Is Love Truly Real? Perspectives from Science and Society

  • Thread starter Thread starter Carly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Love
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the question of whether love is real, with participants expressing diverse viewpoints. Some argue that love is a genuine and evolving emotion, shaped by individual experiences and relationships, suggesting that each new love redefines the concept. Others contend that love is merely a chemical reaction in the brain, equating it to other biological urges and questioning its significance beyond a hormonal response. The conversation also touches on the distinction between love and lust, with some participants emphasizing that while both are real, they serve different purposes and elicit different behaviors. The idea that love can be defined as a strong affection that encompasses care, commitment, and mutual respect is presented, contrasting with views that dismiss romantic love as a societal construct or illusion. Ultimately, the debate reflects a complex interplay of emotional, biological, and philosophical perspectives on the nature of love.
  • #61
Love is blind. What did Prince Charles saw in his new bride? she looks like a man
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
From Wikipedia
Camilla Parker Bowles (born July 17, 1947) was girlfriend, then mistress, and is now the fiancée of Charles, Prince of Wales. She and the Prince of Wales have announced that they will wed on April 8, 2005.

Being 58 she is either approaching or has experienced menopause. Certainly, they are not looking at having children.

He is marrying his sweetheart. I hope it works out for them.

Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks, does it?

It's between Charles and Camilla - and that's all that matters.

May they have a peaceful and happy winter together.
 
  • #63
Astronuc said:
Romantic love between a man and woman, especially when they are husband and wife, is absolutely not BS. It is absolutely wonderful. :smile:

My entire contention has been the opposite, and still is.

Franz - Love is real, and Romantic Love is not BS.

It would appear that you have not personally experienced the Love yet. Hopefully you will someday. :smile:


Perhaps you're right. I won't argue against my own inexperience. But hear this:

I've had three girlfriends that were at one point all ready to start planning a wedding date, one right after the other.

What did it take to get there? Nothing at all really. Let's face the facts: I'm abrasive, egotistical. I have a superiority complex that makes john nash appear humble. Quite simply I'm an arsehole. and yet, all of them "loved" me. Simply because i knew the right things to say at the right time. Because i knew what was attractive and what wasn't. All of them made a big deal about the distinction between "lust" and "love", but all of them "loved" me. Not because love was anything magical, just because i knew what to say when.

My conclusion? "Love" is cheap, and nothing special. It is as easily gotten as it is lost.

Could i be wrong? Sure. But from watching people around me, i know what i see.
 
  • #64
franznietzsche said:
I'm not being very clear in what I'm saying, but my brain is rather frtizing out on me lately.

Oh I see. They say that's the first sign of falling in love :biggrin:

Again, apologies if someone mentioned this previous to page 3 of this thread, but Sternberg (1986) suggested that the various forms of love consist of combinations of 3 elements:
Passion: "the drives that lead to romance, physical attraction, sexual consummation, and related phenomena"
Intimacy: "feelings of closeness, connectedness, and bondedness"
Committment: "the decision that one loves someone else and ... the commitment to maintain that love"
http://psyche.tvu.ac.uk/phdrg/atkins/atws/document/280.html

Thus romantic love (flowers & chocolates) is the combination of passion & intimacy, but without any real committment. Passion doesn't get a category to itself, which I guess reflects Sternberg's view that this, by itself, isn't a form of love. However, the kind of love that involves real committment (as shown in marriages that survive life's problems) is called consumate love, and is the kind of love that people often think they are experiencing when they are really only experiencing romantic love. Franznietzsche, lust is a quickie without any illusions about how wonderful the other person is. Romantic love is a quickie with the person who is most perfect for you in the world. Consumate love is hoping the missus doesn't have another one of her headaches.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #65
franznietzsche said:
I've had three girlfriends that were at one point all ready to start planning a wedding date, one right after the other.

What did it take to get there? Nothing at all really. Let's face the facts: I'm abrasive, egotistical. I have a superiority complex that makes john nash appear humble. Quite simply I'm an arsehole. and yet, all of them "loved" me. Simply because i knew the right things to say at the right time. Because i knew what was attractive and what wasn't. All of them made a big deal about the distinction between "lust" and "love", but all of them "loved" me. Not because love was anything magical, just because i knew what to say when.

My conclusion? "Love" is cheap, and nothing special. It is as easily gotten as it is lost.

Could i be wrong? Sure. But from watching people around me, i know what i see.
I can see why you are skeptical. Just because you feel you were false with them doesn't mean that what they felt wasn't real, it just means that they fell in love with something that wasn't real.

