The origin of "love"

[OniaPL]

Love is playing Borderlands coop with your other half.

And then having sex with them.

You know, it'd be more efficient to have sex while you are playing. For example, have her ride you while you play Baldur's Gate. Surely you are capable of multitasking?

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Isn't that a Lil' Wayne song?

 

[Da Orky Man]

Definition: 'Love' is making a shot to the knees of a target 120 kilometers away using an Aratech sniper rifle with a tri-light scope.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Brain chemicals.
Everything you experience is in the end electrical signals in your brain.
Why does a person alter the way your brain functions like this? Eh, I'd say evolution. It's a good imperative for mating and raising the resulting children.

Then what do you think that triggers the chain where the hormones and other chemicals that create "love" are released? Is it a combination of the information your senses receive (smell, looks, sound etc.), or is it something that slowly develops if interaction with the person makes you happy, or other similar methods?

I also have an unrelated question to you. So if everything that we experience, that we do and that we are is caused by chemicals and electrical signals that are controlled by our autonomic nervous system which we can't control consciously, what does that make us? Are we just empty vessels? Are we just structures that can't break free from their architechture?

And is free will only an illusion, if our actions and our nature are controlled by things that are not under our control?

We smell hormones whenever we breathe. The detection of those hormones starts the process. Interaction with said person simply strengthens their effect on you. So, it's a combination of both.

Technically, yes. Everything we feel or experience is controlled by the brain chemistry. But 'we' are our brains, therefore we control how to act when exposed to that chemistry.

 

[Jonluw]

Brain chemicals.
Everything you experience is in the end electrical signals in your brain.
Why does a person alter the way your brain functions like this? Eh, I'd say evolution. It's a good imperative for mating and raising the resulting children.

Then what do you think that triggers the chain where the hormones and other chemicals that create "love" are released? Is it a combination of the information your senses receive (smell, looks, sound etc.), or is it something that slowly develops if interaction with the person makes you happy, or other similar methods?

Probably a mixture of the two.
At first sight you are attracted to the person, due to looks and perhaps pheromones. This triggers some hormones and shit, and makes you want that person in some capacity.
As time passes, you develop affection for the person.
Affection, here, taking the form of certain neural patterns and hormonal reactions to that person actions perhaps.

I'm just speculating wildly here though. I haven't seen any studies on the subject.

I also have an unrelated question to you. So if everything that we experience, that we do and that we are is caused by chemicals and electrical signals that are controlled by our autonomic nervous system which we can't control consciously, what does that make us? Are we just empty vessels? Are we just structures that can't break free from their architechture?

And is free will only an illusion, if our actions and our nature are controlled by things that are not under our control?

I do know that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the fact that particles act according to probability, not mechanics, can mean that the universe isn't deterministic.

In the end though, I'm fairly convinced that if you set up the world exactly as it was 20 minutes ago, you and I would make the exact same choices.
I don't know if the universe is completely deterministic, but I find it likely that we are to a great degree slaves to our genes and environment.

Could a man have chosen not to kill that other man?
Yes, he could, but that would have required his brain to have some slightly different connections/neural paths when making that decision.
In other words: If he stayed exactly the same in every way, that man would always choose to kill the other man.

We're moving into unexplored territory here though. This is mostly just guesswork and speculation.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

What do you think love is? Is it the work of chemicals in our brains, which are put to action because of some element of the other person that triggers the effect? Or does it come from the so called "soul" or other not-so-scientific source?

If one cannot tell which it is, then does it really matter?

 

[Phasmal]

A physical attraction that people made lied to themselves about being more than that.

Well, it doesn't say romantic love.
People love their families, their pets, its not a misplaced physical attraction (or I should bloody hope not).

OT: Love is all sorts of different things. I'm sure a lot of it is biology, but for romantic love I would say it's accepting who each other is and warm fuzzy feelings and all that. And teaming up to stomp on noobs in various games.

