On the Subject of Love

What is love? This question has been prickling me for the longest time since I've first discovered it's presence in the eyes of couples all around me during the times of school to the faces of partners newly wed at the church bells. Is it simply a reaction of chemical and hormonal imbalances within the brain that pushes the animal within us to reproduce or is it something more, something profoundly humane in the choosing of our spouses? Is it prevalent or is it a mere fickle stage, tossed aside when divorce soon cuts the ties of marriage 2 years after? At times I wonder whether or not the two truly were committing to the vows of "until death do us part". Well enough of my babbling, what do you think of love?

Baby don't hurt me
Don't hurt me
No more

Now that I got that aside, to the discussion that is serious. My main view on love in general is just a "built-in function" for humans to reproduce. Which I believe that morals are being restrictive of said purpose.

Then again I'm sure a social system where it's legal to fuck on sight is equally retarded.

Personal description. The warm feeling that you get from a summers eve. There is such an innocence and raw string of emotions that come when you look into that special persons eyes. No matter how close or how far you can always feel them with you. They are your strength, they are your courage, they are your everything and their happiness is the greatest gift in the world.... Yeah (I'm a romantic love sick pup, so yeah this is really how I feel, don't judge too harsh cause even I'm puking in the corner from the cheesy sweetness of my own words)

Love like anything complex in life is whatever you want to to be regardless of how simple or sappy.

There's absolutely no reason why one can't be an incurable romantic and still think love is a chemical process happening in the brain... which it is.

From an evolutionary point of view, it is quite obvious. Your offspring will have a much greater chance of survival if you love them and if you love your partner enough to stay with him/her ensuring that they will have at least two protectors.

I'm not really in the mood to attempt a subjective, poetic, wishy-washy definition of love but I see no reason why one can't propose them so long as they accept the existence of an objective, scientific answer. I think the idea that Science can't answer everything has a tendency to go to: Science can't answer anything at all and therefore, every Joe knows better.

Humans are creatures that long and seek out companionship. With a few exceptions, were group mentality based.

Affection may be a product of society, that 'love exist' and in such a manner may be something we tricked ourselves into believing.

But it's hard to dismiss our long history monogamy. So maybe it might exist beyond society.

I've often wondered, but never looked into it (too much controversy around the whole subject).

I will say this, with certainty, there's a difference in the different types of affections, as well, often times, people mistake lust and infatuation as romantic feelings. While they may develop into "love", they are not the same.

As well, with all human emotions, and everything else in the (natural) universe, "love" is subject to decay and entropy. Eventually novelty fades and something has to keep the relationship going, otherwise the feelings will grow weaker for one another.

On the subject of marriage/divorce, I believe that it's what people believe to be "the objective of marriage" that has cause change. That it is no longer something that entails "20 years" of commitment, but that it is simply a "more committed" step above a "steady relationship".

Marriage is a "step up" as opposed to a "final step". And because of this, people jump into it more arbitrarily, on bases of lust/infatuation, because it is easily reversible.

Personally, I find it fascinating, how much the meaning and view of it has changed. It seems media has a huge influence of the speed at which this process took.

My personal opinion, if love exist as "written in our DNA", it is not something meant to last. If you want to make it last, it takes a conscious effort. Humans have been able to fight against their design, our societies are proof of that, so I do think "will power" can push love to last a lifetime. (But that takes effort from both parties, as well, near constant presence.)

Hmm... maybe a portion of love is written in our DNA as many mammalian animals will strive to search for mates in order to create offspring. I know solitary animals like the male bear, for a period of time, find mates during mating season, inject her with his semen, then runs along to do bear things. But at the same time, pack oriented animals like the wolf and lion, continue to stay with their mates, even after producing offspring. Perhaps love, when injected, takes different effects, depending on whether or not the target animal is more competitive or cooperative.

Then again when we get to humans, things get wonky, with all sorts of environments and conditions as well as the advent of acceptance of homosexuality. I believe the fact that homosexuality exists perhaps may be proof that humans are fighting against their genes and thus, love may be psychological and jammed full with variables as a result of the environment the human was raised in. And even then I've seen more successful homosexual couples rather than heterosexual couples as of late. So maybe love is an imprint we receive from our genes that we may or may not consciously manipulate in order to find a spouse. So why exactly would one need a spouse if one is not going to reproduce?