Slashdot Mirror
Love Under a Microscope
smooth wombat writes "As today is one of the top five marketing-induced spending days, the obvious question is, what is love? Anthropologist Helen Fisher studied the brain's circuitry and found that the brain sees romantic love as a reward similar to chocolate, money or drugs. Does this mean that the mystery of love is less magical now that science has studied it under the microscope? According to Dr Fisher: 'You can know every ingredient in a piece of chocolate cake, and you still sit down and eat that chocolate cake and it's wonderful,' she said. 'In the same way, you can know all the ingredients of romantic love and still feel that passion.'"
From TFA:Since the odds of survival for a human child with two parents is (or at least was) much higher than the odds of a single-parent child, it shouldn't be surprising that humans have a strong drive to forge lasting relationships. Natural selection in action, and all that.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
What if the secret ingredient in that cake is "love"? How do they explain that?
When asked to confirm the above findings by Dr. Haddaway, a pair of scientists dressed in bright purple and blue labcoats nodded furiously, in rhythm.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Never trust a skinny chef. If a chef won't eat their own concoctions(sp?), you probably shouldn't either. If knowing the scientific details of love makes it less rewarding, it's probably not that great to begin with.
Frist Psot?
I pity the foo that isn't metasyntactic
Roses are red
Violets are blue
All of my base
Are belong to you
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
Love is like a box of chocolates. You sneak one or two before you decide to buy. Then eventually you do buy, take it home and eat them all in one sitting. Finally, your left with your body feeling sick, your wallet feeling light, and holding an empty box.
Demented But Determined.
It's like I knew I will get fired one day for reading Slashdot during office hours, I still read it.
It's like I knew the next story will only be out in 20 minutes, I still hit F5 every second.
It's like I knew a story is a dupe, I still "read more" and reply to it.
If this is not true love, what is?
Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
This touches on the issue of mind / brain duality.
Is our mind something that's simply a meta-effect of the brain, so that for instance if you view/control my brain you can fully know / control my mind?
Also note that the answer to this has serious implications for free will, the justice of retributive punishment, etc.
Nothing better than making love with your mate/spouse than after smoking a good joint.. the sense of touch is enhanced, the the beat of the music just flows...., the orgasm is better... so ya I'll pick the drugs option. Start it out by going to an open-air concert if the weather is accomodating in your area, make sure it's a quality strain of bud and pre-roll them before you go out.
We are a very loving nation apparently...
Loading...
I read such a topic 3 weeks ago in National Geographic. The article was pretty well written. Chemical imbalances, irregular brain patterns and oxcotin (i think that was the chemical).
Check out this video. Pretty cool.
http://www.devilducky.com/media/41727/
Since I lack the philosophical education to completely explain what "Love" is (other than a simple chemical addiction from the brain ;) ) I will not attempt to answer that here.
:)
What I will leave you with is a artist's parody of this same query.
Go ponder that for a while.
http://whatishl.ytmnd.com/
they have all the answers. Condition a system so that any unknown variables are in a state of gimbal lock and they begin to think that the variables they observe changing are the only variables. Impose your own notions as to cause and effect, and behold! you have an experiment with repeatable outcomes with little insight as to the nature of reality.
It says in 65nm letters (soon 45nm at Intel) And some time after I posted this original poem on
I don't know what to think.
A later version dedicated to Rob and Kathleen (in 2002) can be found here
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
It's not a toy, it makes real cup cakes with a 40 watt bulb and there's icing packets, but the secret ingredient is love, Damnit!
another scientist assumes a reductionist view of the mind despite the fact that no advances in AI have been predicated on such. How is that news?
Rank my idea: http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/node/531
That chocolate cake analogy is good. Just like a cake you can mix all the right ingredients and still make a big mess of it instead of something good.
"Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
I think that goes for OS's too
So... how long before Lady Godiva and I can legally marry?
And the only one that applies to this research is romantic love. Not that the article doesn't explicitly say that, it certainly does. But I think it's worth bringing up though. Some people use the word love as if it's singly defined, but many cultures define love differently.
AccountKiller
I thought it was those two stupid naked kids holding hands and crap...
What is love?
What is this longing in our hearts for togetherness?
Is it not the sweetest flower?
Does not this flower of love have the fragrant aroma of fine, fine diamonds?
Does not the wind love the dirt?
Is not love not unlike the unlikely not it is unlikened to?
Are you with someone tonight? Do not question your love.
Take your lover by the hand.
Release the power within yourself.
Your heard me, release the power.
Tame the wild cosmos with a whisper.
Conquer heaven with one intimate caress.
That's right don't be shy.
Whip out everything you got and do it in the butt.