 

[OniaPL]

What do you think love is? Is it the work of chemicals in our brains, which are put to action because of some element of the other person that triggers the effect? Or does it come from the so called "soul" or other not-so-scientific source?

If one cannot tell which it is, then does it really matter?

It matters to me because I find it interesting. It's curiosity, the same reason why you would ask any question.

Also, because I have too much free time and I like to question these things and ponder about them.

 

[Devil'sAdvocate]

Chemicals and social cohesion.

I travelled through the African continent last year. Spoke to many people about many things: religion, welfare, politics, life and love.

Love is a different concept in many cultures. Just because Hollywood has fed us the western definition of love for more than half a century does not mean its the only one. I remember one conversation about love in particular. I stayed with a family in Jinja (husband and wife of thirty years and their four kids) they seemed, and said to, be very happy. They told me the story of how they met and how they had fought hard to be together. So of course I assumed they married for love, as that is what I'm used to.

They laughed so hard when they heard me talk about "love", the type I know and you're asking about, this romantic construct. They thought it was ridiculous to be with someone on, what they called a "physical whim".

There is nothing magical or holly about love as we treat it. Its just another social construct, probably based in this ideal of the judeo-christian "free-will" bullocks we get drummed into our porn-induced skulls.

Have you ever been in a long-term relationship? I guess you have not because then you would know there is no such thing as a soul mate.

 

[Hagi]

I do know that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the fact that particles act according to probability, not mechanics, can mean that the universe isn't deterministic.

I'm not a physicist or anything so I could very easily be wrong here but I've always thought that the uncertainty in quantum mechanics came from measurements.

In order to measure something you have to affect it however minutely and thus the very act of measuring changes the measurement you receive. So the best you can get is probabilities about what the measurement would have been had you not affected it by measuring it.

But, as far as I know, the actual universe itself was still thought of as deterministic.

As I said though, I'm not a physicist and could easily be wrong here. Just looking for clarification.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

What do you think love is? Is it the work of chemicals in our brains, which are put to action because of some element of the other person that triggers the effect? Or does it come from the so called "soul" or other not-so-scientific source?

If one cannot tell which it is, then does it really matter?

It matters to me because I find it interesting. It's curiosity, the same reason why you would ask any question.

Also, because I have too much free time and I like to question these things and ponder

What do you think love is? Is it the work of chemicals in our brains, which are put to action because of some element of the other person that triggers the effect? Or does it come from the so called "soul" or other not-so-scientific source?

If one cannot tell which it is, then does it really matter?

It matters to me because I find it interesting. It's curiosity, the same reason why you would ask any question.

Also, because I have too much free time and I like to question these things and ponder about them.

For the record, I think it's chemicals. But I doubt that will sate your curiosity. The answer to your question is, by nature of the question, unknowable. So then the question (to my mind, at least) becomes: what difference does it make? How would you feel if the answer was A rather than B? Would you love differently?

 

[Jazoni89]

Love is playing Borderlands coop with your other half.

And then having sex with them.

Love is buying her some greasy soggy chips from the ol chippy, and then her having a taste of your cod piece.

Cmon, that's the British way Daystar, you should know that...

 

[Jonluw]

I do know that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the fact that particles act according to probability, not mechanics, can mean that the universe isn't deterministic.

I'm not a physicist or anything so I could very easily be wrong here but I've always thought that the uncertainty in quantum mechanics came from measurements.

In order to measure something you have to affect it however minutely and thus the very act of measuring changes the measurement you receive. So the best you can get is probabilities about what the measurement would have been had you not affected it by measuring it.

But, as far as I know, the actual universe itself was still thought of as deterministic.

As I said though, I'm not a physicist and could easily be wrong here. Just looking for clarification.

I thought so as well until we began to touch on the subject in physics class.
Apparently, it's not some sort of practical issue like that, it takes the form of a fundamental law of the universe.
If you try to break it by measuring the position of one particle and the speed of a different particle which has a speed and position that's related to the first particle, you actually change the properties of the first particle (See Aspect's experiment on quantum entanglement and the polarization of photons).

