|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 11/26/2003 : 06:35:11 [Permalink]
|
Okay. Then your definition of love is that which it takes for the species to reproduce and to make sure that they have enough to eat?
Is this pure instinct? Is "romance" something different? Are there different kinds of love? What are they? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
 |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 08:43:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Woody D
quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo
Love is not reproduction.
I think you are correct Gorgo.
Val, doesn't know what he's talking about.
My grandparents was an aranged marrage, they had several children. My mother used to say she didn't think her father loved her mother.
Many cultures have such marrages. My 'room mate' also cames from a culture like that and I believe he did say that his parents union was aranged too. His mother was his fathers 2nd wife. History of his family shows that the father was with the 1st wife in between being with his 2nd family. Several children from both wifes. These stories are not isolated incidencs.
Love, again I say, has nothing to do with survival of the species.
Snake
Gorgo was referring to me? I thought I made it very clear that reproduction was a key for the survival of a species. Love helps ensure that more of the offspring survive to mating age.
Love is that emotion which causes parents to provide for and protect offspring and each other. At no time did I intimate that Love was reproduction. Love is advantageous from a survival point of view as two parents caring for offspring ensures more offspring survive than a child on it's own. These parents will teach their offspring the skills it needs to survive. But since you can't come up with any sort of refutation, you'll just settle for claiming I don't know what I'm talking about.
There are several types of love.
They are agape (love for humanity in general or societal love), romantic or eros (couples who stay together have this type of love), custodial or storge (love for children), and philia (love between freinds).
Again, your anectdotal evidence is unrepresentative of the whole of society.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 08:54:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo
Okay. Then your definition of love is that which it takes for the species to reproduce and to make sure that they have enough to eat?
Is this pure instinct? Is "romance" something different? Are there different kinds of love? What are they?
I repeat:
quote:
So-called 'love', as we see it, and distilled off to it's basic essence, is a tight bonding between two individuals to the advantage of both. Expanded, it, it is a bonding of the community and the country, again, to the advantage of all. We haven't seen much of this last lately, however, we do see a lot of sub-groups, factions, if you will, bonding quite tightly in order to gain political advantage -- kind'a reminds me of a large, troup of baboons. The faction(s) that succeed will get most of the available 'food'.
Love between two initally horny individuals, if it goes beyond the cheap motel stage, will soon become a solid friendship that will eiher last a lifetime or end in seperation, or worse.
'Romance' is the bullshit employed by both parties to either reach or re-visit the relationship's cheap motel stage. 
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 09:22:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Snake:
Love, again I say, has nothing to do with survival of the species.
Consider this. Everything we are, we are because we evolved. What does not work for the survival of a species gets selected out. Every emotion or combination of emotions we have must therefore serve to insure the survival of the species in some way. It is the evolutionary prime directive. If what we call love did not work for us, or if it endangered our survival, it would not be around, or it would lead to our demise.
As filthy pointed out, bonding is good for survival. Love is about bonding. Romantic love often leads to reproduction. Reproduction is what every species must do to survive.
And sure, reproduction can occur without romantic love or bonding. Just ask a black widow. But they are a solitary species. They do their best work alone. We don't. We have evolved as a social species. All brands of our love evolved with us.
And hey, how many teenagers would survive adolescence if their parents didn't love them? Most of them would be murdered by their parents... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 09:53:36 [Permalink]
|
Nope. Not me.
quote:
Gorgo was referring to me?
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 09:55:23 [Permalink]
|
But, except for things like the sex drive, isn't all this other stuff learned? I mean, some people do not love their children, etc.
I'm not asking these questions because I know, I'm asking questions to explore. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 11:11:54 [Permalink]
|
Kil wrote:quote:
Consider this. Everything we are, we are because we evolved. What does not work for the survival of a species gets selected out. Every emotion or combination of emotions we have must therefore serve to insure the survival of the species in some way. It is the evolutionary prime directive. If what we call love did not work for us, or if it endangered our survival, it would not be around, or it would lead to our demise.
Not quite. Traits which offer no advantage or disadvantage for reproduction have no "selection pressure" one way or the other, and instead tend to spread through a population randomly.
Take, for example, a hypothetical gene for a hypothetical deadly cancer which typically shows first symptoms at age 60 (I'm too lazy right now to find a real-life example). Since 60 is well beyond most people's reproductive age, the disadvantages posed by the cancer are minimal with regard to reproductive success. The gene will be passed on to offspring long before the person with the gene finds out they've got a genetic disease.
Anyway, if a "love gene" exists, and it neither helps nor hinders reproduction, it would still likely spread throughout the population. It's more than likely, however, that love - in general - aids reproduction. After all, kids whose parents don't love each other - or who don't love their kids - would have been at a distinct disadvantage with regard to making it to puberty even just a few hundred years ago, for a variety of social and economic reasons. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 17:55:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
It's more than likely, however, that love - in general - aids reproduction.
That' a bunch of hog-wash.
It's sexual attraction that 'aids reproduction'. Love is not the same thing as attraction alone.
Snake |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 18:45:03 [Permalink]
|
Snake wrote:quote:
That' a bunch of hog-wash.
It's sexual attraction that 'aids reproduction'. Love is not the same thing as attraction alone.
What's "hog-wash" is that you seem to be telling me that when I say "love," I mean something completely independent of "sexual attraction." You also seem to be telling me that when I says "aids," I mean "is completely responsible for."
