Is love JUST a chemical process?
The science today indicates that love is simply a series of chemical reactions and hormones and that the spiritual part of this overwhelming feeling is untrue therefore does not exist.The lust we feel towards people we find attractive is proven to be just a natural human process of selection,that way we choose whoever is genetically most appropriate for us,that is who will make an excellent parent for our children.Love seems to be a feeling created later on thanks to the human system of bonding and it a is also scientifically explicable:Love is a feeling created by our mind and it consists of a variety of hormones,its purpose is to ensure the parents stay together long enough to conceive a child.But what then?Is love JUST a chemical process or is it the renaissance of the human race?Love has the effect on people like certain drugs but is our addiction only a short-term deception of nature?Is it really just an illusion our mind creates so we would stay with our genetically convenient partner or is the paradise we seek in another world actually before us and we deny it?Is the secret of love hidden in a scientific fact or in our hearts?
- In a "eros" or erotic sense it isAll the No points
- thoughts in general can't just be attributed to chemical processes
Is love JUST a chemical process?
Yes because... No because...In a "eros" or erotic sense it is
In some senses love is just a chemical processes and mainly in the erotic sense. Allow me to explain. The bible has three different words used for describing love: Agape (Unconditional Love given freely), Eros ( a state of deep sexual attraction), Phileo (brotherly love) [[ God and Science "Love Defined by the Bible". http://www.godandscience.org/love/biblicallove.html
The type of love most described currently with regard to romance is eros which is a series of chemical reactions designed to either encourage people to reproduce with each other or desire to put it.
Love may be just a chemical attraction in one meaning but the desire for close companionship surpasses physical attraction which shouldn't really be called love and should be called lust instead which isn't love. The Oxford Dictionary describes lust as "strong sexual desire" which is chemically generated. [[ Ask Oxford "Lust" Accessed 05.08.2008 http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/lust?view=uk
Is love JUST a chemical process?
Yes because... No because...The people we end of coupling with, usually have certain similarities.
This fact supports that genetics play a huge part in who we end up with. Why do our prospective mates have similar features, smells & habits? Genetic research points out to, how we are programmed to be attracted to certain attributes. And 'the ONE', would/should then hypothetically be the closest available fit to these.
Is love JUST a chemical process?
Yes because... No because...thoughts in general can't just be attributed to chemical processes
The example mentioned in the opposition argument has a big problem. What if survival instincts include the survival of a genetic line rather than just the survival of the person. If the human instinct is to protect it's genetic line then it doesn't go against survival instincts
Love is a combination of very complex thought processes, it isn't the same as just sexual arousal, which is induced by hormones. The human mind isn't just the sum of its physical parts, a lot of the way our mind works can't yet be mechanically explained. For instance, why do we act against our own interests for the sake of another person, even when we won't gain their favour by doing so? It seems to go against our survival intincts.
Is love JUST a chemical process?
Yes because... No because...GENETICS also point to how MEN are polygamous.
and that they have the natural incentive to plant their seed in every slot available. In this topic the definition of love has been confined to the mating patterns of ' a standard couple' comprising a male and female, which I feel is very restrictive and not true to 'genetic research' which points to the gay-gene, among other things.
By genetics and the restrictive definition of love in this topic , ALL men cheat: A clear fallacy.
Genetics only play at inclination or tendencies not practical realities. If your hormones tell you to mate with a supermodel, that does mean you will act on the urge. Most people don't, otherwise supermodels would not be working on the ramp or maintaining their figures in the gym but would be the human equivalents of 'Queen Bees'. (either raped or sexually coerced, all the time)Debates > Is love JUST a chemical process?