What it means is that not only do we have to treat particles' movements as a matter of probability when making predictions, the particles actually act as if they were waves. If you don't make any observations of the particles' momentum, the particles' movements will experience interference as if they were waves. The amazing thing here is that the interference patterns correspond to the probability waves that represent the particles.
It's not simply a matter of us having to treat particles as if they have a probable area of distribution. They actually act like the probability waves that we are limited to look at them as.
Look up electron self interference.

Spoiler: Here is a video on the subject. It is slightly corny though.

[http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys3220/phys3220_sp06/mainPage3.html]

That is an image of a ring of iron atoms, taken with a scanning tunnel microscope. Each spike represents an iron atom. That spike in the middle of the ring is not an iron atom that the scientists placed there.
It's the probable distributions of all the other iron atoms piling on top of each other to create a new atom (Although, as you can see, the spike isn't as pronounced as the other atoms).
It's like how when two waves meet, the tops cancel out the bottoms, and tops that meet tops amplify eachother.

But getting into quantum mechanics like this is some serious mindfucking shit.
Try watching some related videos to that one I embedded if you want.

 

[Hagi]

Well... Yeesh... That's quite the mindfuck.

Thanks for that, I enjoy mindfucks.

Won't pretend to fully understand any of that but dang... it's fascinating.

I do wonder though, does that really make the universe indeterministic? Or is it still deterministic but there are causes that we're simply not (yet) aware of.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

Love is a construct to create altruistic behaviour to other humans who don't share a large portion of our DNA.
Romantic love is purely based on trust, if you don't trust your partner to be faithful in any situation, you don't love them! (at least that's what I told the wife when charlize theron asked me to meet her in paris)

 

[Jonluw]

Well... Yeesh... That's quite the mindfuck.

Thanks for that, I enjoy mindfucks.

There's plenty more where it came from. Just look into quantum mechanics and you'll have a neverending supply of "what the fuck is... does the world really act that way?"

Won't pretend to fully understand any of that

That's probably for the best. Nobody does. [sub]No, not even me. Even though I am a super-capable omni-being.[/sub]

I do wonder though, does that really make the universe indeterministic? Or is it still deterministic but there are causes that we're simply not (yet) aware of.

*shrug*
Nobody knows.
My physics book claims it means the universe is indeterministic, but it is hardly an absolute authority.
It means lots of things. For example that everything might be everywhere at once.
However, when we observe the objects, they pop into only one position. It might mean that different outcomes are possible from the exact same starting conditions.

Say you fire an electron through a slit. It hits a spot on a detector plate behind the slit.
Now reverse the entire universe back to the point where you fire the electron, and fire the electron again. The electron might hit a different spot on the plate.
At least that's how I understand it.

Here's some stuff about quantum superposition.
One side effect of all this pondering - to me at least - is that it makes the thought that the entire universe might be a simulation really appealing.

Spoiler

 

[OniaPL]

For the record, I think it's chemicals. But I doubt that will sate your curiosity. The answer to your question is, by nature of the question, unknowable. So then the question (to my mind, at least) becomes: what difference does it make? How would you feel if the answer was A rather than B? Would you love differently?

I don't know if it would affect me, or the way I love others. To be honest, I'm not sure what love even is or if I have felt it. I have a woman in my life that I care for, but I do not know if that is "love", when I compare what I feel to the concept of love other people and the popular culture have pushed on me.

When I think about this, this question is most likely just another part of my quest for "truth", to be slightly dramatic. I wish to know what things are and why they happen. I wish to know what I am, and I wish to understand myself.

 

[GmonXyZ]

Keywords:
Affection: Describes a disposition or rare state of mind(Emotions).
Passion: Describes a disposition or rare state of mind with a sensual element.



So basically it seems like a emerging property thingy.