Love

[marharth]

How is love also not circumstantial? A emotional connection to a person can happen through hate as well, its just a negative connection. Just because it is positive connection doesn't change anything. What if I really hate someone? Can I say hate comes from deep inside us and can't be explained? Can I say that if I negatively bond with someone it will be different then other emotions? Emotions as a whole have a lot to do with bonding with other people, including both negative and positive emotions.

 

Assuming that I have never been in love since I look at emotions from a logical standpoint is simply incorrect, and seems as more of a insult.

 

Once again, I see no proof that love comes from deep inside a person. It is just a emotion like every other emotion known.

 

My comment would be no more or less an insult than a good number of comments I've seen from you. *shrugs*

 

Here is my final comment to you: Love does not require proof.

 

True love exists without the demands of logic, the burden of proof, and cannot be determined by any formula from any number of scientists. Love simply is. It is intangible and defies comprehension.

 

Marharth, please do not reply to this post and claim lack of understanding, demand proof, or anything like that from me. I'm not intersted in explaining my position to you any further. You either cannot, or will not, understand what I'm saying.

If your claiming it can't be explained, and logic and proof are not necessary, I have no reason to believe it is anything more then a emotion.

[Lisnpuppy]

Marhart...your cynicism blows my mind.

 

Not everything in the world is black or white..there are LOTS of shades of grey out there.

 

I know you want all these debate topics to be completely logical and 100% fact based. That isn't how its done here. People are just as likely to give opinions as to openly debate. Remember that, hun!!

 

Now as to love. Of course I believe in it, that its real, that it helps shape us. I also know there are many different kinds of love...at many points in one's life and its all relative.

 

Love can do many amazing things...but unfortunately is sometimes is also not enough to make everything work out ok.

[Keanumoreira]

Love is not a biological emotion. Why? Take this into consideration: according to the scientifical "love", love only exists because of two main chemicals in the brain. Serotonin and Norephinephrine. When aroused, these two chemical reactions trigger what we know as a state of love.

 

Now...for the real definition.

 

Love is not a formula, love is not a chemical reaction, and love is by no means within the realm of logic. Can you physically hear, smell, see, taste, or touch love? No, you cannot, and therefore, you can't prove that it is real but we all know that it exists because at some point in our lives, we have or will feel it. Love as a universal emotion is just that...it's universal. If it were trully explainable by adding 2+2, then where is the huge number explaining why it is that love is so strong that it propells us in directions on a scale more grand than even that of hate itself? If this really was a biological emotion, then why does it have us chasing our tails and leaping waterfalls to find a definite truth? That isn't natural, because in nature's eye, we only live to breathe, reproduce, and die, and the wheel continues to spin. What does it have to do with humanities continued existance to find whatever it is this love is when we can just meet up at point A, do this thing, and walk away to point B, or in the universal case, why even care at all? You're still here right?

 

The point is, there is so much more to it than you are letting on Marharth. These are things that you and I can never explain, that Albert Einstein or Steven Hawking, both minds combined, couldn't even put on a chalkboard or piece of paper. It is simply...just....there. It exists because we let it and because there is something else there that is driving us to explore. If you ask me, that sure as hell isn't natural. :)

Edited July 30, 2011 by Keanumoreira

[Sync182]

If your claiming it can't be explained, and logic and proof are not necessary, I have no reason to believe it is anything more then a emotion.

 

I know I said I wouldn't respond, but I had to, if for no other reason than to add a point I missed earlier:

 

Emotions are not logical. Deal with it.

 

This is a DEBATE forum - not a SCIENCE forum. I now fully expect that a photo of marharth will reveal him/her to have pointed ears, green-ish skin, and a blood chemistry based on copper, not iron.

Edited July 30, 2011 by Sync182

[ginnyfizz]

Hmmm...there is a very long quote I could post or link to that has never been bettered in the way it describes love, but due to where it comes from, I am not certain that it is allowed.

[grannywils]

This is one quote from the source to which I think you are probably referring Ginny. I don't think it is the quote you are referring to, but this one leaves out any references to names that might get us in trouble:

 

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away".

 

The other is more powerful, but not allowed I guess....

[kvnchrist]

If love and hate are both just chemical reactions, why do they do the exact opposite, to the person feeling them. You look at a person full of hate and you see a person quite often alone, because of the level of anger, within them. . A person full of love is pretty much the adhesive in many long and lasting friendships. They bring people together.

 

Love isn't triggered by the mixing of chemicals. It's triggered by the attitude and Ideals for the person in question.

[grannywils]

I have another quote for you Marharth. This is a passage from Kahlil Gibran's The Prophet. He wrote a whole section called On Love. But in your disbelieving state, you will probably just need to hear this section:

 

"But if in your fear you would seek only love's peace and love's pleasure,

Then it is better for you that you cover your nakedness and pass out of love's threshing-floor,

Into the seasonless world where you shall laugh, but not all of your laughter, and weep, but not all of your tears.

Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself.

Love possesses not nor would it be possessed;

For love is sufficient unto love".

If you want to hear all that he had to say on the subject, or any other for that matter, read the book. It is quite popular with your age group. I know I read it at about your age.

[kvnchrist]

This is one quote from the source to which I think you are probably referring Ginny. I don't think it is the quote you are referring to, but this one leaves out any references to names that might get us in trouble:

 

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away".

 

The other is more powerful, but not allowed I guess....

Love is a thing of giving and of sacrifice. It takes nothing but the time spent and the effort expressed.

[marharth]

Love is not a biological emotion. Why? Take this into consideration: according to the scientifical "love", love only exists because of two main chemicals in the brain. Serotonin and Norephinephrine. When aroused, these two chemical reactions trigger what we know as a state of love.

 

Now...for the real definition.

 

Love is not a formula, love is not a chemical reaction, and love is by no means within the realm of logic. Can you physically hear, smell, see, taste, or touch love? No, you cannot, and therefore, you can't prove that it is real but we all know that it exists because at some point in our lives, we have or will feel it. Love as a universal emotion is just that...it's universal. If it were trully explainable by adding 2+2, then where is the huge number explaining why it is that love is so strong that it propells us in directions on a scale more grand than even that of hate itself? If this really was a biological emotion, then why does it have us chasing our tails and leaping waterfalls to find a definite truth? That isn't natural, because in nature's eye, we only live to breathe, reproduce, and die, and the wheel continues to spin. What does it have to do with humanities continued existance to find whatever it is this love is when we can just meet up at point A, do this thing, and walk away to point B, or in the universal case, why even care at all? You're still here right?

 

The point is, there is so much more to it than you are letting on Marharth. These are things that you and I can never explain, that Albert Einstein or Steven Hawking, both minds combined, couldn't even put on a chalkboard or piece of paper. It is simply...just....there. It exists because we let it and because there is something else there that is driving us to explore. If you ask me, that sure as hell isn't natural. :)

Love has to do with a more chemicals then two. A number of chemicals that have to do with love...

Serotonin

Oxytocin

Vasopressin

Pheromone (if you consider that a single chemical)

Dopamine

Norepinephrine

 

I can't physically hear, smell, or touch hate either. We know both exist since we feel the effects of them.

 

Just because something propels you to do something does not mean it can not be explained.

 

If it can not be explained by science then it would be considered paranormal, and I still don't see any convincing arguments. If you want to consider it a topic of philosophy, why? Maybe you are all right, but I really don't see where your coming from. If someone could try to fully explain why its a topic of philosophy, and not a topic of science like every other emotion, I would be more willing to change my position.