Love and atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-03-2016, 06:05 AM
RE: Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 05:41 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 05:26 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  I can guarantee that a great number of couples felt similar in their early times, and some never left the phase; you in your feelings are not unique. Sorry to take a pin to your balloon.

Tell me; how are you sure that your feelings are not hormonal? How would you defend your assertion?
As a point to consider; some in the no-free will camp would argue that your choice was simply an illusion; your brain ran through the calculations in the background, and you simply believed it to be your choice. Have you considered that?

You mean we all like a schizophrenic person somehow ? That our subconscious dictate a illusion in our heads and somehow we believe in something not real ? Believing in experiencing and experiences that are not real is a definite description of schizophrenia ! How we just will be schizophrenic in just the matter of love ? This is hard to digest but maybe it's true

I believe you misunderstood my comment. The no-free will campers I mentioned for illustration are determinists; the factors of antecedent determine the outcome, and the human perception of choice is simply an illusory by-product. It is not a mental illness like schizophrenia.
I myself am not amongst their numbers, and my explanation does them a disservice in its baseness. I was just wonderign if you had considered that you had never actually made a choice, it was determined by the physical phenomena around you.

(21-03-2016 05:53 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  I have some theories of my own . Actually I posted this to share and discuss this theories .

Instead of this chemical in our brains , what about we describe love as a universal energy-like thing that we don't understand yet , like gravity and electromagnetic forces , that we born as couples in some electromagnetic-like spectrum that eventually come together somehow

But we know that there is an electro-chemical basis for emotion; we can manipulate the mental states of individuals with drugs and electrical stimulation of neurons. But we have no evidence for an all-pervading emotion-field.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free Thought's post
21-03-2016, 06:18 AM
Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 06:05 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 05:41 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  You mean we all like a schizophrenic person somehow ? That our subconscious dictate a illusion in our heads and somehow we believe in something not real ? Believing in experiencing and experiences that are not real is a definite description of schizophrenia ! How we just will be schizophrenic in just the matter of love ? This is hard to digest but maybe it's true

I believe you misunderstood my comment. The no-free will campers I mentioned for illustration are determinists; the factors of antecedent determine the outcome, and the human perception of choice is simply an illusory by-product. It is not a mental illness like schizophrenia.
I myself am not amongst their numbers, and my explanation does them a disservice in its baseness. I was just wonderign if you had considered that you had never actually made a choice, it was determined by the physical phenomena around you.

(21-03-2016 05:53 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  I have some theories of my own . Actually I posted this to share and discuss this theories .

Instead of this chemical in our brains , what about we describe love as a universal energy-like thing that we don't understand yet , like gravity and electromagnetic forces , that we born as couples in some electromagnetic-like spectrum that eventually come together somehow

But we know that there is an electro-chemical basis for emotion; we can manipulate the mental states of individuals with drugs and electrical stimulation of neurons. But we have no evidence for an all-pervading emotion-field.

Yeah , I'm telling you that it's not a choice , you don't choose who you love , you just love , and that's exactly the case ! It's like it's just meant to be .

tricky matter anyways

Thanks for your participation
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 06:22 AM
RE: Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 05:53 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  I have some theories of my own . Actually I posted this to share and discuss this theories .

Instead of this chemical in our brains , what about we describe love as a universal energy-like thing that we don't understand yet , like gravity and electromagnetic forces , that we born as couples in some electromagnetic-like spectrum that eventually come together somehow

One of the philosophers said something similar, about one soul being separated into two bodies. I'm sure another poster will know who said it.

Ideas or concepts like "separated souls" or "energy" have a big problem. Emotions and feelings are explained by the natural sciences via brain chemistry.

If metaphysical ideas are to be believed they have to not only show that they are correct, but that the existing understandings are incorrect.

(21-03-2016 05:57 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  I think this is more believe-able than act of god or just act of hormones . Hormones don't act in 2 different persons , with this chemical theories you can in best case describe it in one of partners .

Some of the chemicals involved are pheromones, scent based secretions. These are, in fact, chemicals generated by one partner that affect the other partner.

Additionally, everything we do and experience is reflected in our brain chemistry. One person cuts us off in traffic and we get angry. Another person gives us a hug and we feel affection.

It's all back and forth interaction and it's all chemistry.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
21-03-2016, 06:35 AM
Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 06:22 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 05:53 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  I have some theories of my own . Actually I posted this to share and discuss this theories .

Instead of this chemical in our brains , what about we describe love as a universal energy-like thing that we don't understand yet , like gravity and electromagnetic forces , that we born as couples in some electromagnetic-like spectrum that eventually come together somehow

One of the philosophers said something similar, about one soul being separated into two bodies. I'm sure another poster will know who said it.

