does love exist. (1 Viewer)

[scaredytiger]

sorry if you read my first post i do not 'feel' anything.
its just like with my god for example. i feel a spiritual connection to him. others dont. how can i go telling people that he exists when they do not have that spiritual connection.

but it is not the spiritual connection which we dispute.
only the existence of the presence you feel that connection to.

 

[scaredytiger]

i wasn't being metaphoric

i wasnt either.

 

[melanieeeee.]

but it is not the spiritual connection which we dispute.
only the existence of the presence you feel that connection to.

it is his presence. anyway i am going to sleep now. i had only four hours sleep last night.

lust you all. xoxo

 

[HalcyonSky]

sorry if you read my first post i do not 'feel' anything.
its just like with my god for example. i feel a spiritual connection to him. others dont. how can i go telling people that he exists when they do not have that spiritual connection.

yeah well the feeling of 'love' has peer-reviewed papers to explain what causes it and to verify it exists

 

[ASNSWR127]

sorry if you read my first post i do not 'feel' anything.
its just like with my god for example. i feel a spiritual connection to him. others dont. how can i go telling people that he exists when they do not have that spiritual connection.

Well bad luck darling!

I would rather feel love for a person than love for a construct any day!

 

[DownInFlames]

But love's not something that has to 'be there' to exist. The people walking around your house might not exist, but your feeling that they did definitely does.

So I wasn't really in love, I only thought I was?

failmetaphor fails. damn

 

[Serius]

Love is just lust and friendship as occasionally post hoc rationalised by a complex emotional and logical creature, imo. The reason why I imagine it's associated with such special magical feelings is because we like to create things which we think are greater than ourselves, to give us some sort of a transcendence.

Ive always wondered what the difference is between love like with friends and a romantic love.

Maybe there isnt really a correlation, maybe if you like someone enough and you spend time with them, you grow to love them, like i love most of my mates. If you add a romantic or sexual ellement ontop of that love its still the same love just with +intimacy. Theres always lust type words people use to describe a romantic love, but then all the ellements i consider part of 'real' love exist in non-sexual relationships aswell such as i would do anything for my family and i really enjoy just seeing them happy in life, stuff like that.

The puppydog type love where you cant stop thinking about them, always smile and cant stop giggling and stuff around them, i would call that more an infatuation or obsession than anything. Sure it can grow into real love but it gets mistaken as the real thing all the time. I call it honeymooning, its usually about the first 3 or so months, could go for six if they sex for first time towards the end of the 3 months[ in effect restarting the honeymoon]

 

[melanieeeee.]

yeah well the feeling of 'love' has peer-reviewed papers to explain what causes it and to verify it exists

post peer paper reviews or lies. make sure that the peer paper reviews are actually proving that love exists not just asserting and assuming of its existence.

Well bad luck darling!

I would rather feel love for a person than love for a construct any day!

great argument you have there.

Lol, epic post?
"Does love exist?"/"Does love still exist?"


I'm sure this is only a phase.
What is "romantic love", to you?

I'll be naive here and hazard a yes. The definition with which I haphazardly work with; a mutual understanding of another individual, characterised by caring (perhaps even excessive and overbearing, at times) and a genuine active interest in the other person and his/her interests, affections, and... shit, I don't know and/or have run out and/or can't put it to words and/or have chickened out.
Intimacy? Passion? Commitment? (Sternberg defined it as so, I believe.)

there are a million different theories for love. just like there are a million interpretations of god. how do we know which one is right.

I made amateur vid. or something about this; and have no idea whether it's circulating on the 'net.
That children exist?

how do you know that there is a correlation between love and children though. there could be a million other reasons to explain why kids exist. that is kind of like saying the earth exists as a result of god. hence proving gods existence.

"Where is this love? I can't see it, I can't touch it. I can't feel it. I cant hear it. I can hear some words, but I can't do anything with your easy words."

"I can't see it, I can't touch it. I can't feel it. " thats exactly why i am an non-believer.

http://www.askmehelpdesk.com/relationships/does-love-exist-there-such-thing-love-55982.html

I've yet to read, but have already lul'd in ignorance.

yeah that really is not a strong argument to a none believer. i dont feel any of that. so i dont see why it should exist. || i feel a spiritual connection with god. other people do not feel this connection. i cant really tell them that this connection with god if they havent felt it.

 

[staticsiscool]

I knew you would have some retarded underlying alternative motive for this thread. Even when you said you didnt, i knew you did.

 

[Sammy-Blue]

hi guys.

i havent "loved" anyone is such a long time and sometimes i wonder whether love is really just an illusion. maybe my heart is just numb. i dont know if i am just selfish or what. so at this moment i am an unbeliever in "love". i want to know whether love exists or not.