You won't find real love until you find a girl that you can be yourself with. Don't be afraid to be yourself. What do you want? Do you want girls attracted to something you're not or do you want someone that loves "you"? Being accepted with all of your flaws and quirks is what real love is about.
 
  • #66
franznietzsche said:
I've had three girlfriends that were at one point all ready to start planning a wedding date, one right after the other.

What did it take to get there? Nothing at all really. Let's face the facts: I'm abrasive, egotistical. I have a superiority complex that makes john nash appear humble. Quite simply I'm an arsehole. and yet, all of them "loved" me. Simply because i knew the right things to say at the right time. Because i knew what was attractive and what wasn't. All of them made a big deal about the distinction between "lust" and "love", but all of them "loved" me. Not because love was anything magical, just because i knew what to say when.

My conclusion? "Love" is cheap, and nothing special. It is as easily gotten as it is lost.

Could i be wrong? Sure. But from watching people around me, i know what i see.

Sounds like they broke up with you. Perhaps you're bitter due to past experiences..

Romantic love doesn't really last very long it eventually turns into companionate love. Less of lust and more of wanting and being attached in a long term with a partner.

I've read an article stating that there's also a decrease in dopamine and norepinephrine as it turns into companionate love. The two chemicals are usually high during the beginning stages of lust.

However, an increase in oxytocin was also observed in the stage of companionate love.
 
Last edited:
  • #67
The_Professional said:
I've read an article that there's also a decrease in dopamine and norepinephrine as it turns into companionate love. The two chemicals are usually high during the beginning stages of lust.

However, an increase in oxytocin was also observed in the stage of companionate love.

Not to mention the strong correlation between romantic love and levels of chocolates :rolleyes:
 
  • #68
the number 42 said:
Not to mention the strong correlation between romantic love and levels of chocolates :rolleyes:

The chemical Phenylethylamine can be found in chocolate which is also secreted(?) in the brain when a person is in love. Which is most likely what gives that "great, loving feeling high".
 
  • #69
franznietzsche
Confidence is often found to be appealing. They were probably attracted for reasons that they don't understand. This happens to all of us esp when we're young.

This is exactly why it is so important to realize what is nature calling - lust, blind attraction, love at first sight [usually, IMO], dirty magazines and Hooters - and what is love - a heartfelt connection, a soulmate, a companion, as person who shares common desires and beliefs, a person that you love to spend time with, a person who becomes an integral part of your life that you don't want to live without, and so much more. These are the things that come from or define real love. If this hasn't happened for you then you haven't fallen in love yet; and that's okay. It doesn't happen very often. But I also agree with you in that many people marry for lust. I think its an easy trap for most of us to fall into when driven by hormones. this is why parents usually want their kids to grow up a little before they marry. They realize how much growing up we do in our late teens and early twenties. There are no guarantees but maturity helps. I nearly married the wrong girl when I was twenty. Some years later Tsu and I met and I was ready for a serious relationship, and not just playing house.

Of course, as soon as Tsu saw me she was a helpless, but I was a complete gentleman. :smile: :smile: :smile:
 
  • #70
Evo said:
I can see why you are skeptical. Just because you feel you were false with them doesn't mean that what they felt wasn't real, it just means that they fell in love with something that wasn't real.

That wasn't quite what i meant. I never lied to anyone of them. I never acted as anything other than myself. That was the problem. I tend to be very machiavellian when I'm dealing with people in general, its almost instinctive, and not something I'm particularly proud of. Its never something i tried to do--i just did it. If something would go wrong, i would just start talking, and everything just comes out right, without even really trying to fast talk my way out of--or into anything.

I wasn't saying what they felt wasn't real, I'm saying that it was nothing special. When they were saying these things after as little as 3 weeks(well, one of them anyway), that would be a logical conlcusion.

As a side note, after those experiences, i tend to disclaim myself whenever i hear those words coming from women's mouths--i don't want them to feel that way about me when i don't feel that way about them, i don't want to hurt them--with those three i was very inexperienced, and still believed in romantic notions of love. I even thought i loved them.

You won't find real love until you find a girl that you can be yourself with. Don't be afraid to be yourself. What do you want? Do you want girls attracted to something you're not or do you want someone that loves "you"? Being accepted with all of your flaws and quirks is what real love is about.

I want an equal and a challenge.

What i want is a person who is fully my equal. A person who when my mind kicks into its machiavellian mode isn't even fazed, and walks right through every hoop with ease--a worthy opponent in the art of verbal fencing so to speak.

And I've never met one.
 
  • #71
The_Professional said:
Sounds like they broke up with you. Perhaps you're bitter due to past experiences..

