philosophical headache: what is love?

[Desulishor]

Baby don't hurt me(bobs head back and forth) No, seriously. Let's try answering this question. Shortly put it's the strongest form of affection between two people, but this answer alone does not satisfy me. To be more precise, why is love? What is it based on?

Right now I got 2 answers, one of them comes from my rationalistic side while the other comes from the softy in me. Somehow, both are true for me, and neither of them would be right alone.

theory 1: Love is only a product of evolution. Because of the long childhood of homo sapiens, affection between a male and a female who plan on reproducing is beneficial for survival, thus it was selected for by nature. Pleasures that come from sex and spending time with members of opposite sex are a product of hormones affecting your thinking, for the same reason as above. However, this does not explain for homo/lesbian love plus some would call it a materialistic and even an ugly explanation.

Theory 2: There is a human shaped hole in each person's heart, thus, there is some1 for everyone. Two lovers complete each other, even to a degree that being in love will change a person. A scientist would call all this a psychological need for another person's affection, a romantic would call it being destined to be together. However,
this does not explain paid love and such.

Hence, both explanations are needed. Perhaps both are right. Say, for an example:
Love evolved from simple hormone effects on brain, the same kind we see in mammals that take care of their young in bigger families IE wolves. Later on, as human brain evolved further, it's growth became dependant on these hormones in the same sense the human body has became dependant on every substance that it is exposed to during normal growth. (think of trace elements) Thus, there is a real need for love in our brain. One can see this in so-called wild childs that were grown by animals. One such specimen was found and adopted by a psychologist and the child never learned to talk, let alone basic manners. Thus it can be concluded that human contact and even love is vital for our growth.

What are your thoughts on the subject/opinions on my views?

[Darkseid]

Love is a feeling.

I'm high on believing.

[John Watson]

Love is one of the most important things in the world, and it is what everyone wants sometime in their life.

A strong and deep emotion that someone can pull out of you against your will is what love is to me. No one can ever love by themselves...unless they're super self-centered. xD

As powerful the feeling of love can be, it can also be easily broken and shattered.

[Skylar1]

I am sorry. The temptation was too great.

theory 1: Love is only a product of evolution. Because of the long childhood of homo sapiens, affection between a male and a female who plan on reproducing is beneficial for survival, thus it was selected for by nature. Pleasures that come from sex and spending time with members of opposite sex are a product of hormones affecting your thinking, for the same reason as above. However, this does not explain for homo/lesbian love plus some would call it a materialistic and even an ugly explanation.

You are largely correct except for the last part.

The same neurochemicals exist regardless of sexual orientation. The desire to reproduce is there whether you're attracted to member the same, opposite, or both sexes. Why this is, still remains to be seen; but that is irrelevant, and is a thread for another day.

Also, when one becomes sexually attracted to another person, the brains "critics" (which are the part of the brain which noticed defects and flaws) are suppressed. Thus masking the flaws of the other person giving the illusion that they are far more attractive than you would have thought had you only just meet the person.

Theory 2: There is a human shaped hole in each person's heart, thus, there is some1 for everyone. Two lovers complete each other, even to a degree that being in love will change a person. A scientist would call all this a psychological need for another person's affection, a romantic would call it being destined to be together.

A few things wrong with this theory:

Psychological need isn't necessarily the same as the instinct to reproduce.

Humans are polygamous, so I have a hard time believing the whole "complete me" stuff. Maybe only temporarily? but not for the long run.

However,
this does not explain paid love and such.

Nor does it, or the rest of you theory, do anything to examine and accurately describe what "love" is. This is due to the fact that "love" holds such a vast array of different meanings and emotions that attempting to condense it down to a single definition is impossible* because you need to break it down into it's smaller parts, then from there, describe those. I would be like trying to explain Advance Calculus before you even understood basic Algebra.

*I say this because there is no such way that is feasible to make a single "all-encompassing" statement, not that it is impossible to understand what "love" is.

Hence, both explanations are needed. Perhaps both are right. Say, for an example:
Love evolved from simple hormone effects on brain, the same kind we see in mammals that take care of their young in bigger families IE wolves.

This is correct. It doesn't do off-spring any favors if both parents wander off in opposite directions leaving kin exposed to dangers of predators and such.

Later on, as human brain evolved further, it's growth became dependant on these hormones in the same sense the human body has became dependant on every substance that it is exposed to during normal growth.

Ehhh.. I'm going to need to see a source on this one.

(think of trace elements) Thus, there is a real need for love in our brain.

If love was "optional" our existence wouldn't have latest very long.