* i am not refering to lust. i am able to lust for someone.
** btw i am referring to romantic love.

edit: what is the proof that love exists.

You haven't loved anyone, ever, you've only felt what you think is love. You need a few more years on your side before you can start talking garbage like this.

 

[DownInFlames]

This thread is majorly deep. Lol.

 

[Zingy]

me and you both buddy.

Doubt it, or you wouldn't have made this thread.

 

[sajad07]

Yes

 

[ASNSWR127]

difficult to define love, but studies suggest "romantic love" exists, and produces different neural activities in the brain compared to "love for a friend". love, just like any other emotion, can be described entirely by chemical/cognitive neuroscience with biological and evolutionary reasoning to support why it exists.

[/font]
The Neural Basis of Love as a Subliminal Prime: An Event-related Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study
S. Ortigue1,2, F. Bianchi-Demicheli3, A. F. de C. Hamilton1, and S. T. Grafton1,2


Accession Number Peer Reviewed Journal: 2008-07234-011.
Title Brain oscillations evoked by the face of a loved person. [References].
Year of Publication 2008
Author Basar, Erol; Schmiedt-Fehr, Christina; Oniz, Adile; Basar-Eroglu, Canan.

other papers deal with more biological reasons as to why love exists such as benefits of monogamy relationships.

holy shit that was waaaay too clinical.

Love doesn't need to be...

 

[HalcyonSky]

post peer paper reviews or lies. make sure that the peer paper reviews are actually proving that love exists not just asserting and assuming of its existence.

there.

thanks 3unitz

 

[melanieeeee.]

@ 3units.

i dont agree with that definition of love. atm im studying the unit: love, intimacy and friendship at uni and we learn about a bunch of different theories of love (for those that dont believe me - http://www.usyd.edu.au/courses/?uos=1&uos_sef_id=GCST2610_Intimacy__Love_and_Friendship_3718 ). and i definitely have not been aware of the definition that love is "a motivated and goal-directed mechanism with explicit and implicit mechanisms". because that definition is not an accurate representation of love (according to what i have studied at university) to start of with, the goal of the experiment/ report is not providing evidence that love exists but instead providing evidence that motivated and goal-directed mechanism exists. hence it isnt really love that they are proving exists. also there are some assumptions made that love already exists e.g. love creates "euphoria, loss of appetite, hyperactivity, delay of the onset of fatigue, and a decreased need for sleep."

 

[HalcyonSky]

@ 3units.

i dont agree with that definition of love. atm im studying the unit: love, intimacy and friendship at uni and we learn about a bunch of different theories of love (for those that dont believe me - http://www.usyd.edu.au/courses/?uos=1&uos_sef_id=GCST2610_Intimacy__Love_and_Friendship_3718 ). and i definitely have not been aware of the definition that love is "a motivated and goal-directed mechanism with explicit and implicit mechanisms". because that definition is not an accurate representation of love (according to what i have studied at university) to start of with, the goal of the experiment/ report is not providing evidence that love exists but instead providing evidence that motivated and goal-directed mechanism exists. hence it isnt really love that they are proving exists. also there are some assumptions made that love already exists e.g. love creates "euphoria, loss of appetite, hyperactivity, delay of the onset of fatigue, and a decreased need for sleep."

they're saying that love is a sensation arising from these 'motivated and goal-directed mechanisms', you cant differentiate the 2 they're just different labels for the same thing

 

[melanieeeee.]

they're saying that love is a sensation arising from these 'motivated and goal-directed mechanisms', you cant differentiate the 2 they're just different labels for the same thing

they are saying "Throughout the ages, love has been defined as a motivated and goal-directed mechanism with explicit and implicit mechanisms." also no i dont believe that there is a correlation between the two. they are making the assumption that there is.

 

[HalcyonSky]

they are saying "Throughout the ages, love has been defined as a motivated and goal-directed mechanism with explicit and implicit mechanisms." also no i dont believe that there is a correlation between the two. they are making the assumption that there is.

the assumption is reinforced by evidence.

Recently, two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies reinforced the assumption that love is a goal-directed state that leads to a range of emotions, rather than a specific emotion (Aron et al., 2005; Bartels & Zeki, 2000). These studies showed that intense ongoing love, as compared to friendship, recruits subcorticocortical pathways mediating reward, emotion, and motivation systems

 

[melanieeeee.]

"Recently, two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies reinforced the assumption that love is a goal-directed state that leads to a range of emotions, rather than a specific emotion (Aron et al., 2005; Bartels & Zeki, 2000). These studies showed that intense ongoing love, as compared to friendship, recruits subcorticocortical pathways mediating reward, emotion, and motivation systems."

okay so there is a cause and effect between the two. but they are not the same. meaning that again you have made the assumption that love exists.