What Is Love?
Mantrid
Lockpick Join Date: 2003-12-07 Member: 24109Members
Lockpick Join Date: 2003-12-07 Member: 24109Members
in Discussions
Fairly simple question, fairly complex answer.
I suppose its different for every individual, but what exactly constitutes love?
Is it just something a person feels for another? Is it love only if both people "love" each other?
Or, do you opt for the the scientific explanation, defining it as the interaction of chemicals and impacted by Darwinian principles?
I suppose its different for every individual, but what exactly constitutes love?
Is it just something a person feels for another? Is it love only if both people "love" each other?
Or, do you opt for the the scientific explanation, defining it as the interaction of chemicals and impacted by Darwinian principles?
Comments
The Greeks had about 4 words for different forms of love; Eros, or Erotic love, love because someone is beautiful, probably the most common sort of love in today's society. There is also Agape, basically unconditional love, love just for the sake of love. A Father might love his children with an unconditional love, no matter what they do, he will still love them.
There are more, but my 1 year of AS philopshy is fading from my mind and those are the only I can remember.
I go with a chemical reaction in your brain that stimulates hormones and causes strong attractions/bonds.
I go with a chemical reaction in your brain that stimulates hormones and causes strong attractions/bonds. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed
And I speak from experience here somewhat, with the case of my girlfriend *smiles*. We can both clearly see that there are forces at work that are far more than just chemicals... ^_^... *grins* .... she's very distracting...heheheh
How much a person values each physical characteristic and conceptual values of another depends on their own values (basically Ayn Rand's view). Some people don't care much for confidence in their partners and care even less for their political views while others place prime importance on those aspects.
Things on the physical scale are easier to get past then those on the mental but are nonetheless important and in some cases are reflective of mental aspects (dedication to excercise results in a better body).
I refer you to the expert:
"Love, friendship, respect, admiration are the emotional response of one man to the virtues of another, the spiritual payment given in exchange for the personal, selfish pleasure which one man derives from the virtues of another man's character."
[Ayn Rand, "The Objectivist Ethics"]
Maybe not, I don't know, I've never been in love. Lust, sure. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I had the same reaction when I saw the title.
I belive their are two basic types of love. Love for your family and love for your partner. The main difference is the lust. I love my family and my dog, but I do not lust for them. I do (well I did at least), however, lust for my ex-girl friend. Like Flint Paper, I have never been in love (or if I did, I did not know). I think many people get love mixed up with lust, resulting in failed marriages.
Maybe not, I don't know, I've never been in love. Lust, sure. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh I'm not denying that it is incredibly strong. In fact love is one of the few things that can last a lifetime, but it is still caused by your body. As it stands two people have to meet, or interact in someway before they can fall in love, but if love was supernatural two people who have never met, spoken, or interacted with each other could fall in love.
As it stands the most extreme stories of love revolve around love at first sight, but a glance is enough to set off the reaction in your brain. Even chatting with someone online can cause this reaction. It is overwhelming, it is powerful, it is lasting, but it is still caused by your body.
If you knew what my situation is right now, that is a good definition of love. Going through so much crap, just to stay with the girl that you love is a load of stress and pain, but you don't give up. <!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Wishful thinking...
I go with a chemical reaction in your brain that stimulates hormones and causes strong attractions/bonds. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've always rather liked those chemicals myself. Particularly endorphins.
Hmmmm endorphins.
I probably think there is slightly more to love than chemicals, there are probably pheromones involved as well as well as other complex things nobody has figured out just yet. They will though.
I can't wait until you can medicate it.
Does this mean that love is just another bunch of worthlesschenicals, like a puddle of mud? If yes, what makes it such a life changing experience. If no, why are you contradicting yourself?
Does this mean that love is just another bunch of worthlesschenicals, like a puddle of mud? If yes, what makes it such a life changing experience? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
What makes cocain such a life changing experience?
Does this mean that love is just another bunch of worthlesschenicals, like a puddle of mud? If yes, what makes it such a life changing experience? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What makes cocain such a life changing experience? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Guys... guess what...
saying love is just chemicals is really, really, oversimplfying and dumbing down the issue...