I'll agree with your apparent point - that sexual attraction is the major player in successful reproduction - but love can and does help.
For example, I never had any desire whatsoever to have children with any of my past one-night stands or "f--k buddies," with whom there was no real love. I did have a desire to have a child with my wife, though, and the result is two-and-a-half years old, now. I wouldn't have married her if I had nothing but a sexual attraction towards her. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2003 : 00:31:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
For example, I never had any desire whatsoever to have children with any of my past one-night stands or "f--k buddies," with whom there was no real love. I did have a desire to have a child with my wife, though, and the result is two-and-a-half years old, now. I wouldn't have married her if I had nothing but a sexual attraction towards her.
Val says, you are not allowed to use that, it's anectdotal.
My expierence is the opposit. I never wanted to have children either, and I resent them for being born. All I've ever had for anyone I've ever 'slept' with was attaction, including the two I married. (How can you love someone you have to yell at all the time and who doesn't speak English?) It's all sex. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2003 : 02:50:27 [Permalink]
|
Snake, I posit that the fact that you've had terrible experiences and horrible marriages makes you unqualified to condemn the subject as "hog-wash." If you even know somebody who actually wanted to have kids, or know of somebody in a good marriage (me), then you know that your experiences are perhaps no greater than 50% of what happens in the real world.
Of course, the first half of my reply to you was not anecdotal, but you chose to not reply to it at all. Such is "debate" on these sorts of forums, but you could have shown some chutzpah by adressing the meat of my reply, instead of just the anecdotal fluff.
You also wrote:quote:
I never wanted to have children either, and I resent them for being born.
"Either?" What you describe is not the case for me. While I never wanted to have children with the girls I just boinked for boinking's sake, I very much wanted a child with my wife. Your attempt at including me in your version of reality fails.quote:
All I've ever had for anyone I've ever 'slept' with was attaction. . .
I find the above comment particularly to be deserving of pity. Really, Snake, I feel bad for you if such is the case. The orgasms are very much better when there's more to it than "hey, you look good."quote:
. . .including the two I married. (How can you love someone you have to yell at all the time and who doesn't speak English?)
All I can say is: why the hell did you marry such a person? Or persons? Did you start out with a "cheap" vision of what marriage is? Did you marry so that your spouse could get a green card? Was it economics instead of either lust or love?quote:
It's all sex.
I know of a guy in a small West Virginia town who has at least 37 children, and he's never been married. That is a life which is "all sex."
I'm on my 14th sexual partner right now, and I've been with her (monogamously) for the last 11 years. I had no inclination to have kids with the previous 13 partners because, for a variety of reasons, they weren't "keepers." I was in love with many of them (and several more that I never got the opportunity to actually have sex with), but I never had a desire to have kids with the first 13 because I knw they wouldn't be good mothers for the kind of kids I'd want to raise. In fact, some of them are mothers from men other than myself, and have proven themselves to be incompetent as moms.
On the sole basis of sexual attraction: you're damn right I'd boink some of them (even the stupid ones) again. But I'd also be damn sure that more than one method of contraception was in use, since the last thing I'd want to do, even if I were single, would be to set up a situation wherein I couldn't just flee - guilt free - from those women if I felt like it.
On a different note, I was once asked - by a woman - how I got to know any women if I didn't have sex with them. I still think the question is moronic, in that it implies that any dealings between men and women are about sex and nothing more. It was the first, but not the last, time I'd found a woman whose only "meaningful" interaction with men was through her vagina. Needless to say, she didn't like me, because I wouldn't ever have had sex with her. I was, on that basis alone, "worthless" to her.
People who interact solely through sex are, ironically, often a big turn-off for me. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2003 : 04:26:31 [Permalink]
|
So, what we seem to be saying is that sex drive has not necessarily evolved for the benefit of the species. Sex drive must be combined with logic and some other things in order for it to be a benefit to society. Society is the mechanism that humans create which is supposed to benefit the species (and ultimately the rest of the world, hopefully).
Love, then is a combination of deeds and thoughts and actions based on a lot of things, most of which are under human control. Love is not just sex drive for instance, as sex drive can be ignored for other purposes.
One thing that hasn't been shown is that love is any kind of evidence of a "spirit." There has been no need to introduce such a concept into this discussion at all.
One thing we haven't found |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
gezzam
SFN Regular
Australia
751 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2003 : 10:56:03 [Permalink]
|
All I know is that the little dog on my avatar just about pisses herself with happiness every time we come home.
It can be either one of two things......love or hunger.
The romantic in me says it is love.... |
Mistakes are a part of being human. Appreciate your mistakes for what they are: precious life lessons that can only be learned the hard way. Unless it's a fatal mistake, which, at least, others can learn from.
Al Franken |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2003 : 13:30:07 [Permalink]
|
I just think of it this way:
Love is a bond between people. You can give it any reasoning you want and it's going to vary from person to person and type of relationship. I think it's pretty obvious that such a bond would increase the chances of survival.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2003 : 16:21:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by gezzam
All I know is that the little dog on my avatar just about pisses herself with happiness every time we come home.
It can be either one of two things......love or hunger.
Or a third reason: The Divine Leader of the Pack arrived.
Dogs social structure demands the individual having ultimate loyalty to its master/pack.
quote:
The romantic in me says it is love....
It's easy to interpret loyalty as love. Most people don't care to make the distinction. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