By Leon Phelps
I gotta say, I've never understood this... when people eat chocolate they actually FEEL something? They get the warm and fuzzies? I sure don't... it tastes nice and all, but that's it. Maybe in a similar way to how I'm immune to caffeine (Drink 3 Jolts and go right to sleep) I don't FEEL the chemical for love? People have said I'm cold and heartless a few times, I guess chemical sensitivity affects our personalities more than we think. Perhaps some don't feel love or other positive affections and simply have no desire to be a nice person. A new way to stay out jail perhaps? Instead of "He had a bad childhood" we'll hear "He simply doesn't have the chemical receptors for love."
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
The Greeks had four words for love: agape, phileo, eros, and storge. We English speakers seem to conflate everything around eros and thereby miss the point. Love is the act of the will whereby another individual is placed ahead of yourself. That's why Christians are commanded to "love their enemies" and why the Apostle Paul wrote that the greatest act of love was when God gave His Son as the sacrifice for the sins of the world.
No naturalistic scientist could ever write:
Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant
or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;
it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth.
It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never ends.
I love eating them like cake!
Monstar L
1. the traditional romantic-type love, a crush. a person can't stop thinking about another person, many times a minute even, to the point of mental distress. this is very definitely like addiction
2. long-term love. this is when you operate on a day-to-day basis with the other person as if you were a unit, and you can finish each other's sentences and such. you don't think of the other person constantly, you just coexist with them fluidly (albeit with a certain level of conflict). if the person were to leave or die, you would experience great stress, as if you had lost a limb
i think evolution set this up pretty well. romantic love is the almost gravitational chemically-driven attachment you have with someone else that allows for the binding of two organisms together socially. then, as the chemicals subside, you are left with permanent neurogical patterns and structures in both organisms such that you function as a social unit
good design, i think, albeit with unavoidable failures such as:
1. chemically bonding with someone who does not like you (stalking, obsession), your classic unrequited love
2. ongoing long-term conflict that does not resolve, where you are bound to someone you have serious differences of opinion with. classic marriage counseling fodder and irreconiable differences divorce papers issues
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
good date film which also answers your question.
"Fisher studied the brain's circuitry and found that the brain sees romantic love as a reward similar to chocolate, money or drugs."
Explains why when we pursue romantic love our bait often consists of one of chocolate, money or drugs.
Good, I don't have to change my viewpoint at all.
This message will self-destruct in 5, 4, 3...
Love under the microscope... Love on top of the microscope... Love next to the microscope... Love nowhere near the microscope...
That is a shitty thought, and I want to know what its like to be in love. Can any Slashdotters give me some suggestions?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
At least we can go out and buy tons of chocolate cake and eat it now =)
This is why Ray Nagin wants a chocolate New Orleans! He really meant a "New Orleans of Love!"
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
'You can know every ingredient in a piece of chocolate cake, and you still sit down and eat that chocolate cake and it's wonderful,' she said. 'In the same way, you can know all the ingredients of romantic love and still feel that passion.'
'Maybe, but once I found out what was in menudo I could never eat it again,' I said. 'In that same way, I'm not sure I'll ever be able to feel anything ever again. Thanks a lot wh...'
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Asking this question on Slashdot is like asking a group of chimpanzees whether they prefer Spanish Red or White Zin.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
Well, if you're a cylon, anyway...
Bigtime Consulting - "We're the best because we cost the most"
What's the definition of "vagina"??
The box a penis comes in.
And...
I've eaten some pretty fucking good chocolate cake in my day. Ain't never wanted to die for the shit.
There are people who'd say things like that about their preferred batch of ingredients. We call them junkies, the chemical they use is called by many names -- not the least of which is junk. When a junkie is deprived of junk, they go through withdrawal. They experience physical pain, depression, and often behave irrationally or self-destructively in order to get their fix.
I (like most of you) have used oxytocin. Like heroin users, when deprived of their fix (or even when threatened with their supply of the drug being cut off), oxytocin users feel depressed, lethargic, some feel physical pain - right in the chest/gut area, and are also prone to self-destructive and irrational acts.
From TFA:
You can know every ingredient in heroin, and you can still sit down and - oh, wait. Once you know what heroin does to human neurochemistry, you can choose not to take the shit, and if you're a junkie, you still have the choice to stop.
Just because my former drug of choice happened to be secreted by my own endocrine system didn't make me any less a junkie.
Mercifully, the 2-3 year pair-bonding mechanism built into your brainstem puts a limit on the withdrawal: if you stay clean, that's about as long as you're physiologically capable of feeling oxytocin withdrawal symptoms. Once you're through that phase, the cravings disappear, and they stay disappeared unless you do something stupid.
