It's Chemical

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 1100
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

It's Chemical

Post by Whitedragon »

It is chemical

What is love ? Although this blog is not about love itself, often when the emotion love comes up, they say it is only chemical. What lies beyond it, though ? Is it on whether it is chemical … or is it on WHY it is chemical. To clarify this, why, refers not to the chemicals, but that which lies beyond them ; who or what sets it into motion and is it for the right reasons or not ?

Perhaps love is NOT the chemicals, but the person and his or her personality that evokes them. We will discuss two major questions. Do people and things evoke chemical reactions, and what is the value at looking at the people rather than the chemicals ? We will also discuss chemical attachment to the wrong things and people. Thus, the discussion is on whether the emphasis lies with the chemicals or the things and people that evoke their reactions. Some things make our chemicals seethe, but does it have value ? Are there some things that educe little endorphins, but hold the key to success and perhaps even happiness ?

The suggestion is that something, like love, is primarily stimulated externally, which calls the primary cause of emotion into question. Anyone can evoke a chemical reaction. We can fall in love with a user or a good person. Although chemicals can bind us to the right or wrong person, we fall for the person. It is inherently in that person, but the chemicals make the love possible. Where do we place the emphasis, on the chemicals or the things and people that set them in motion ? If we lived alone in a desert, we have chemical potential to love, but no one to set it in motion neither can we project it on anyone. Every time we love, it is different, but really, the person is different, which makes the argument for love being solely a chemical harder to believe.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.
Thinkingcat
Posts: 50
Joined: June 2nd, 2010, 2:19 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Thinkingcat »

Since consciousness is not understood, all that can be said is that there is a correlation between chemicals and feelings. I think you are right that it is an open question whether the feelings or the chemicals are primary. Even if experimental evidence suggests that feelings can be produced by chemicals, it is still arguable that chemicals may only be facilitating the consciousness of something that has independent existence.
Boots
Posts: 327
Joined: February 11th, 2016, 9:19 am

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Boots »

Love is simply the feeling a person has when they have emotionally invested in something or someone.
User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 1100
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Whitedragon »

Thank you Thinkingcat, we still have to contend with the notion of quantum physics, which suggest that our minds play a role in our environment, which could make for a very interesting twist in the discussion.

Yes boots, one cannot but help to lean to this argument that it involves what we have invested. It must play one of the biggest roles in a relationship. However, how do we get to the point of love ? Being in love is the preamble for it. Without it, we might not want to invest at all. So what makes us willing to invest, just the person or the chemicals, and again, which is most important ?
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.
Togo1
Posts: 541
Joined: September 23rd, 2015, 9:52 am

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Togo1 »

I think that chemicals are certainly involved, but you're correct that love is not explained or encompassed by chemicals. In the same way that analysis of the neurotransmitters involved in perceiving the colour red doesn't give you the experience of red, so too the chemicals involved in love don't touch on the experience of love, and it's role as a drive, as a motive, and as a passion.
Boots
Posts: 327
Joined: February 11th, 2016, 9:19 am

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Boots »

Whitedragon wrote:Thank you Thinkingcat, we still have to contend with the notion of quantum physics, which suggest that our minds play a role in our environment, which could make for a very interesting twist in the discussion.

Yes boots, one cannot but help to lean to this argument that it involves what we have invested. It must play one of the biggest roles in a relationship. However, how do we get to the point of love ? Being in love is the preamble for it. Without it, we might not want to invest at all. So what makes us willing to invest, just the person or the chemicals, and again, which is most important ?

The individual to whom we are initially attracted possesses some traits/chemicals/pheromones or what-have-you that are attractive to us. Why are these particular traits/chemicals/pheromones attractive to us and not others? Because that is what we are wired to be attracted to.
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Logic_ill »

Love is chemical, but we do not only experience it that way. People who have an interest in our biological functions might view it as chemical, but not everyone. I suppose love is a natural feeling for social animals, such as ourselves. I wonder if plants experience it? :) I mean, human beings have a name for "their attachments" or feel good interactions. But sometimes they hit or mistreat a person they love, and claim it was out of love. They may even be right. Love is very much associated to the human need of being social, even if it is with only one person. But most of the time, it isn´t. There´s all kinds of loving relationships and there may be no way around them.

But going back to other social animals, can their desire for sex be considered love? Do they view that way or even have a name for it? :) Dogs also interact with one another. Can we call this interactions love?

How about non-social species? Do they experience love? Does a lizard love another when they have sex? How about when they fight? These are certainly behaviors or needs.

