Science often tries to explain love through hormones. I don't deny that hormones create sexual attraction and the feeling of bliss, but to tell the truth I don't believe those who entirely reduce love to a chemical reaction. There must be something else, something related to our human consciousness. When I hear someone say that it's nothing more than hormones, I always feel insulted in the name of all humans: we're not just animals following reproductive instincts. Some questions about love are yet to be answered, and I doubt hormones are that answer:
-If it's only hormones, then how can two lovers continue to love each other when one of them is thousands of miles away on a trip (or even long dead)?
-Why is true and durable love based on your lover's personality rather than just his or her physical appearance or manliness/womanliness? If a girl is a true bitch, you'll hate her no matter how cute she is.
Why don't we fall in love with the first male or female we meet, like animals? A guy may know dozens of girls pretty well, but never fall in love with any of them; while a dog, obeying only its instincts, will take the first female it comes across.
Any comments?
.
Why do you assume that hormones cause love based on a purely physical bases? Or that human psychological hormones and brain chemistry are like those of animals?
The natural selective forces that have brought about the species were not only based on environmental factors like climate, but also humans must adapt to living with other human beings, their culture and society. We take into account people's personality as part of why we find them attractive. Culture has produced the brain chemistry which causes love. Love is an adaptive strategy to bring about lasting relationships between people for the continuation of the species.
And even if you go as far as to say that human are just like animals as u suggest, then you are wrong that animals have sex with the first animal they meet, many animals have elaborate sexual selection rituals, instincts and habits. But human beings are certainly more advanced neurologically than other animals, and so we have "love" as our reproductive adaptation. This does not reduce or take away from the wonder and power of love as we see it through our subjective experience, it merely explains why our species has ideas such as "love" to begin with.
I always have a comment if you ask a question ;)
What you are describing is lust. The activity of hormones in the brain results in lust, not love. Lust is of the mind and of the body, love is of conciousness.
| QUOTE |
| If it's only hormones, then how can two lovers continue to love each other when one of them is thousands of miles away on a trip (or even long dead)? |
This still qualifies as lust, because love is not directed at anything in paricular. As for a scientific how, a neurologist could give an accurate description. Distance has nothing to do with lust or love. Even when two individuals are next to each other, lust only heightens because there is more activity from the sense organs. Before, it was only activity from the imagination which can never grasp true experience. Lust will continue to exist thousands of miles away because of the imagination.
Love is more like a state of mind. When you accept yourself, you accept the whole world. Love posesses you, it is much larger you. You will have love for everything, because love is not confined to just one individual. Life is love.
| QUOTE |
| Why is true and durable love based on your lover's personality rather than just his or her physical appearance or manliness/womanliness? If a girl is a true bitch, you'll hate her no matter how cute she is. |
Again, you are describing lust. Lust is certainly a biological function for all creatures, Darwin would tell you it is nature's way of ensuring procreation. However, it does not operate the same for everybody. In another man's case, lust will exist no matter how bitchy a woman is, as long as she is cute. For you it is not the case, but it is for others.
You mention the lust being durable, but lust is never durable. Lust is impatient, fragile and gluttonous--because the mind is impatient, fragile and gluttonous. Love is powerful, poetic and flowing. There is no reason to think that personality types are any more important to lust than physical appearence or love. Both transcend personality and appearence. Lust is selfish, unconcerned with anything but sex. Love is in complete acceptance and sees beyond the body and mind, love sees into conciousness.
| QUOTE |
| Why don't we fall in love with the first male or female we meet, like animals? A guy may know dozens of girls pretty well, but never fall in love with any of them; while a dog, obeying only its instincts, will take the first female it comes across. |
Psychology is actually discovering that we do. A man first falls in love with his mother, upon birth, the baby first sees his mother before himself. The first thing a man knows in this world is his mother, then himself. Men often fall in love with a woman that reminds them of their mother, subconciously they choose someone reminiscient of her. A woman often falls in love with someone similar to her father. Psychologists have been analyzing families and marriages for the past few decades and have learned that we actually do fall in love with the first man or woman we meet.