The Honeymoon that Never Ends
by Osho
LOVE IS NOT A RELATIONSHIP. Love relates, but it is not a relationship. A relationship is something finished. A relationship is a noun; the full stop has come, the honeymoon is over. Now there is no joy, no enthusiasm, now all is finished. You can carry it on, just to keep your promises. You can carry it on because it is comfortable, convenient, cozy. You can carry it on because there is nothing else to do. You can carry it on because if you disrupt it, it is going to create much trouble for you... Relationship means something complete, finished, closed.
Love is never a relationship; love is relating. It is always a river, flowing, unending. Love knows no full stop; the honeymoon begins but never ends. It is not like a novel that starts at a certain point and ends at a certain point. It is an ongoing phenomenon. Lovers end, love continues- it is a continuum. It is a verb, not a noun.
And why do we reduce the beauty of relating to relationship? Why are we in such a hurry? Because to relate is insecure, and relationship is a security. Relationship has a certainty; relating is just a meeting of two strangers, maybe just an overnight stay and in the morning we say goodbye. Who knows what is going to happen tomorrow? And we are so afraid that we want to make it certain, we want to make it predictable. We would like tomorrow to be according to our ideas; we don't allow it freedom to have its own say. So we immediately reduce every verb to a noun.
You are in love with a woman or a man and immediately you start thinking of getting married. Make it a legal contract. Why? How does the law come into love? The law comes into love because love is not there. It is only a fantasy, and you know the fantasy will disappear. Before it disappears settle down, before it disappears do something so it becomes impossible to separate.
In a better world, with more meditative people, with a little more enlightenment spread over the earth, people will love, love immensely, but their love will remain a relating not a relationship. And I am not saying that their love will be only momentary. There is every possibility their love may go deeper than your love, may have a higher quality of intimacy, may have something more of poetry and more of godliness in it. And there is every possibility their love may last longer than your so-called relationship ever lasts. But it will not be guaranteed by the law, by the court, by the policeman. The guarantee will be inner. It will be a commitment from the heart, it will be a silent communion.
If you enjoy being with somebody, you would like to enjoy it more and more. If you enjoy the intimacy, you would like to explore the intimacy more and more. And there are a few flowers of love which bloom only after long intimacies. There are seasonal flowers too; within six weeks they are there, in the sun, but within six weeks again they are gone forever. There are flowers that take years to come, and there are flowers that take many years to come. The longer it takes, the deeper it goes. But it has to be a commitment from one heart to another heart. It has not even to be verbalized, because to verbalize it is to profane it. It has to be a silent commitment; eye to eye, heart to heart, being to being. It has to be understood, not said.
Forget relationships and learn how to relate.
Once you are in a relationship you start taking each other for granted- that's what destroys all love affairs. The woman thinks she knows the man, the man thinks he knows the woman. Nobody knows either! It is impossible to know the other, the other remains a mystery. And to take the other for granted is insulting, disrespectful.
To think that you know your wife is very, very ungrateful. How can you know the woman? How can you know the man? They are processes, they are not things. The woman that you knew yesterday is not there today. So much water has gone down the Ganges; she is somebody else, totally different. Relate again, start again, don't
So if I make chocolate I'm making love? Could it be perhaps the thought that "I love chocolate" tricks these scientists into believing that love is the same as chocolate? What if they asked the subjects to write down what their favorite food is and then see the patient's reaction when they talk about it. I bet it'd be considered love too. I love fish's cause they're so delicious! Love can be fear too... "I think I love you, so what am I so afraid of?"I think the Partridge Family sings that
Choice is an illusion, created between those with power, and those without. Look there, at that woman. My God, just look at her. Affecting everyone around her, so obvious, so bourgeois, so boring. But wait...
Watch - you see, I have sent her dessert, a very special dessert. I wrote it myself. It starts so simply, each line of the program creating a new effect, just like poetry. First, a rush... heat... her heart flutters. You can see it, Neo, yes? She does not understand why - is it the wine? No. What is it then, what is the reason? And soon it does not matter, soon the why and the reason are gone, and all that matters is the feeling itself. This is the nature of the universe. We struggle against it, we fight to deny it, but it is of course pretense, it is a lie. Beneath our poised appearance, the truth is we are completely out of control. Causality. There is no escape from it, we are forever slaves to it. Our only hope, our only peace is to understand it, to understand the `why.' `Why' is what separates us from them, you from me. `Why' is the only real social power, without it you are powerless. And this is how you come to me, without `why,' without power. Another link in the chain. But fear not, since I have seen how good you are at following orders, I will tell you what to do next. Run back, and give the fortune teller this message: Her time is almost up. Now I have some real business to do, I will say adieu and goodbye.