Then, there´s love across species. I think it is possible.
User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 1100
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Whitedragon »

Boots, that thought did come up initially. The chemicals and pheromones we give off do play a role and it is a very good point you raise. However, what about the things people say, the things people believe. What about the movies and music taste we share; chemically we might love Mozart or the Beetles, maybe even both. What we believe however, philosophy about, (if we do), is that just chemical, or does our interests and convictions go beyond chemicals ? Electro chemical action in the brain stores it and sets it in motion, but if we never share our ideas with someone, it might be just that which makes them lose interest.

Logic_ill, another question we can ask is, why do people cheat on each other ? There could be more than one reason … the one that stands out is when a partner is no longer satisfied with what the other party has to offer. A beautiful partner can potentially have more mates than others that are less attractive ; the long term infidelity often gravitates to the lack of other compatibility between the two people. For example, why would a man spend more time with his male friend, hanging out all the time, and hardly speak to his wife ? (No sex jokes please – let us assume they are not gay).

Perhaps what we have in common is what binds us together, and what is lasting ; not just wild hormones.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Logic_ill »

The reason why I went into other species and their interactions, was because we call some of these interactions "love" when it's about humans, but not when they are other animals. Truth of the matter is that we probably wouldn't be able to behave differently (on average), unless we reflect on it and want to change.

I think a reason why some men cheat is because they not only think they can get away with it, but they are also somehow taught to. I mean some guys do it for sport and they find much male support. If she is female, the reasons can range from boredom to being in the wrong place at the wrong time, etc. Long term relationships might rarely get away without something frisky going on with either male or female. It's just bound to happen if either of the two is attractive and attracted to someone else outside that relationship. Proximity to others is a major factor.

Hanging out with friends, in my view, may be less burdensome or even boring to both the male and female. It depends on the couple and whether they truly enjoy one another's company. Some men just want a woman for sex and try to avoid any other type of relationship with them, even if they are married. Some may have too much to hide or don't want to complicate things by mixing friends and wife. They may be the jealous type or the secretive type. There are a whole range of reasons for that kind of BS. ;)

We are under the constant influence of our chemical reactions because we are alive, but our stories are what's most real to us. I think love should be ever present.

But I don't want to place blame on the male alone. I mean any sex can cheat, especially with the ups and downs of long term relationships. Not that they should.
Boots
Posts: 327
Joined: February 11th, 2016, 9:19 am

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Boots »

Whitedragon wrote:Boots, that thought did come up initially. The chemicals and pheromones we give off do play a role and it is a very good point you raise. However, what about the things people say, the things people believe. What about the movies and music taste we share; chemically we might love Mozart or the Beetles, maybe even both. What we believe however, philosophy about, (if we do), is that just chemical, or does our interests and convictions go beyond chemicals ? Electro chemical action in the brain stores it and sets it in motion, but if we never share our ideas with someone, it might be just that which makes them lose interest.

Logic_ill, another question we can ask is, why do people cheat on each other ? There could be more than one reason … the one that stands out is when a partner is no longer satisfied with what the other party has to offer. A beautiful partner can potentially have more mates than others that are less attractive ; the long term infidelity often gravitates to the lack of other compatibility between the two people. For example, why would a man spend more time with his male friend, hanging out all the time, and hardly speak to his wife ? (No sex jokes please – let us assume they are not gay).

Perhaps what we have in common is what binds us together, and what is lasting ; not just wild hormones.
Initial attraction to anything or anyone has myriad explanations from chemical to aesthetics. I like small sports cars and someone else likes rat rods. I buy a sports car I like and over time I may love that car. That will happen once I emotionally invest in the car. To what degree I love and when exactly that occurs is individual.
User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 1100
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Whitedragon »

Boot said :
Initial attraction to anything or anyone has myriad explanations from chemical to aesthetics. I like small sports cars and someone else likes rat rods. I buy a sports car I like and over time I may love that car. That will happen once I emotionally invest in the car. To what degree I love and when exactly that occurs is individual.
Indeed, but if there were no sport cars or rat rods, how could one be attached to it, which is the primary focus of the thread. Imagine a man who has one sense missing, like sight, or smell – the world that exists for us in sight or smell is absent for him. Relevant chemicals in our world will remain dormant, which compels us to place the emphasis of importance on the external world.