I mean, when you get down to it, EVERYTHING in your body is chemical related, from the way your eyes work to how you wiggle your toes.
Plz, none of this 'chemical' junk, because that only answers the 'how' aspect of love, not the 'why'.
Really, it's all about the 'why' do we fall in love.
Why is it that you can look at another, and feel like spending a lifetime with them?
Why spend it with them over another individual?
What sort of luck is involved in love?
Does this luck make love more enticing, or more foreboding and to a degree dispisable?
Come on guys, lets go for the bigger questions here
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->what exactly constitutes love?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Doesn't look like a why question to me...
Anyways, I've decided to answer the rest of your questions by extending my cocain analogy:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why is it that you can look at another, and feel like spending a lifetime with them?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why is it you can take one hit, and feel like getting high for the rest of your life? Because when you're high, your not thinking logicaly, you just want the high to last forever because it feels so great.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why spend it with them over another individual?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why cocain over anyother drug? Its just a matter of taste, I may like herowin, you may prefer ecstasy. Genetics probably play a big part in which drug you like the most.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What sort of luck is involved in love?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, I can't think of a cocain analogy for this one. But to answer it without analogy (bummer) I'd have to say that if people you were capable of loving (defined as a function of the things your sexualy attracted to, the things you have in common, familiarity, and other such things) were scarece, you'd statistically never meet them. One of my pet peeves is the socalled 'soulmate' concept. Utterly rediculous is an understatement for what I think of it. But tahts not the issue so moving on... Since youre not likely to ever fall in love if the set of people you are capable of falling in love with is small, you will generally find yourself to be unlucky when it comes to falling in love. And naturally, if the set is large, the opposite is true.
oh yeah, and I was going to add this to my other post, but since I'm here:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Does this mean that love is just another bunch of worthlesschenicals, like a puddle of mud?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your body is a bunch of "worthless checmicals", in fact if I'm not mistaken it has a good deal of the same chemicals you'd find in mud (ableit probably not in similar ratios). So one could argue that since your body (including your brain) isn't anything more than a collection of chemicals, none of your emotions are either.
So you wouldn't mind if I introduced another worthless chemical to stop all your worthless chemicals from doing thier worthless chemical reactions? And your friend's response to your lack of worthless chemical reactions would be equally worthless, and he would be much better off just getting on with his own worthless chemical reactions and not caring about anybody elses, because, lets face it, they are worthless?
So you wouldn't mind if I introduced another worthless chemical to stop all your worthless chemicals from doing thier worthless chemical reactions? And your friend's response to your lack of worthless chemical reactions would be equally worthless, and he would be much better off just getting on with his own worthless chemical reactions and not caring about anybody elses, because, lets face it, they are worthless? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remember, you're the one who used the term "worthless chemicals" I was mearly mirroring you're wording for effect.
Yes I think I would mind, until you actually did it at which point I wouldn't be able to mind anymore... And I'm sure my friends and family would mind too. But those reactions are also purely chemical. Most animals on earth have evolved to have an instinctive desire to continue their existance, this makes sense because if they didn't they'd die before the could reproduce and the species wouldn't exist anymore (though some species have evolved more elaborate means to ensure their continuation). Friendship is most easily explained as an expression of pack mentality, which in more primative times served to ensure a group of individuals' protection by forming the group into a cohesive defense unit. This behavior lingers in modern humans in the form of the concepts of friendship, family, and in its more primitive displays, angry mobs and gangs. So even though my friend is no less a collection of chemicals then I, he will still be upset that the safty of the pack has been comprimised and will likely seek to eliminate the threat (you, in this case).
What's a violin made of ? Bits of wood and sheep intestines. Does it mean it's a worthless noise maker ?... Though physical love is induced by body chemicals , it's not a worthless experience either.
question for theists: If god/s exists and it/they designed consiousness and love as chemical phenomena why would that degrade the "meaning" of it or make it any less special as long as other promisses of the religion are fullfilled? What specifically is preventing this Universe from having been implemented by god/s as an autonomous and physical Universe which does not need maintenance by god/s but with which it/they may interact?
