22 Mar 06
Originally posted by DragonFriendLove (to me) is a collection of memories associated with emotions; good and bad. In that sense of the word, biology and psychology treats different aspects of 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 interests me is not the fact that you'd ask this question, but that you seem to think love is something that can only come from your God. Accept his existence, and you will experience love. The only love I can think of that could be had from accepting a god (totally and unquestionably), is the manic kind of love. (I sure hope I used the right word there. Let me explain.)
Some people so desperately need the subject of their love to be flawless (in their own eyes) that they either deny any doubts cast upon it/him/her, or try to explain it away. Usually both. This is what I call manic love. This is when everything has to be kept at status quo, and there has to exist an absolute, unchangable truth (like a constant in the universe) or the person having such love is utterly destroyed (as a person); or at least thinks (s)he will be. It's the kind of love some people have for their spouse, or a parent may have for a child (s)he wants to mold into something it's not. It's the kind of love I suspect you have for your God.
If anything bad happens in the world, it's not God we must blame. He is pure and untouchable. He is nothing if not all together good. We must blame Satan or mankind itself (or maybe not blame at all since we should not judge). We are the flawed beings. God is perfect. If we accept our God without question, we will feel complete and be forgiven for anything we've ever done that we felt ashamed of. Christ will help us love ourselves and give meaning to our existence.
That's the idea, and it works perfectly as long as we can maintain our belief. It works so well, in fact, that we can commit just about any act and still be able to love ourselves in the end. I've said this many times in one form or the other since I began posting in this forum, but I still haven't seen a response that could convince me otherwise.
The point is that you can attribute perfectly natural phenomenons (such as love and compassion) to your God if you like, but you can't claim that those things prove the existence of God any more than I can say they prove the existence of space flies. Most people have feelings, and a brain to invoke those feelings. That doesn't prove anything as for the existence or goodness of a God.
If christianity is built on the notion of love, it's built on something that most people experience in one way or the other. Christianity, then, is not needed.
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by scottishinnzWhat you've described covers one aspect of love. What, in the Greek, is called eros, or lustful love. Greek also has another word for love, agape, or brotherly love. It's the love one has for a sibling or a long time family friend. Agape type bonds can be just as strong as the eros type bonds. What does science have to say about a love like that?
'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). ...[text shortened]... ecause it is percieved (unconsciously) by the brain that this is 'failed' mating.
DF
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by DragonFriendAccording to vistesd, one of our resident sages, the Greek Orthodox Church says that eros is contained within agape. And they'd know, wouldn't they? Being Greek and all.
What you've described covers one aspect of love. What, in the Greek, is called eros, or lustful love. Greek also has another word for love, agape, or brotherly love. It's the love one has for a sibling or a long time family friend. Agape type bonds can be just as strong as the eros type bonds. What does science have to say about a love like that?
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by LemonJelloI'm afraid you don't know much about the basis of Christianity, my friend.
[b]Since Christianity is built upon love
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 ...[text shortened]... his love talk could be mildly interesting, but I don't see what it has to do with God talk.[/b]
When asked, what did Jesus say was the greatest commandment?
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ... And the second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. "
My point in bringing this topic up is that science can't measure love itself. We can measure reactions in people due to love, but we can't measure love itself. And yet, I don't think there's a single one of us, skeptics included, that would say that love doesn't exist. How is that?
DF
22 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by DragonFriendDefine love. If you define it as something intangible then of course it cannot be measured. But whatever definition you make, you will only be guessing what it really means and what is entailed in it.
My point in bringing this topic up is that science can't measure love itself. We can measure reactions in people due to love, but we can't measure love itself. And yet, I don't think there's a single one of us, skeptics included, that would say that love doesn't exist. How is that?
DF
People agree it exists, but cannot agree on what exactly it is. So what? I can name several things which are like this; gravity, consciousness, George Bush. That doesn't say anything about the nature of love.
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by stockenI've never said love can only come from God. Atheists can love just as strongly as theists, I have no doubt about that. Love is a human emotion and is not predicated on one's relationship with God at all.
Love (to me) is a collection of memories associated with emotions; good and bad. In that sense of the word, biology and psychology treats different aspects of love.
What interests me is not the fact that you'd ask this question, but that you seem to think love is something that can only come from your God. Accept his existence, and you will experience lov ...[text shortened]... t most people experience in one way or the other. Christianity, then, is not needed.
A Christian's self-worth doesn't come from their own view of themselves, but from their best estimate of how God views them. So if I go off and kill people in the name of god, how will that make God view me (breaking one of His commandments, and all). When people don't take that question into account before commiting their action, they aren't truely Christian (although they may call themselves one).
Peronally, I don't care what the world thinks of me. The only opinion that matters is God's, and so I try to learn as much about Him as I can so I can accurately estimate His opinion of my life. My life is about doing God's will and not my own. It's a hard thing to do, but each time I get a step closer my life becomes all the more enjoyable.
Outside of Christianity, where is one suppose to learn about love? From the world? Love has driven people to do some incredible things, and some horrible things. Which is a proper expression of love? How is one to decide? Whose voice is authoritative on the subject?
DF
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by dj2beckerWhy is that relevant? Science is all about things that can be measured and quantified. Even if someone COULD completely describe love in terms of chemical reactions (a hopelessly complex task that would require measurement of all the things in my past that might have affected my preferences for certain kinds of people), the exercise would be entirely missing the point of the emotional experience.
Can you prove this using the scientific method?
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by DragonFriendIf a scientist said 'hey ...look..I've proved love exists ! Have a look at my experiment!' My guess would be it's not likely to be a love I'd be that interested in.
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
22 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by DragonFriendLove is an abstract concept and therefore it is perhaps more suitable for philosophers/pshychologists than for scientists.
I'm afraid you don't know much about the basis of Christianity, my friend.
When asked, what did Jesus say was the greatest commandment?
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ... And the second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. "
My point in bringing this topic up i ne of us, skeptics included, that would say that love doesn't exist. How is that?
DF
Sure, scientists can attempt to describe the process biologically (c.f. scottishinnz's post), but they would be depending on their samples to accertain accurately if they are or not in love. And when some describe love as lust, others can describe it as something completely different.
22 Mar 06
i fell in love with a lady, and i did everything i could for her. a few times i faced losing my life, but i just fought harder. some friends of mine died and i got lost. i'ld love to be there for her, but i've started looking elsewhere, cause everyone seems to think what i know is so good to be wrong. hey you f'ers i know what love is... it is what you cannot have.