Love is an illusion created by a mix of chemicals in the brain. It has nothing to do with any deep spiritual connection. It's merely your animal side reacting to the stimuli of oxytocin (not to be confused with Rush Limbaugh's drug of choice: oxycontin). If you expunge the animal side of your nature, you can see the world clearly and without being influenced by such ridiculous concepts as love and passion. Stop lying to yourself. There is no such thing as love. Or is there? Check my sig link to find out for sure...
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
If the "mystery of love" has been studied to the same extent as chocolate, than I would suggest that our understanding of how it works and the effects it has on us are a long way from being understood.
Put another way, if you take the 400 or so compounds in chocolate and study them invidually (putting aside the need to study all the possible combinations), you'll end up with something like "Big boobs in the female of the species increases the chances of successful mating." Hardly useful. Or informative.
My guess is that we'll be studying chocolate (and love) for years to come. And given that our science isn't much more evolved from the Poke It With A Stick And See What Happens method, we might as well enjoy the mystery. And the big boobs.
But Love. Deep seeded, infallable, uncorruptable, everlasting love .
Infatuation, maybe.
I'm only using the following example for lack of an equally recognizable one, and religion aside, but the same type of love Jesus would have felt had he existed? To love someone(s) enough to completely fuck yourself over for them in order to prove a point? To love someone enough to never forget them (and the tender emotions held with their memory), throughout your entire life, without regard to what had caused the fallout (be it cheating, offense, abuse, etc)?
Love isn't simply a chemical reaction. It's a philosophical conundrum and, perhaps even, an imaginative creation. For all we know, we could have simply invented the concept of "Love" and are now desperately trying to explain something who's meaning has been lost and contorted with time. If you ever stop loving something (even for a moment), then you never loved it to begin with. Even hate is nothing more than resentful love; you can't hate something without having loved it first.
That's why the only person who's ever heard me say "I Love You" has been my mother. Not even girlfriends get that special treatment. They'll get a "I'm infatuated with you", but nothing more (of course that is, until I find someone I find deserves it).
Happy Heart's Day, btw.
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
After an expensive night, on the town, where dinner included a desert of chocolate mousse, and champaign, your date will feel more like you love them. heh.
I keep a bowl of various (e.g. dark, 50% cocao, flavoured: raspberry, orange, &c.)chocolates in my living room. I serve wine with dinner (and I make that dinner high-quality, and a bit fancy). I'll often throw in a massage, with scented oils. Maybe that's why I have trouble getting them to stop calling, when I'm e.g. in the middle of a date with someone else.
Then, again - maybe not.
i was limiting myself (being valentine's day) to the kind of loves that exist between two sexually compatible adults
;-)
which, of course, reveals the 3rd kind of love i really did leave out: pure unadulterated shallow physical lust
but not much really has to be said about that kind of love. it is what it is. it's very powerful, but not very complicated
the loves you are talking about are on a whole other level of abstraction, and they have nothing whatsoever to do with romance and valentine's day and sex (hopefully... i don't really want to know what you do with the pickles you mentioned
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The word "love" is code for a filthy conspiracy between the male-hating female gender and the oppressive lap-dogs that run the world government and economy. Just kidding. Hang on, I've got to take out the trash... -derfel
Yeah, but afterward you're still just a loser stoner whose life is so numb and pathetic that you have to take artificial substances just to feel anything of significance.
Essentially you mean, there is one type of love. The other's called "Infatuation"
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
I'm fine with your assessment of what's become of my life. But even without the drugs you're just as much as a loser as I am. Now that's something I wouldn't be happy with.
i really hope that wasn't autobiographical
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Some teachers, writers, scientists, philosophers (And yes, dedicated F/OSS programmers too!) they have their rewards when they see their jobs finished.
So, cheer up, if you don't care that much about having a girlfriend, it's not because you're a loser, but because you don't actually NEED a girlfriend.
Of course, this is only MHO.
We were an unconventional, but very happy couple (I am 42, she was 61).
If romantic love is a reward, it's a reward for something deeper.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
To paraphrase Eddie Izzard ...
"Cake or Love?"
"Cake please!"
Heh. Those who have been successfully married for more than a year know this to be true. It's damn difficult to love a person sometimes, because sometimes even the best mate is almost unlovable. If love was no more than a kind of "wanna get some" reflex, most marriages would be annulled after the first week.
Simply not true!
Sounds like we've created a society highly hostile to the raising of offspring, and the protection and efforts of two or more parents greatly increase success.
Watching TV and seeing what is marketed directly at kids, I would have to say, we really are trying to exploit them. We have met the enemy...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
To the AC author - grow up! Judge people for what comes OUT of their minds, not what they put into them.
Anyways, did someone who hurt you smoke pot or something?
