Do You Believe In Love?

[LastPoet]

Hmmm, we should make a whole science about love, why dont we? why not? Because its already explained really, What about unconditional love? it comes with the whole idea: if god had unconditional love then even the worse of crooks had the love of god, and this is an antimony that generates paradoxes. And paradoxes have ugly faces to science, because it falls into semantics. To religion instead, paradoxes fuel them, because it may hit a broad, intelectually lazy majority, just put a 'godidt' stamp on it.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Do you believe in love?

Yes.
I've felt it. Animals feel it. It's so reproducable that anyone can experience it personally or from observing others. It's even observable in animals between members of their own species and animals between differing species. Science can even recognize particular brain patterns that respond to persons, places, and things humans truely love.

(I am of course, referring to the kind of love between family, friends, lovers, and persons with a favored pet.)

So... yes. Science can unequivically proove that love exists. Psychiatrists, neurologists, and biologists can certainly attest to that both professionally and personally.

[chasm]

Do you believe in love?

No, not really.

So, you cynical lot, how far do you take this logical attitude; Do you denounce love? Or do you allow yourself that one leap of faith?

I don't "denounce" love because I don't believe in it.

I would allow myself a leap of faith on other things, so to speak, like bungee jumping off a cliff...

[Violet]

love is not the chemical reaction. love is just a name we give the feeling the reaction brings us. love is an abstract concept, is it not? nobody defines love as a chemical reaction. the chemica reaction is the chemical reaction. love is a name for a feeling created by man. it doesn't exist as a thing.

Argh, semantics! That's like saying skyscrapers don't exist because 'skyscraper' is just a name we give to a building.

Actually... they exist as your interpretation of what an apparent thing you have interpreted as a building to be.

And yes... the interpretation of what it is would likely be the same even if the word "skyscraper" did not exist. You would probably give it a name.

Everything exists as a thing, Cecco... love exists as a thing... insomuch as Jesus exists as a thing... as you also exist as a thing. Of course... others might not (yet) recognize the existence of such things ^_^

---

i see shell also comes from that overpopulated school of belittling atheists. i have never said god exists. it was never leading that way. and i have no idea where you get the idea that i am saying atoms don't exist. it's not a ploy for anything other than getting a discussion started. that's the whole point of this place isn't it?

If nobody else is saying it, then I will: 'God' exists. It would have to for us to be talking of it. It ('God') exists as a number of things, although I do not recognize it to exist as an objective manifestation what created the universe or guides our progress through it.

[William_Saskibar]

I get what you're saying, but I don't see them as the same thing. That doesn't make Jesus a real, physical person... it makes him one that exists only within my mind, i.e. imaginary. Emotions are a function of the brain and exist as such. They are not tangible in that you can carry them in your pocket, no. They exist as detectable 'feelings', which are caused by natural brain function.

You might say that, if I believe in god, then god exists within my mind, but that is not the case. If I believed in god, he would only exist as a concept within my mind. That would not make god himself exist independently from me. With emotions, there is no claim that they exist independently of the brain... they are a function of the brain. Those chemical reactions we have named 'emotion' exist.

my friend you have actually found the words i was searching for thank you

---

If nobody else is saying it, then I will: 'God' exists. It would have to for us to be talking of it. It ('God') exists as a number of things, although I do not recognize it to exist as an objective manifestation what created the universe or guides our progress through it.
[/quote]

if god exists just because we speak of then you're claiming that unicorns exist as well

[darkwolf176]

All you need is love

[Rhizomorph13]

Ok, then go out in the desert with a heart full of love and see how far you make it!

[Xyster]

Pink flying Unicorns are love......... well not really but while we were throwing out logical fallacies ..why not...

if an emotion = the god of the bible it would not be love... Contempt maybe but not love

[SleepingDemon]

Yes, I do believe in love. However I see it as a subconscious response to a given stimuli that we try to maintain. If you ask the average person, love is something you feel, but it isn't. Love is something you do. You don't see someone and automatically love them. You love your family almost obligatorily, because they are family. It is a very strong instinctual bond that we manifest into words.

Love between a couple isn't found in the first year, or the second year. It's a lifetime. This topic has been romanticized by novels and hollywood almost to the point of absurdity over the last couple centuries. But the phrases we use to describe it really exaggerate don't you think? Have you ever felt like anyone was really the wind beneath your wings? Have you ever really needed someone like you need oxygen? Because if you are no longer with them then the answer is an emphatic no. It's a period of sensations that we try to extend. We make love love by constantly trying to fan the flame so to speak. Crushes and lust are very often confused with love, but those tend to fizzle away at some point and after you recover, you may be a little more jaded but you feel the same way before it happened.

Enough analyzing though. I'm married, i've been married for almost four years. And I love my wife, it's not the way she looks, not the way she thinks, not the way she smiles, but it's the deep seeded feeling of contentment that I feel. I feel as if I died right now, I could die knowing that I didn't miss anything, that my life although short had it's moments where I felt some connection to another human being that wasn't simply friendship or obligation. But a willingness to endure more than I would for almost anyone just to feel satisfied with my life. That is love to me.

[Super Cynic]

love is not the chemical reaction. love is just a name we give the feeling the reaction brings us. love is an abstract concept, is it not? nobody defines love as a chemical reaction. the chemica reaction is the chemical reaction. love is a name for a feeling created by man. it doesn't exist as a thing.

This is not true.

It's not simply a concept. Love is an emotion, and, like all emotions, and indeed all things, (which aren't just speculation) they have a cause. I'm no scientist, but I know that this emotion is caused by chemicals being released into the brain, and the effect of this is what we feel (in this case love, attraction towards someone/something). A primary argument against god's existance is that if he created everything, he did not have a cause. Therefore, you can't say that love doesn't exist using the same argument as disproving god's existance.