That might make sense...if it was true. Well, actually one of them did. The other two didn't. Either way, don't see how that's applicable. Two of them i broke up with because i got bored being with them--i'm sorry to say, it sounds callous, but that is what it came down to.
 
  • #72
Ivan Seeking said:
Of course, as soon as Tsu saw me she was a helpless, but I was a complete gentleman. :smile: :smile: :smile:


Yeah, sure :rolleyes:
 
  • #73
franznietzsche said:
I wasn't saying what they felt wasn't real, I'm saying that it was nothing special. When they were saying these things after as little as 3 weeks(well, one of them anyway), that would be a logical conlcusion.

After only 3 weeks, they were probably confusing lust with love. It happens often among the young, as Ivan has already noted. I don't believe in love at first sight, I do believe in lust at first sight. Love takes a little more time to develop. You're still young, so it's not at all surprising that you haven't found real love yet.

I want an equal and a challenge.

What i want is a person who is fully my equal. A person who when my mind kicks into its machiavellian mode isn't even fazed, and walks right through every hoop with ease--a worthy opponent in the art of verbal fencing so to speak.

I'm not so sure about the "challenge" part, but looking for someone you consider your equal is important. However, keep in mind that finding your equal may not mean finding someone exactly like yourself, but instead, someone who complements you. She may have strengths you lack and weaknesses which are your strengths. Try to keep your mind open to that possibility. That's all part of what dating is about, finding out about a person enough to decide if they are someone you are compatible with or not. There's nothing wrong with taking your time to find the right person. True love doesn't happen all that often. You'll know it's real when it's like nothing else you've ever felt before, and only gets better every day you're with the person who stirs that feeling in you.
 
  • #74
Complicated explanations. Why not just let it happen? If it does, that's wonderful. If it doesn't, move on. I'd rather be alone than apologize for why I'm not.
 
  • #75
franznietzsche said:
I want an equal and a challenge.

What i want is a person who is fully my equal. A person who when my mind kicks into its machiavellian mode isn't even fazed, and walks right through every hoop with ease--a worthy opponent in the art of verbal fencing so to speak.

And I've never met one.

You don't need a girlfriend, you need a debating society.
 
  • #76
"Do you feel love is real?"

No, I feel love is a mixture of real and imaginary. Love is complex!
 
  • #77
the number 42 said:
You don't need a girlfriend, you need a debating society.


Yeah, i get bored at those too.
 
  • #78
I don't think a girl who'll constantly argue, nag and debate is good long term relationship material. After a while of incessant debating, arguing, nagging you'll get sick of her too
 
  • #79
the number 42 said:
You don't need a girlfriend, you need a debating society.

:smile: That's only what he thinks he needs. What he really needs is one who will put up with him and when he gets too full of himself can just tell him, "Shut up and kiss me."

franz, there's more to life than academics and debating. I hope you'll find a woman who can show you how to not take everything in life quite so seriously.
 
  • #80
the number 42 said:
You don't need a girlfriend, you need a debating society.
I was thinking along the lines of a sparring partner.

But that would seem to be a mutually destructive relationship. :rolleyes:
 
  • #81
Moonbear said:
"Shut up and kiss me."

Mooners, I remember a time when you could barely bring yourself to whisper the word 'reproduction'. Now its all "lets all have a massage" and "kiss me kiss me". I was a bit wary of you during your nun phase, but there seems to be some sort of rebound effect kicking in. That or you are running trials on Prozac at your lab? :biggrin:
 
  • #82
franznietzsche said:
Yeah, i get bored at those too.

What about a debating society in a skirt?
 
  • #83
Astronuc said:
I was thinking along the lines of a sparring partner.

But that would seem to be a mutually destructive relationship. :rolleyes:

Hmmm. I can't see how a girl punching the living solids out of me could be much of a turn on. It would only be mutually destructive if I could get a couple of low blows and rabbit punches in. (Did I just say "low blows"?).
 
  • #84
franznietzsche said:
Its not a question of what i experience. Using anecdotal evidence is horribly unscientific, i would think by now i should have established that that is the sort of thing i would not do, use my own anecdotal experience as evidence.

Its about what i can objectively observe around me.

It completely is a question of what you experience! Unless you think you have solved the problem of other minds, that is. One cannot fully understand what it feels like to be in love, or to feel any other kind of subjective experience for that matter, unless one has experienced the relevant quality for one's self. (Some might argue that a complete, objective neuroscientific description of the brain would give us a complete understanding of subjective experience, but as we do not have such a complete neuroscientific description, this contention is irrelevant to the immediate conversation here.)

I've had three girlfriends that were at one point all ready to start planning a wedding date, one right after the other.