Or are you just an asshole?
That's some deep shit, maaaaaan.
Sleep is futile.
> Posted by Zonk on 5:05 Wednesday 15 February 2006 ... "As today is one of the top five marketing-induced spending days, the obvious question is, what is love?
>
Don't you mean 'yesterday'?
Max.
Five feet of heaven in a ponytail...
Yes, I AM a geezer.
Look at all the happy creatures dancing on the lawn...
At least I still have drugs, money and chocolate...
According to Harry Connick, Jr:
A little bit of me and a whole lot of you, add a dash of starlight and a dozen roses, too,
then let it rise for a hundred years or two and that's the recipe for making love.
It doesn't need sugar cause it's already sweet, it doesn't need an oven cause it's got a lot of heat,
just add a dash of kisses to make it all complete and that's the recipe for making love.
And if you've made it right you'll know it, it's not like anything you've made before.
And if you've made it wrong you'll know it, cause it won't keep you coming back for more.
I didn't get it from my grandma's book upon the shelf,
I didn't get it from a magical and culinary elf,
no, a little birdie told me you can't make it by yourself, and that's the recipe for making love.
Touch a nerve?
I'm an ex-stoner and I agree with his assessment. To each his own, but in general, stoners do not live up to the common defintion of success. If they're happy with how they spent their lives: Great. That's valuable.
Myself? Now that I've put an edge back on my mind, I wouldn't trade conscious discontent, for ignorant content bliss, for anything. The pursuit of more is true happiness. The sad thing is, I think the people who as stoners are happy with that use of their lives, would regret it if they just stopped using for long enough to remember how to be happy without weed.
How about if I judge both? If you need drugs to enhance either your pleasure or your consciousness, then you have severe problems. I pity those people, really, like I pity people who need medications to function properly.
Anyways, did someone who hurt you smoke pot or something?
No, not really, though I've known a lot people who have screwed themselves up in various ways. But yeah, I know, you're different. You can "handle" them. All that means is the brain damage is limited enough in scope that you don't know how much it's damaged you and/or can't remember what it was like before.
Or are you just an asshole?
An asshole perhaps, but an asshole who is right.
if you want to fall in love.
Of course, if you're a schizophrenic axe-murdering psychopath, um, maybe you don't want to fall in love.
or at least not until you go on a hunting party with our VP.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Is love a chemical?
A neural pathway in the brain?
A learned response?
A reaction to reciprocal behavior?
Sex?
Remembered instances of happiness (or less pain)?
Maybe it's all of the above - and none of the above.
We use one word when maybe there are many.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Someone has to say it, might as well be me with my terrible karma.
I call BS!
---Excuse the bad English, I'm American---
Love is a neurochemical suppression of criticism triggered by pattern recognition.
You might feel like you're correct but there is no absolute right or wrong when a person alters their brain chemistry. If you're judging me from a moral basis, then I have no argument. You will always be right and I will always be wrong. But why are you wanting to pick a fight with people that have no problem altering their own conciousness? It's theirs, not yours. Do you make the same arguments with your friends (if you have any) that consciously and willfully alter their brain chemistry/nervous system when it's caffiene? or chocolate? Or maybe they have passion for bubble baths. You're arguing against a completely natural and healthy need for human beings to transcend the daily reality they live out. What you're doing is completely unhealthy and probably causes more brain damage to yourself than cannabis will ever do.
Now I'm sure you live a very healthy and productive life. You probably don't smoke, don't drink coffee, will never sky dive or eat chocolate and live a perfectly celibate life. I respect that, I never attacked what you make of your life did I?
For the rest of humanity, for the people that have not graduated with honours from their local high school DARE program like you have, we will continue to enjoy what life has to offer us. I have no problem with your personal choice, but please don't be so quick to judge people based on what you personally believe is a moral failing. Your morals are not mine.
Look at the female's reproductive resource requirements and then look at the male's requirements. The semi-monogamous results are predictable and we can see them everywhere in our society.
Deleted
Don't ask other Slashdotters.
Though some of the stuff I've seen under here is genuinely insightful. Perhaps only those who've been in relationships posted?
Not judging from a moral basis at all. I'm judging on a "stupidity" basis. Hey, there are people who get off on amputation -- they amputate their limbs because they like modifying their bodies. Do I think it's immoral? Absolutely not. Do I think it's stupid and there is something psychologically wrong with them? Absolutely.
Same with drugs. You just can't see the mental amputation you're doing. It is NOT like eating chocolate, or even like caffeine (Nicotine is debatable; caffeine is also debatable, but less so). Your body metabolizes those in a relatively natural way. They don't make long-lasting changes to brain chemistry in a way that your brain wasn't designed.
