't require breast feeding, and can run about by itself). Relationships in childless couples probably last less time than this because it is percieved (unconsciously) by the brain that this is 'failed' mating.
Originally posted by DragonFriendJelousy proves that love exist.
Scientifically speaking, does love exist?
I don't think anybody would disagree that love can be a powerful motivation, but does science say it exists? Since Christianity is built upon love, this seems a relevant question.
DF
Originally posted by DragonFriendSince Christianity is built upon love
Scientifically speaking, does love exist?
I don't think anybody would disagree that love can be a powerful motivation, but does science say it exists? Since Christianity is built upon love, this seems a relevant question.
DF
Actually, Christianity is 'built upon' a whole bunch of seemingly arbitrary supernatural claims. How would a scientific characterization of 'love' influence our assessment of the truth value of those claims, or influence whether or not belief in those claims is justified? Maybe if you can demonstrate that 1. The truth of Christianity is a necessary condition for love to exist in such and such a form; and 2. Love does exist in aforementioned such and such a form; then I could definitely see how this love talk would be relevant to Christianity. Otherwise, this love talk could be mildly interesting, but I don't see what it has to do with God talk.
Originally posted by XanthosNZActually I take that back, love and jelousy is more of a yardstick in which we measure: Insecurity, passion, possessivness, joy, despair etc. etc.
Next question: does jealousy exist?
EDIT: If you say that love proves that jealousy exists I will slaughter everyone you believe you love.
Originally posted by DragonFriendLove is not a physical entity but an emotion and so it depends on your understanding of the word exists. A very good book on the subject of Love is The Four Loves by C.S. Lewis. Although he was a Christian and I dont neccessarily agree with everything he says, but it does give a greater understanding of love. It also shows that romantic love is not the only type of love nor neccessarily the strongest. People can love inanimate objects with an intensity rivaling thier romantic love.
Scientifically speaking, does love exist?
I don't think anybody would disagree that love can be a powerful motivation, but does science say it exists? Since Christianity is built upon love, this seems a relevant question.
DF
What is interesting is that as you say, Christianity is built upon the concept of love but the study of love or the understanding of what love is and why people love is not commonly part of any Christian teaching. It is assumed that everyone knows what it is, and the logic of why we love is more or less ignored.
love is nothing more than a fairytale. most of the time when people speak of "love" they're actually talking about lust.
u wanna know what true love is? caring about a person by devoting their time to that person without expectation of sexual gratification.
"i love that girl" BS. all u wanna do is **** her and move on. where were u when she was sick? not around, huh.
and what about when she had a death in the family? did u make it to the funeral? no?
and that time she almost had a mental break down because of all that **** she had to finish before the holidays rolled around? u weren't there were u?
No, u were'nt because that was ME. not u. ME. but yet u have the AUDACITY to **** her in MY house when i wasn't around. **** U. U PIECE OF DOG****. IF I BELIEVED IN HELL, I'D HOPE U ROT IN IT. U CALL YOURSELF A "FRIEND". YOUR NOTHING MORE THAN A BACK STABBER!! BENEDICT ARNOLD OF EXPONENTIAL PROPORTIONS!@!!
so u see, love is nothing more than an illusion. acts speak much louder than words. if u truly "love" a person, u dont have to say anything. it will be known.
As a physicalist I'd have to say I don't see the problem here. Love is a generic term we tend to give to a whole load of chemical interactions which make us feel a number of different ways in regards to our interactions with other people. The fact that these interactions are so complex and interwoven with our everyday behaviour makes them very hard to study and unravel. As such people tend to prefer to think of them as somewhat unfathomable and occasionally mystical emotions which make us do crazy things.
Basically, for me, they're either there to encourage me to care for someone, or to procreate.
Originally posted by lioyankLove is a very big word covering a lot of meanings. Lust is just a more specific term for one aspect of some of the meanings of love. Almost all forms of love are selfish in nature, though they often have a selfless component as well.
love is nothing more than a fairytale. most of the time when people speak of "love" they're actually talking about lust.