You're damn right about that <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I just remembered...I have Haddaway - What is love on my pc
*plays*
Night at the Roxbury = winnar!
So you wouldn't mind if I introduced another worthless chemical to stop all your worthless chemicals from doing thier worthless chemical reactions? And your friend's response to your lack of worthless chemical reactions would be equally worthless, and he would be much better off just getting on with his own worthless chemical reactions and not caring about anybody elses, because, lets face it, they are worthless? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remember, you're the one who used the term "worthless chemicals" I was mearly mirroring you're wording for effect.
Yes I think I would mind, until you actually did it at which point I wouldn't be able to mind anymore... And I'm sure my friends and family would mind too. But those reactions are also purely chemical. Most animals on earth have evolved to have an instinctive desire to continue their existance, this makes sense because if they didn't they'd die before the could reproduce and the species wouldn't exist anymore (though some species have evolved more elaborate means to ensure their continuation). Friendship is most easily explained as an expression of pack mentality, which in more primative times served to ensure a group of individuals' protection by forming the group into a cohesive defense unit. This behavior lingers in modern humans in the form of the concepts of friendship, family, and in its more primitive displays, angry mobs and gangs. So even though my friend is no less a collection of chemicals then I, he will still be upset that the safty of the pack has been comprimised and will likely seek to eliminate the threat (you, in this case). <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Am I nothing more than a clockwork orange?
If so, you annihilate the basic assumption in every justice system in the world. Free will.
If so, you annihilate the basic assumption in every justice system in the world. Free will. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please stop thinking in such a binary manner... you know , there's something called "attenuating circumstances" in most (civilized) justice systems in the world , since not everyone is able to stoically endure the strongest emotions we inherited from our primitive ancestors.
but in my opinion, i have one thing that always stands.
love is <i>worth it</i>.
There are three: <i>philia</i>, <i>agape</i> and <i>eros</i>.
Eros is indeed erotic love, passionate love, and very definitely sexual love. I think that of all the above three, the English word "love" is closest to eros. This may be because the other two are so rarely defined as so-called real love. Not only that, but eros may seem a lot stronger than other forms of love, so all-encompassing, so powerful that the others are quickly forgotten and put aside. Eros is surely something most humans strive for, and yearn for.
Then we have philia. Brotherly love and friendships belong here. Something siblings and friends feel towards each other. The sexual drive is lessened, and there's simply a feeling of enjoying one other's company. Most of the time philia is not really recognized, or is mistaken for something else. Yet, philia is a lot more common than eros, and is seen in our everyday lives.
And, lastly, agape. According to Christianity this is God's love, unconditional love, perfect and unstained love (and something humans are impossible to achieve in this life). Christianity aside, I think the comment about a father loving his children might be pretty close. The love of parents, I think, belongs here.
I use these three when defining love
It's been a while since I went over these, so I might be a bit off.
Oh, and a bit of googling says that Sanskrit has no less than <i>ninety-six</i> words for love. Then again, Google is not really the most reliable of sources.
As for love being a result of chemical interaction, an interesting documentary I saw a while ago said that attraction is mostly based on certain physical features (big surprise there). Of course, an elaboration is in order. We find men and women attractive, because their physical features indicate that they can produce healthy off-spring. To have even certain kinds of facial features means that the body is capable of reproducing, which means that he or she looks good.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
But you never said you disagreed with me on that point, so I can safely assume that you think the chemical reactions are equally worthless
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes I think I would mind,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
why?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->until you actually did it at which point I wouldn't be able to mind anymore... And I'm sure my friends and family would mind too. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But those reactions are also purely chemical.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And equally worthless
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Friendship is most easily explained as an expression of pack mentality, which in more primative times served to ensure a group of individuals' protection by forming the group into a cohesive defense unit. This behavior lingers in modern humans in the form of the concepts of friendship, family, and in its more primitive displays, angry mobs and gangs. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Friendship is a lot more than just keeping together for survival. I don't know about you, but I don't hang around with my friends because together we have a better chance of fighting off the odd sabre-toothed tiger. They are my friends because I get on with them, I like them. They like the same things I like, I can talk to them about stuff on the same level.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So even though my friend is no less a collection of <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[worthless]
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->chemicals then I, he will still be upset that the safty of the pack has been comprimised and will likely seek to eliminate the threat (you, in this case).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Surely if his saftey has been compromised, he will be more worried than upset? He would not be sad that his 'pack' has lost one set of eyes to watch for the lions, he would be sad because he had lost a friend. why?