You're arguing against a completely natural and healthy need for human beings to transcend the daily reality they live out.
No, I'm arguing against numbing regular life so much that you THINK you're "transcending" reality, when the truth is that you're only transcending your self-imposed problems. People with healthy psychologies are already far above where you think you get with drugs.
I literally don't care if you screw up your brain, just like I literally don't care if amputation guy cuts various parts off. But don't try and tell me that the root of both isn't psychological damage. The fact that you can't find happiness in regular reality should tell you something.
You mention four aspects of love and then focuses on only on a Bible-oriented version of agape. Why not devote equal time to phileo, eros and storge?
I would recommend praticing what you preach, "wrf3". Your attack on scientists certainly is un-agape-like, as well as doing a disservice to the Slashdot community.
- A biologist wrote "The Life of a Cell", a paen to the wonder of biology and creation.
- Einstein loved Mozart and was an accomplished violinist, who played with passion.
- It would be very hard to characterize the famous psychiatrist Carl Jung as an unpoetic character.
Looking around this world one can, after prying their nose out of the Book of Corinthians, definitely find scientific poets, and poetic scientists. And a love of mankind certainly does not preclude a passion and love for nature and the universe.
Perhaps another poem about love is appropriate. Hopefully the this poem titled "Dust" by Rupert Brooke, will be suitable this Valentine's day.
When the white flame in us is gone,
And we that lost the world's delight
Stiffen in darkness, left alone
To crumble in our separate night;
When your swift hair is quiet in death,
And through the lips corruption thrust
Has still'd the labour of my breath -
When we are dust, when we are dust !
Not dead, not undesirous yet,
Still sentient, still unsatisfied,
We'll ride the air, and shine, and flit,
Around the places where we died,
And dance as dust before the sun,
And light of foot and unconfined,
Hurry from road to road, and run
About the errands of the wind.
And every mote, on earth or air,
Will speed and gleam, down later days,
And like a secret pilgrim fare
By eager and invisible ways,
Nor ever rest, nor ever lie,
Till, beyond thinking, out of view,
One mote of all the dust that's I
Shall meet one atom that was you.
Then in some garden hush'd from wind,
Warm in a sunset's afterglow,
The lovers in the flowers will find
A sweet and strange unquiet grow
Upon the peace; and, past desiring,
So high a beauty in the air,
And such a light, and such a quiring,
And such a radiant ecstasy there,
They'll know not if it's fire, or dew,
Or out of earth, or in the height,
Singing, or flame, or scent, or hue,
Or two that pass, in light, to light,
Out of the garden, higher, higher. . . .
But in that instant they shall learn
The shattering ecstasy of our fire,
And the weak passionless hearts will burn
And faint in that amazing glow,
Until the darkness close above;
And they will know - poor fools, they'll know!
One moment, what it is to love.
Sorry about your loss... The important thing is that yall were happy!
Libertas in infinitum
Call me highly skeptical. Helen Fisher is a physical anthropologist. As in population geneticists, primatologists, and paleoanthropologists. This is a far cry from being an expert in studying the "circuitry" that underlies love. In her book, she hooked up with some doctors from SUNY to use MRI brain scanning to "look at what love looks like", but the book is really mostly just anthropology. In truth, we have no idea what the circuitry of love is (yet), but we have long understood the effect of endorphins (caused by chocolate, heroin, running fast, and love) on the human brain and their relationship to one another. Thus her claim is both simultaneously old hat and inexpert.
Slashdot user bigberk seeks girlfriend. Willing to offer chocolate, money and drugs to the lucky lady
It's Valentines night, and you and I are posting here because...?
eTrade SUCKS
Fisher went on a quest to unravel the mystery of the brain in love. She teamed up with Art Aron, a psychologist and professor at Stony Brook University in New York and Lucy Brown, a professor in neurology and neuroscience at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.
And here's your answer! Looks like Dr. Fisher may not be a neuroscientist, but her research team indeed does include Dr. Brown, a professor in both Neurology and Neuroscience.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
ariscusmaximus asked Why not devote equal time to phileo, eros and storge?
Well, others more eloquent than I have done this. However, I wanted to focus on agape because when I posted, the majority of posts did not deal with agape.
Your attack on scientists certainly is un-agape-like.
Please note that my "attack" was against naturalism and it was simply an observation that naturalism, with it's focus on species survival, cannot logically produce a like-minded statement about love.
The fact that you can't find happiness in regular reality should tell you something
When did any of the above pro cannabis people say they can't find happiness in regular reality?
Because only people who are unhappy with regular reality use it. People who are strong psychologically don't like the effects, because it brings them down. The fact that it lifts you up means there's a reason it lifts you up.