Ideas or concepts like "separated souls" or "energy" have a big problem. Emotions and feelings are explained by the natural sciences via brain chemistry.

If metaphysical ideas are to be believed they have to not only show that they are correct, but that the existing understandings are incorrect.

(21-03-2016 05:57 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  I think this is more believe-able than act of god or just act of hormones . Hormones don't act in 2 different persons , with this chemical theories you can in best case describe it in one of partners .

Some of the chemicals involved are pheromones, scent based secretions. These are, in fact, chemicals generated by one partner that affect the other partner.

Additionally, everything we do and experience is reflected in our brain chemistry. One person cuts us off in traffic and we get angry. Another person gives us a hug and we feel affection.

It's all back and forth interaction and it's all chemistry.

No this chemical theories are not incorrect , there is definitely a rise in oxytocin when you love , but what causes this chemical phenomenons ? There is metal in magnets , metal atoms and chemistry in that , but the force is electromagnetic fields, something atoms produce and somehow or we somthing like this in gravity . All i say is this what forces this chemicals in body to rise and move in neurons and veins ! There is no paradox, I think this unknown forces are work with physical and chemicals in our body and brains !

Something bigger that we now , don't know , like gravity before Newton but we feel it !
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 08:12 AM
RE: Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 04:25 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  ... if love is just an emotion
...

" 'Love is merely chemistry'
... is a deception.
We are merely chemistry.
Love makes us master chemists."
~~ Johnny Cantor

(21-03-2016 06:18 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  ...
Yeah , I'm telling you that it's not a choice , you don't choose who you love , you just love , and that's exactly the case ! It's like it's just meant to be .

tricky matter anyways
...

Actually, it's not that tricky. This short article might help... It only takes 34 minutes to fall in love.

Welcome to TTA, btw. Join in the fun ... you'll fall in love with the place.

Wink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
21-03-2016, 08:37 AM
RE: Love and atheism
Which human passion is the more strongly manifested against another individual: jealousy, or hatred, or love?

Can't all three lead ultimately to the death of the subject? How then is love—in and of itself—any more meaningful than jealousy or hatred, or more deserving of special consideration?

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 09:17 AM
Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 08:12 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 04:25 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  ... if love is just an emotion
...

" 'Love is merely chemistry'
... is a deception.
We are merely chemistry.
Love makes us master chemists."
~~ Johnny Cantor

(21-03-2016 06:18 AM)hitrosh Wrote:  ...
Yeah , I'm telling you that it's not a choice , you don't choose who you love , you just love , and that's exactly the case ! It's like it's just meant to be .

tricky matter anyways
...

Actually, it's not that tricky. This short article might help... It only takes 34 minutes to fall in love.

Welcome to TTA, btw. Join in the fun ... you'll fall in love with the place.

Wink

I agree with the article , it shows the chemistry of love , it says we need two object and material an atoms for having a gravity between them , but it doesn't explain the force that begins that cascade ! Yeah some scientist maybe put strangers together , but was that study double blind ? With how many subject he or she has a marriage in study ? How it is supporting the idea , Maybe that process was that force of universe ! Maybe that marriage didn't last , half of marriages lasts , we surly don't talk about them , lots of people think they are in love , but they define crush , attraction and other unhealthy or sexual ( sexual is healthy ) feeling as love . What was the measure of attraction ? There was a follow up ? Are the subjects was 100% sure that the other partner is the only one ? Or they just having a crush or just really interested in their partner ?


I'm talking about the initiation of that cascades !

When I first met my wife , I felt something different and told my friend beside me that . We were in a mall not a cafe in France . Although I had crushes Before , I had those heart beats and blood rushes to my face , I met hundreds of girls , so why this girl , this peace was something new and unique for me ? You can't be sure and successfully marry someone just with chemicals , because if you felt this person is the one and only , honestly and not fooling yourself and end up divorcing , how could you fell in love again and say someone else is the one , so what happens with last peaceful relation ?! We don't talk about going parties and having wonderful sex or even traveling the world , we talk about peaceful life together for a lifetime ! Of course I'm talking about true and healthy love , a love that calms you and put you in peace , not crushes , sick dependence and ... This article was lousy about the reason behind all this but was strong in describing the devices and instruments of how it works ! Thank you though .
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 09:23 AM
Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 08:37 AM)SYZ Wrote:  Which human passion is the more strongly manifested against another individual: jealousy, or hatred, or love?