(oh, and by the way, nobody has answered my original question,
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Does this mean that love is just another bunch of worthless chemicals, like a puddle of mud? If yes, what makes it such a life changing experience. If no, why are you contradicting yourself?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->)
What makes love so valuable that people are willing to die for people that they love? What makes a few grams of chemicals go against the overwhelming urge to survive? Chemicals are all fine for the how, but what about the why? Why is there such a thing as love in the first place? You don't need it to procreate, sometimes it gets in the way? Why should a man love just one woman, and spend the rest of his life with her, when he could be out, psreading his genes around with a large variety, ensuring a greater chance of survival of the species and his genes?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But you never said you disagreed with me on that point, so I can safely assume that you think the chemical reactions are equally worthless <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And since you never specifically stated otherwise, I can safely assume your anscestors are the noble and harty cow-people of planet X. You can't assume something just because I haven't said otherwise.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes I think I would mind,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
why?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Answered farther down in that post...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->until you actually did it at which point I wouldn't be able to mind anymore... And I'm sure my friends and family would mind too. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, ansewered farther down in that same post...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But those reactions are also purely chemical.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And equally worthless
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you say so.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Friendship is most easily explained as an expression of pack mentality, which in more primative times served to ensure a group of individuals' protection by forming the group into a cohesive defense unit. This behavior lingers in modern humans in the form of the concepts of friendship, family, and in its more primitive displays, angry mobs and gangs. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Friendship is a lot more than just keeping together for survival. I don't know about you, but I don't hang around with my friends because together we have a better chance of fighting off the odd sabre-toothed tiger. They are my friends because I get on with them, I like them. They like the same things I like, I can talk to them about stuff on the same level.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes because thats the modern expression of the principle. Deep down you still have survival urges motivating the whole thing. You can pretend it doesn't work that way all you want, it doesn't make it untrue.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So even though my friend is no less a collection of <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[worthless]
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->chemicals then I, he will still be upset that the safty of the pack has been comprimised and will likely seek to eliminate the threat (you, in this case).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Surely if his saftey has been compromised, he will be more worried than upset? He would not be sad that his 'pack' has lost one set of eyes to watch for the lions, he would be sad because he had lost a friend. why?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What if I were to say, that at its core his sadness was due to the loss of some of his saftey, that deep down it was only because my death would affect his own servival in a primitive world that he even grieves at all? I know that people are unwilling to accept the things I'm saying, because doing so would shatter preconcieved notions about what it is to be human, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
(oh, and by the way, nobody has answered my original question,
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Does this mean that love is just another bunch of worthless chemicals, like a puddle of mud? If yes, what makes it such a life changing experience. If no, why are you contradicting yourself?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->)
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I did answer this. I said yes, love is a chemical thing, and then I pointed out that cocain is similarly life changing, yet no one denies that it is just a chemical.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
What makes love so valuable that people are willing to die for people that they love?
What makes a few grams of chemicals go against the overwhelming urge to survive? Chemicals are all fine for the how, but what about the why? Why is there such a thing as love in the first place? You don't need it to procreate, sometimes it gets in the way?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its fairly simple really, love obviously evolved as an aid in mate choosing. It ensures that one mates with others who are likely to be more geneticaly compatable. If humans chose mates as dogs do, that is they mated with whoever was physically ready to become pregnant, then they could potentially mate with people who were less compatable.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why should a man love just one woman, and spend the rest of his life with her, when he could be out, psreading his genes around with a large variety, ensuring a greater chance of survival of the species and his genes?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
you'll notice that Adultery is quite common amoungst humans, I would wager that "spreading genes around" is the root motivation for such behavior.
Anyways, I can see this thread heading towards religion-ville and rather than stick around and potentially do something I'll regret later, I'm going to bow out now. Have fun.
Who gives about little impracticalities? Lets discuss the meat of the subject.