What is love?
Staying the f*ck out of my inbox....
make install! Not love!
I love humanity, it is people I hate
...very much like deciding that tears explain sadness.
I know subjectively, that even my simple emotions are complex, multilayered things. There's the sensation-level feedback which lets me know I'm experiencing an emotion. There's learned-behaviour changes like reinforcement (of love, happiness, etc) or disincentive (from pain, shame, etc). There's thought-ability changes, belief-prioritization changes, even memory recall changes. All in parallel. And that's leaving aside the experience, belief and attention context that triggered the emotion. So, it looks to me like what these guys are doing is picking at one strand (new love's pleasure/reinforcement/habituation mechanism) and thinking they have the totality. Which is just ignorant, and I'd guess it's not accidentially ignorant. More people pushing the "mind is nothing but meat" idea. Not an opinion I share!
One difference between weed and coffee is that coffee affects the ability to make judgements. Mind altering druges that tend to reduce the ability to judge clearly if actions are good or not (not necessarily in a moral sense) is a reason to not do them.
Love is hot goth-metal chicks
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
"Love is finding someone to hang out in the foxhole with. And when you leave the foxhole for a spell, you keep your dick in your pants." - Some cheezie movie
Horns are really just a broken halo.
Indeed, I think a big portion of love is sacrifice. At the least you are sacrificing time, perhaps finance, on the trust that you will be with that person.
Some people sacrifice of their own bodies, such as those that donate an organ, etc, to an ailing relative or compatible friend, soulmate, etc.
With the former, the point at which love might be reached is when you know you would sacrifice of yourself in such a way, were it ever required of you. For those that think they are in love, consider... would you sacrifice a kidney, or other bodily organ, degrading the overall health of your body in order to assist or sustain that of the one you love?
asdf sdf df fdsa dsa sa
Calvin: What's it like to fall in love?
Hobbes: Well... say the object of your affection walks by...
Calvin: Yeah?
Hobbes: First, your heart falls into your stomach and splashes your innards. All the moisture makes you sweat profusely. This condensation shorts the circuits to your brain and you get all woozy. When your brain burns out altogether, your mouth disengages and you babble like a cretin until she leaves.
Calvin: THAT'S LOVE?!?
Hobbes: Medically speaking.
Calvin: Heck, that happened to me once, but I figured it was cooties!!
Because only people who are unhappy with regular reality use it. People who are strong psychologically don't like the effects, because it brings them down.
What some sweeping, grandiose statements. So you know them all do you?
The fact is different drugs affect people differently. If I drink booze, it makes me sleepy. If I have a few tokes I'm awake and focused on what I'm doing (and no, I'm not stupid enough and my judgment is not impaired enough to make me think I can drive or operate heavy machinery while under the influence). I personally know people who are just the opposite. A few tokes and they go to sleep, a few drinks and they're ready to dance all night.
The fact that it lifts you up means there's a reason it lifts you up.
Yes. And that reason is the cannabinoids are binding to the cannabinoid receptors in my brain. Just like the naturally occurring endocannabinoids that all our bodies produce. And your point is?
"Your mother's a bloody liar... That's what I liked about her." - Yellowbeard
A very interesting post, but I wonder:
I suspect that the ideal of a lifetime monogamous commitment was developed by the new State Authorities
Is there any actual evidence that a group of people got together in a back room and actually consciously invented lifelong monogamy? Because the idea seems to me just a little bit far fetched. I don't think that people are quite that insightful and forward-thinking.
At any rate, just to support what you said about serial monogamy, there is strong evidence that it was (subconsciously) an invention of women. Men, I think, would be happy roaming about like nomads, and just mating (forcibly if necessary) with any female they happen to meet. Monogamy was like a contract that women made with men. "I will stop resisting and you'll actually have more and better sex IF you agree to stick around and help with the kids." And then once the kids had aged five or six years, the contract stopped serving its purpose and both parties moved on to their next contract.
I think that lifelong monogamy just evolved out of that, as the contract term kept getting longer and longer. The more complex the civilization, the *more* support that children need. Now you've got to buy them clothes, you've got to put them through school, you've got to teach them the complex behaviors that will allow them to fit into this civilization. That takes more than just a few years.
I just think this is a better explanation for lifelong monogamy than the idea that it was invented for a purpose. I think it evolved.
Nonetheless, what you said about the state supporting marriage for its own selfish reasons, I certainly agree with. I just don't think the state invented it.
Err, ALL hallucinagenic drugs bind to your brain in some way similar to some natural process. So does Meth Amphetamine. So does PCP. That like saying that because you plug your radio in 110 volts, it's no big deal to plug it into 220 because it's still connecting to electricity just like it's designed to, right?