What did it take to get there? Nothing at all really. Let's face the facts: I'm abrasive, egotistical. I have a superiority complex that makes john nash appear humble. Quite simply I'm an arsehole. and yet, all of them "loved" me. Simply because i knew the right things to say at the right time. Because i knew what was attractive and what wasn't. All of them made a big deal about the distinction between "lust" and "love", but all of them "loved" me. Not because love was anything magical, just because i knew what to say when.

My conclusion? "Love" is cheap, and nothing special. It is as easily gotten as it is lost.

Is that anything more than anecdotal evidence?

In any case, since you cannot have leapt into your former girlfriends' minds, you cannot know what it was that they were emotionally experiencing. Very likely, at least one of them did feel genuine emotions for you, and not just in a lusty way. The relatively short lasting, brightly burning feeling of "being in love" can be ignited in short term circumstances. The question of under what conditions this emotion can be 'turned on' for certain people does not address the experiential quality of the feeling itself. The feeling of "being in love" or "romantic love" itself, as other people have described, is probably one of the most wonderful and intoxicating emotions a human can experience; it is really quite different from feeling lust. One who has experienced both emotions will be quick to tell you as much.
 
  • #85
hypnagogue, I just noticed your location. While your in there, please find out what's going on. I'd like to know - sought of a sanity check, if you will. :smile:
 
  • #86
franznietzsche said:
I want an equal and a challenge.

What i want is a person who is fully my equal. A person who when my mind kicks into its machiavellian mode isn't even fazed, and walks right through every hoop with ease--a worthy opponent in the art of verbal fencing so to speak.

And I've never met one.

Dude, you're 17, aren't you? How many girls have you been even peripherally involved with that weren't teenagers? Plenty of women of the type you describe are out there (though admittedly, I generally found them outside of southern California). You have to consider that men who are arseholes like yourself tend to attract weak-minded women that crave abuse. I'd be wary of anyone that was attracted to me if I were you. It would be better if you found someone that you were actually attracted to (and not just physically, as there is an obvious mental component that sounds important to you). It's easy to be confident when confronted with a woman who will fall for you no matter what. If you really want to call yourself confident, find someone who is a challenge. Don't just wait for her to come along; challenge yourself, and don't try to tell me that you can't find a single person that fits your criteria. I know they're out there.
 
  • #87
Astronuc said:
hypnagogue, I just noticed your location. While your in there, please find out what's going on. I'd like to know - sought of a sanity check, if you will. :smile:

That's meant more as a tongue in cheek way of saying that your acquaintance with me is nothing more than your internal mental construct of who I am. So technically, I suppose you could imagine how I might assess what's going on in your head given what you think you know about who I am and how I think, but for this delicate matter I advise sticking with your own self-construct of Astronuc as opposed to using Astronuc-simulating-hypnagogue. :wink:
 
  • #88
the number 42 said:
Mooners, I remember a time when you could barely bring yourself to whisper the word 'reproduction'. Now its all "lets all have a massage" and "kiss me kiss me". I was a bit wary of you during your nun phase, but there seems to be some sort of rebound effect kicking in. That or you are running trials on Prozac at your lab? :biggrin:

:smile: I think all those little candy hearts in my avatar are having some weird effect on how my words are taken. Hmm...trying to decide if that means I should keep the avatar or ditch it. :-p

I think I get all my Prozac from the water supply. :bugeye: :-p
 
  • #89
loseyourname said:
Dude, you're 17, aren't you? How many girls have you been even peripherally involved with that weren't teenagers?

Only one of those three was actually. I've never dated a women my age or younger actually.

Plenty of women of the type you describe are out there (though admittedly, I generally found them outside of southern California). You have to consider that men who are arseholes like yourself tend to attract weak-minded women that crave abuse. I'd be wary of anyone that was attracted to me if I were you.

So I've learned.
It would be better if you found someone that you were actually attracted to (and not just physically, as there is an obvious mental component that sounds important to you). It's easy to be confident when confronted with a woman who will fall for you no matter what. If you really want to call yourself confident, find someone who is a challenge.

I never said i was confident, Ivan was the one who used that word. I just said that somehow i managed to always say the right thing, at the right time, without ever losing control of a situation (or it seems like that sometimes, i don't know how true that really is)
 
  • #90
hypnagogue said:
That's meant more as a tongue in cheek way of saying that your acquaintance with me is nothing more than your internal mental construct of who I am.
I have to remember not to take what I read so literally. :wink:

hypnagogue said:
. . . your own self-construct of Astronuc
Hmmm, I don't have one of those. Got any idea where to get one? :wink:
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 340 ·
12
Replies
340
Views
31K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
7K