One can see this in so-called wild childs that were grown by animals.

Humans are animals.

One such specimen was found and adopted by a psychologist and the child never learned to talk, let alone basic manners. Thus it can be concluded that human contact and even love is vital for our growth.

That's because it's one of those things that is deeply engraved in evolutionary design. There is no way to escape it, doesn't matter who or what raises you, it's with you from birth to death.

[GameGeeks]

Love is a series of chemicals, mostly dopamine, in the brain that that triggers both physical and mental reactions. I wont go into the physical for obvious reasons, but, the mental includes things like desire, lust and need. These factors occur due to a survival instinct in the human body. It introduces the desire to progress the human race. As for those that don't end up matting it falls under the law of survival of the fittest.

[Digital Dragon]

Some would even say that love is a state of being, a state of consciousness your mind enters into. These same people would also believe that heaven is such a place, of perfect love.

[Skylar1]

Love is a series of chemicals, mostly dopamine, in the brain that that triggers both physical and mental reactions. I wont go into the physical for obvious reasons, but, the mental includes things like desire, lust and need. These factors occur due to a survival instinct in the human body. It introduces the desire to progress the human race. As for those that don't end up matting it falls under the law of survival of the fittest.

Ah, but you left out something important. The fact that there is more than one "love"

Love for partner (Making reproduction possible)
Love for Offspring (So you don't just abandon the child and leave it for dead)
Love for Parent (Obviously, it doesn't do much good if the child kills their parents and then is exposed to danger just the same)

There are others too, just didn't feel like posting them ALL, but only to give you a good idea of where I'm going with this.

Some would even say that love is a state of being, a state of consciousness your mind enters into. These same people would also believe that heaven is such a place, of perfect love.

Some people, would say that love is a series of certain brain functions being shut off (suppressed), and allocating those resources to turning on (activating) other parts of the brain.

[Digital Dragon]

Some people, would say that love is a series of certain brain functions being shut off (suppressed), and allocating those resources to turning on (activating) other parts of the brain.

The alteration of brain functions would constitute alteration of consciousness, since that is the way you see the world.
It is also important to differentiate love from a sense of responsibility, though sometimes the two go hand in hand.

[GameGeeks]

Ah, but you left out something important. The fact that there is more than one "love"

Love for partner (Making reproduction possible)
Love for Offspring (So you don't just abandon the child and leave it for dead)
Love for Parent (Obviously, it doesn't do much good if the child kills their parents and then is exposed to danger just the same)

There are others too, just didn't feel like posting them ALL, but only to give you a good idea of where I'm going with this.

No, those would fall under survival of the fittest. Though there are animals that never raise there young and those that raise their young till adult hood. Admittedly those tend to last a few years but it simply takes the human about 18 years to fully grow so in proportion it's the same since most animals tend to mature faster then humans. And love for parent could just be attachment. Pets grow the same bond to owners that they would normally for parents. And I covered love for partner.

[Infinita]

Love is something truly complex in a lot of ways. I find there are different kinds of love such as love for friends, family and of course the significant other. They're all at different levels at how powerful that love can be. I believe that love runs in everyone's blood. It's just the matter of finding it in that one person that fills you completely and it's intuition as to whom it will be. To me, it's a switch and you'll know love when you see, feel and find it.

[Skylar1]

No, those would fall under survival of the fittest. Though there are animals that never raise there young and those that raise their young till adult hood. Admittedly those tend to last a few years but it simply takes the human about 18 years to fully grow so in proportion it's the same since most animals tend to mature faster then humans. And love for parent could just be attachment. Pets grow the same bond to owners that they would normally for parents. And I covered love for partner.

No, it must have an evolutionary advantage, as I stated previously, because if it doesn't it's just taking up resources of a creature without giving any additional benefits. So you're are wrong in the sentiment that it "could just be".

[GameGeeks]

I didn't say it could just be and you're right it is an evolutionary benefit. Just not one limited to just humans but all animals. All animals evolve because of this trait.

[Watery]

Love is only one of many feelings that helped mankind evolve and is curently the most wanted of all. I know because i am.

[Kanjoudakai_Ira]

Love is a mixture of masochism and insanity.
That's all.

[Skylar1]

Love is a mixture of masochism and insanity.
That's all.

“To love is to suffer. To avoid suffering, one must not love. But then, one suffers from not loving. Therefore, to love is to suffer; not to love is to suffer; to suffer is to suffer. To be happy is to love. To be happy, then, is to suffer, but suffering makes one unhappy. Therefore, to be happy, one must love or love to suffer or suffer from too much happiness.”


~Woody Allen