Saying that chemicals are just as important as the external world is arbitrary, since inanimate devices can also observe their surroundings, what about the Star Trek Data, who had no emotions for the majority of the series ? Certainly chemicals make it worthwhile, but viewers of the show would argue Data’s contribution as a “non-emotional” was an important element, which could be seen as an anchor for those with emotion. Such a character grounds the others and helps them view the world from a more objective point of view.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.
Boots
Posts: 327
Joined: February 11th, 2016, 9:19 am

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Boots »

Whitedragon wrote:Boot said :
Initial attraction to anything or anyone has myriad explanations from chemical to aesthetics. I like small sports cars and someone else likes rat rods. I buy a sports car I like and over time I may love that car. That will happen once I emotionally invest in the car. To what degree I love and when exactly that occurs is individual.
Indeed, but if there were no sport cars or rat rods, how could one be attached to it, which is the primary focus of the thread. Imagine a man who has one sense missing, like sight, or smell – the world that exists for us in sight or smell is absent for him. Relevant chemicals in our world will remain dormant, which compels us to place the emphasis of importance on the external world.

Saying that chemicals are just as important as the external world is arbitrary, since inanimate devices can also observe their surroundings, what about the Star Trek Data, who had no emotions for the majority of the series ? Certainly chemicals make it worthwhile, but viewers of the show would argue Data’s contribution as a “non-emotional” was an important element, which could be seen as an anchor for those with emotion. Such a character grounds the others and helps them view the world from a more objective point of view.
If there is nothing to attach to, then there is nothing to attach to. I'm not sure what point you're making here.

The pheromones, chemicals, neurotransmitters at work to drive attraction are internal and react to the external. If an individual is missing the relevant 'chemicals', then that individual will not feel attraction and possibly love.
User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 1100
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Whitedragon »

People place a one-sided emphasis on “chemicals” making it sound as if this is all what love is. This thread wishes to attain a balance. It suggests that the physical or material is just as important, if not more important. In some talks love seems to be minimised to something hallow by saying, “it is chemical,” as if to dismiss or reduce its value by explaining it.

It is similar to the religious discussions on forums. The ability to explain the working of something should not dismiss or diminish it. Such an attitude is unwise, since it would suggest a false sense of omniscience and that knowledge can destroy mystery, beauty, and inherent value. Why do people have the tendency to lose their feeling of awe for something when they can explain it scientifically ? This is troublesome since what we think and what we feel is pushed aside, (even along with the things and people we attach ourselves with). It leaves the possibility to condone malevolent behaviour because feelings are inconsequential. If feelings are just chemicals, we can argue its importance is an illusion, which calls the things we value, which we attach ourselves to in to question. Not all people are like this, but many develop a condescending, superior attitude to the things they understand ; for some awe increases, for some arrogance, and even ignorance despite a knowledge that supposedly grows.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: It's Chemical

Post by The Beast »

Love. Everyone agrees: there is a chemical reaction. Since it is a chemical reaction, it has a component of quantity and one of quality. I can make the assertion that some people have larger capacities to feel faith or love. Moreover, this capacities extend to other areas of the spectrum. As such, new reactions in novel situations have behavioral capabilities. In addition, the personal array of possible reactions has a shelve life and moves on to a different array of possible reactions as maturity is unavoidable. I think of this as mature judgement. It is then possible to do an analysis of any particular reaction and form an idea as to whether is more prevalent in young, or in mature, or in fulfilled capacity (aged) individuals. I feel that the relationship of love and altruism is one of maturity. The capacity to feel love is then converted by maturity into the capacity to be altruistic. However, In some cultures, reactants of love and altruism are the highest in youth and taper down to the end. (Evolution in action) . In addition if love is a reaction, (as it is in Faith), it is increased by rituals (routines connecting the release of the reactants). IMO love is connected to the basic fabric of matter. It must be harmony. IMO love needs faith and they evolve together. So there is the matter of love and there is the feeling of the wave. Do you feel the wave?
Sanchez
Posts: 98
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 8:03 am

Re: It's Chemical

Post by Sanchez »

Imagine a man being forced to do something at gunpoint. The good kind of reductionist would assert that we can make some sense of this in terms of neuroscience (the experience of fear, the desire to live, perceiving the threat, giving in etc. having some neural basis). The bad kind of reductionist would assert that we can explain the situation without mentioning the gun. It's the same thing with love. Even if consciousness is completely located in the brain, it's content is defined by the meaning it derives from the external world. Therefore it's not possible to understand conscious experience without including things external to the brain.

As to love in other species: I'd guess that some sort of affection occurs in all species that take care of their young. Something like romantic love might exist in species that pair up for long periods or even for life. I doubt animals love each other if their encounters are merely sexual.
Whitedragon wrote:we still have to contend with the notion of quantum physics, which suggest that our minds play a role in our environment, which could make for a very interesting twist in the discussion.
Although this view of quantum physics is popular in mainstream media, it is a minority position among the experts in the field. Some feel it's been experimentally disproven. Regardless of whether that's the case, the view runs into logical problems.
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021