There's a reason your brain starts malfunctioning, even if you happen like the effect of the malfunction. The brain is designed to operate a certain way, and when you overstimulate it, it adapts to adjust to the new environment. That's why you need "a few tokes" to focus. Your brain chemistry is now so screwed up that it can't focus naturally.
And what's funny is that you've convinced yourself that it's a GOOD thing.
even if you happen like the effect of the malfunction
Sure do. So much so that for me (and millions of others) the pros outweigh the cons (yes, I won't deny there are downsides).
That's why you need "a few tokes" to focus. Your brain chemistry is now so screwed up that it can't focus naturally.
Please re-read what I wrote. I never said I couldn't focus without it. I certainly have no trouble focusing on writing code at my day job (where I don't use).
And what's funny is that you've convinced yourself that it's a GOOD thing.
What I'm convinced is a GOOD thing is to make up my own mind through my own experiences, rather than succumbing to the reefer madness mentality.
"Your mother's a bloody liar... That's what I liked about her." - Yellowbeard
"Result" of natural selection? Natural selection only has any effect on behaviors that affect your survival. And then, only long enough to have a kid (anything after that short of stopping your *kids* reproducing somehow? no impact).
This leaves out all *kinds* of behaviors and traits, and only has a minor impact on plenty of other ones.
A behavior or trait has to be pretty drastic to weed you and all your relatives out of the gene pool altogether... if you're weird in some way, it doesn't necessarily mean your genes disappear; chances are you'll just mate with the other weirdos like you, right?
Back a few years I read a great book - Creierul, O enigma descifrata, translated from Romanian, it means "The brain - a deciphered enigma". The author named the concept "MDT: Modeling Device Theory"; the brain is treated as a device that is designed to make predictions about the real world, based on the input from the organs and the experience of the person (which is structured in models).
The book is fantastic, the author proposes an abstract model that explains how the brain works at the software level. The model is able to explain many things, including God [why we need such an entity, and what its actual role is], and love.
The idea is that the brain operates with models, which are meant to make predictions of the future, ones that are as accurate as possible. If a prediction is incorrect, the model is updated, hence the future predictions [based on that model] will be closer to the real deal. There are different models, such as school, internet, apple, etc. The models are inter-connected [think of a graph with a helluvalot of nodes]. The model "school" can be connected with the model "internet", which in its turn is connected with the model "slashdot", and so on.
Love is one of such models, what makes it different is the number of other nodes it has connections with.
Back to school and internet and slashdot: I have internet access at school, and that's where I read slashdot. If you take the school-model out, it's not a big deal; I can use another one, for instance "internet-cafe", and substitute the "dead" one with it.
That's not the case of love - take the dear person away, and the model-structure might collapse, because the absent model cannot be substituted.
This was a very generalized description. The idea is that love is just a software-level dependence: many other models point to it, and if love disappears, whatever you try to do - you get something like a null-pointer assignment.
If you understand Romanian - this book is definitely worth it!
The saddest poem
Wow, that is a really good article. I've just realised I'm definitely what's described as a "limerent". Having known for some time that my general psychology and behaviour towards girls I find attractive is definitely somewhat different to that of most of the other guys I know, I've never realised it was a known and labelled trait.
Whenever I develop an interest in a girl, she usually becomes "the one" (at least for the period of time that the interest lasts), even if I know nothing about her. I'd go to extraordinary lengths to be in her presence, and have a completely disproportionate fear of messing things up whenever she's around (which makes it extremely difficult to actually approach her with a view to trying to progress things). I'd have an almost complete disinterest in any other girl - sure I'd enjoy looking at and chatting to other girls I find good looking, but pretty quickly my thought process leads me back to "the one".
Although it feels absolutely amazing when you get any kind of response from the girl of interest, trust me that if you don't suffer from this particular trait then consider yourself lucky! It can be overwhelming at times, leaving you struggling to function in everyday life because the thoughts about the desired girl are so invasive. Even when you're on another continent and have absolutely no possibility of seeing this girl for several weeks, you'll spend at least half that time thinking about her and wondering what she's doing, remembering all the things that make her amazing.
It's funny because even if you know it's irrational (and I do now even more so), you just can't do anything about it. Everything always revolves around her.
Thankfully just now I'm not in the grips of any particular individual (although I guess there will be another along soon, and I've no way of predicting when or where I'll meet the girl that will trigger the cycle) and it feels pretty good. Although I can't say I don't enjoy being in the "limerent" state because it brings with it some fantastic rewards when things are good. But it's the depths you have to beware of, because those are deeper than you ever thought possible, and unfortunately it seems it's inevitable that you fall into them sooner or later if you are the "limerent" type.