Can't all three lead ultimately to the death of the subject? How then is love—in and of itself—any more meaningful than jealousy or hatred, or more deserving of special consideration?

Jealousy or hatred ? How long this thing last ? Hatred and jealousy are negative and harmful and excess of them is unhealthy because they harm your quality of life , why we should consider them ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 09:53 AM
RE: Love and atheism
Plato is a good source for a discussion about love, though one has to be careful of saying what most Greek philosophers meant by something as most of the time they offer no whole definition, or it is too complex or ambiguous.

My simple understanding of this view on love is that love is the desire to have something that you do not have. The only thing conceivable that a human could want that he does not have is goodness.

Plato uses the prophetess Diotima as a mouthpiece in his famed "Symposium". At one point she sums up that, "The object of love is the permanent possession of goodness for oneself".

She then defined love's purpose as the mental and physical procreation in an attractive medium (later changed to beautiful medium). Beforehand, Diotima uses the example of creativity. Creativity is basically the creation of something that once wasn't but now is because of the creative medium. Examples used are poets, philosophers, businessmen etc. Remember, the aim is to attain permanent goodness for oneself, which as a pursuit can manifest itself in a multiple of ways. I think that these examples used are examples of people attempting to fulfill this innate pursuit but they cannot do so on the subject of PERMANENT possession of goodness, merely temporary goodness.

Plato thinks that all human beings are either physically or mentally pregnant, and only when they find this creative medium they can "give birth", or "create". This is an instinctive desire.

So, one must find a medium attractive, or beautiful, in order to have the desire to procreate with it. An artist must find art attractive, a businessman business, a philosopher philosophy etc. The large variety of attractiveness is why humans vary so much in their pursuits in life though they all have the same aim through these pursuits.

Therefore, the ultimate object of love is procreation in a beautiful medium. This is because physical procreation with a woman is not just the same as creating something, say, as an artist. No, procreation itself is as close as a mortal can get to immortality. This closeness with immortality ticks the box (as closely as possible) of having PERMANENT goodness, while at the same time procreation, the act of creating something new, with a beautiful person, ticks of box of achieving goodness.


I hope that makes sense, I'm still studying this subject and the thing that gets me is this term "beautiful medium" as I cannot seem to grasp what Plato means by its necessity here. I would appreciate any illogicalities or anything of the sort pointed out to me because I'm still trying to grasp Plato's concept of love myself. It's a massive topic!

Saints live in flames; wise men, next to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 10:33 AM
Love and atheism
(21-03-2016 09:53 AM)SunnyD1 Wrote:  Plato is a good source for a discussion about love, though one has to be careful of saying what most Greek philosophers meant by something as most of the time they offer no whole definition, or it is too complex or ambiguous.

My simple understanding of this view on love is that love is the desire to have something that you do not have. The only thing conceivable that a human could want that he does not have is goodness.

Plato uses the prophetess Diotima as a mouthpiece in his famed "Symposium". At one point she sums up that, "The object of love is the permanent possession of goodness for oneself".

She then defined love's purpose as the mental and physical procreation in an attractive medium (later changed to beautiful medium). Beforehand, Diotima uses the example of creativity. Creativity is basically the creation of something that once wasn't but now is because of the creative medium. Examples used are poets, philosophers, businessmen etc. Remember, the aim is to attain permanent goodness for oneself, which as a pursuit can manifest itself in a multiple of ways. I think that these examples used are examples of people attempting to fulfill this innate pursuit but they cannot do so on the subject of PERMANENT possession of goodness, merely temporary goodness.

Plato thinks that all human beings are either physically or mentally pregnant, and only when they find this creative medium they can "give birth", or "create". This is an instinctive desire.

So, one must find a medium attractive, or beautiful, in order to have the desire to procreate with it. An artist must find art attractive, a businessman business, a philosopher philosophy etc. The large variety of attractiveness is why humans vary so much in their pursuits in life though they all have the same aim through these pursuits.

Therefore, the ultimate object of love is procreation in a beautiful medium. This is because physical procreation with a woman is not just the same as creating something, say, as an artist. No, procreation itself is as close as a mortal can get to immortality. This closeness with immortality ticks the box (as closely as possible) of having PERMANENT goodness, while at the same time procreation, the act of creating something new, with a beautiful person, ticks of box of achieving goodness.


I hope that makes sense, I'm still studying this subject and the thing that gets me is this term "beautiful medium" as I cannot seem to grasp what Plato means by its necessity here. I would appreciate any illogicalities or anything of the sort pointed out to me because I'm still trying to grasp Plato's concept of love myself. It's a massive topic!

That's an amazing approach
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: