<3

[Unwise]

Yo, post your favorite line about love. I need more, I keep repeating myself^^
exm: "Love isn't the person you can see yourself with,
it's the person you can't see yourself without."
Or "There's something about you I can't seem to get out of my head"

I'm sure there's like a jillion out there><

[funmonkey54]

Re: &lt;3

My Quote:
"Love is like a really cheap hooker, it plays dirty and it blows."

"Professional" Quote:
"Love is like a box of crayons, all colors, all sizes, and all beautiful."

[Unwise]

Re: &lt;3

AMAZING! Not what I was looking for but I like it anyways. hmm... dirty hooker... I always thought of love being a gay guy spreading his "love" and herpes...


hmmm, didn't work out as well...
I fail.

[Unwise]

Re: &lt;3

Love is like a popsicle. People can suck on it forever but swear when its gone and all they're left with is a headache and a stain on their shirt.



I love being mean to myself. It makes it easier to laugh at other people doing it^^

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: &lt;3

Love is...

this maze, and that when we occasionally stumble across another in our journey of spirit, we meet them and bond to them in the realm of the physical. When we meet someone in this realm we take a step towards the completion which we are all seeking. Imagine walking down a forest path, and then, suddenly, it converges with another person and path. The two of you start up a conversation, set up a small camp and spend the evening together, having a wonderful, romantic time and by the end of the evening consummate. In the morning you bid your farewells and once again head down your separate paths. That one evening spent in the spirit journey was the lifetime the two of you spent together in this world. Now that would be the ideal setting. However, maybe the person you meet on the road won’t last your lifetime, maybe you’ll just tear each others clothes off on the side of the road, have a quick **** and move on. But all these meetings will reflect in your physical life. A day in the life of your spirit is a life in your body.

[Quigly]

Re: &lt;3

I love funmonkey. That smexy penguin.
<3

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: &lt;3

Love is...

By its very nature, love is an irrational and capricious emotion. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines love twelve different ways (thirteen if you count the tennis term), and there have been countless attempts made by poets, musicians, philosophers, and literary figures to distill and define the essence of this powerful emotion. At first thought, love appears to be too complex and ambiguous to define in a scientific manner. As Professor Le mentioned, social scientists do not attempt to operationalize complex emotions like love in their entirety. For example, by demonstrating love-directed behavior in one instance is a study able to be generalized to other situations? If that were true, dating would be much easier! Similarly, if research is able to definitively show where the “love center” of the brain can be found, does this evidence do the emotion justice? Over the course of this article I would like to review scientific theories pertaining to the evolutionary origins of romantic love before revisiting these questions.

As social science continues to define aspects of romantic love, there is a greater consensus in the scientific community that no two people experience the emotion in exactly the same way. As a complex human emotion, love is the culmination of a complex interplay between biology, cultural, and environmental influences. In spite of individual differences, however, aspects of love appear to be universal. The universality of love indicates that this emotion may be evolutionarily adaptive. Recently, evolutionary biology has attempted to “reverse engineer” complex emotions (including love) in order to determine how these emotions became evolutionarily adaptive. According to Pinker, emotions like love were preserved in human biology because they identify and prioritize goals based on human needs. In other words, emotions appear to be necessary to motivate an individual to accomplish basic tasks, including feeding, fleeing, defending, and reproducing.

How does love act as a source of motivation? Scientists believe that love acts as the emotional mortar which binds individuals to one another in spite of changing circumstances. For example, one seemingly universal correlate of love is empathy, or the “mirroring of complex emotional states in another.” As socially adept beings, humans have developed this ability to determine emotional and sensory states in social peers. This emotional state appears to play a fundamental role in human social interaction. The evolutionary adaptiveness of empathy, however, is unclear. Some argue that empathy evolved in social species as an integral component of altruism, or the set of behaviors that cause an individual to “benefit another…at a cost to [the] self.” (Pinker, 1997).

From an evolutionary perspective, altruism appears to be counterproductive. Dawkins poses an important question: If evolutionary development has been dictated by the “selfish” actions of genes competing for limited resources, why do altruistic behaviors exist? One theory requires that altruism be defined on two levels. Although these actions are selfless on a behavioral level, altruism ultimately benefits the prospects of survival (and reproduction) of the altruistic individual (Dawkins, 1989). For example, familial altruism is thought to have evolved because family members benefit from protecting those who share their genes. Even though the individual may perish, by protecting relatives with related genes a part of the individual’s own genetic material will remain within the larger population’s gene pool. Pinker states that this is the reason why familiar closeness appears to dictate the degree of altruistic behavior between humans. Parents, for example, tend to sacrifice more for their children than for their nieces or nephews (Pinker, 1997).

Typically, when people describe acts of parental sacrifice they attribute the action to “love.” While a mother sacrificing her own well-being for her child may be an altruistic act, she does not shortchange her own state because she is feeling “altruistic.” Rather, she makes the sacrifice because she loves her child. Based on these examples, it appears that maternal (or paternal) love is strong because it correlates with an individual’s genetic survival.

Other forms of love (i.e., “love for fellow man”) also exist within the human experience. Similarly, social scientists attribute these emotions to reciprocal altruism, or the tendency to help a non-related member of a social group. Evolutionary biologists believe that this form of empathy may also increase an individual’s chances of survival. For example, certain species of primates have evolved to groom one another for harmful parasites, even though they are not related. This reciprocal behavior increases the rate of survivability for each member in the collective group by protecting against parasitic disease. As a result, the social trait is preserved in the population (Dawkins, 1989).

Social phenomena like familial and reciprocal altruism only work when constituent members of a community can reasonably rely on one another for reciprocation (Pinker, 1997). Theorists believe that over the course of our evolutionary development, individuals evolved to cheat reciprocal systems. Returning to the example of reciprocal grooming, a selfish individual will spend less time grooming, instead spending more time being groomed by others. It follows that this individual, left unchecked, will benefit from the preexisting social system. As a result, subsequent generations will mirror this dominant phenotype, eventually eliminating empathetic behavior from the population. Because altruism continues to persevere in social organisms, however, there must be a check against individual selfishness. Pinker proposes that social animals have evolved a “cheater-detector” that helps protect the majority of an altruistic group against selfish individuals. This cheater detector allows altruistic members of a social group to judge and punish selfish behavior exhibited by individuals (Pinker, 1997).

In other words, love appears to have a darker side for a reason. Related emotions like jealousy, doubt, anger, and hate may have developed to ensure that members do not break a social contract. In his article Crazy Love, Pinker talks about individuals who commit crimes of passion when they are scorned (Pinker, 2008). While these acts may not appear to be rational or logical, they do make sense when love is viewed as an evolutionary adaptation. Essentially, one possible explanation for the evolution of love is its ability to function as a cheater-detector in social hierarchies.

Further evidence of love’s importance in regulating social relationships comes from autism research. Researchers believe that an inability to empathize (which we have identified as a key component of the love emotional response) may lead to social dysfunction. Specifically, empathy appears to be necessary for proper social interaction because it allows an individual to correctly identify complex social cues. Consequently, the inability to perceive overt social cues exhibited by others leads to difficulty perceiving underlying emotional and intentional states, which in turn upsets the formation of social bonds.

In summary, it appears that love is an evolutionary adaptive emotion because it allows us to maintain relationships with one another. As a highly social species, humans depend on cooperation to survive in our environment. This explanation for love’s presence in the human condition, however, is not meant to be a complete definition of the emotion. As a highly individual experience, the act of loving something or someone is dependent on the individual’s biological, psychological, and experiential development. In other words, while social science is making strides to understand the underlying framework upon which love is based, the end product can still take your breath away. To use an example as a comparison, physics classes often teach students how rollercoasters work to demonstrate basic physical concepts. Students understand that the laws of gravity, the geometry of track angles, breaks, etc. contribute to a rollercoaster’s function, but when they strap themselves into a car it still a unique and indescribably exhilarating experience. It appears that love as an experience may be similar: While common correlates of love may be universal, the emotion is also defined by the complex interplay between biology, cultural and environmental influences, and the way that we choose to deal with the emotion on a conscious level. Based on this indescribable aspect of love as an emotion, it may be that emotions like this are too complex to rationally define at this point in time, either in a scientific or political forum. Yet the latter has already done so by restricting the rights of homosexuals, specifically in marriage law. As a result, future research is needed to help show that there while there may be differences in the ways that individuals experience love, the basics correlates of the emotion are universal. This research would help establish public policy that gives all people the same opportunities to experience love.

[rzr]

Re: &lt;3

Love is like a cloud. In th end they all turn dark.

Love is like a snow flake. Nobody's experienced the same one twice.

Love is like heaven. We all want to believe it's there, but nobody's really sure if it is.

Just pulled those outta my ass.

[Unwise]

Re: &lt;3

I have to admit, he is...

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: &lt;3

Love is...

Day after day
Nothing's changed you're far away
But I need you to know that I can't sleep anymore
By the nights
Night after night
The stars are shining so bright
Though our pain is larger than the universe tonight
I want you to know I can't sleep anymore
By the nights
By the nights
Day after day I want you to say
That you're mine
You are mine
Year after year
Tear after tear
I feel like my heart will break in two
You came like a wind I couldn't defend
You cut my heart so deeply
The scars won't mend
I'll never believe in love anymore
After this
After this
Can never change or rearrange
What we lost
What we lost
[Gildenlow]
Time after time
I am wasting my time
Living in a past where I was strong
But now I am gone
I leave no shadow when I'm alone
I'll stay forever in my dreams where you are near
Want you to know I can't sleep anymore
By the nights
By the nights
Day after day I want you to say
That you're mine
You are mine

[funmonkey54]

Re: &lt;3

Love is...

By its very nature, love is an irrational and capricious emotion. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines love twelve different ways (thirteen if you count the tennis term), and there have been countless attempts made by poets, musicians, philosophers, and literary figures to distill and define the essence of this powerful emotion. At first thought, love appears to be too complex and ambiguous to define in a scientific manner. As Professor Le mentioned, social scientists do not attempt to operationalize complex emotions like love in their entirety. For example, by demonstrating love-directed behavior in one instance is a study able to be generalized to other situations? If that were true, dating would be much easier! Similarly, if research is able to definitively show where the “love center” of the brain can be found, does this evidence do the emotion justice? Over the course of this article I would like to review scientific theories pertaining to the evolutionary origins of romantic love before revisiting these questions.

As social science continues to define aspects of romantic love, there is a greater consensus in the scientific community that no two people experience the emotion in exactly the same way. As a complex human emotion, love is the culmination of a complex interplay between biology, cultural, and environmental influences. In spite of individual differences, however, aspects of love appear to be universal. The universality of love indicates that this emotion may be evolutionarily adaptive. Recently, evolutionary biology has attempted to “reverse engineer” complex emotions (including love) in order to determine how these emotions became evolutionarily adaptive. According to Pinker, emotions like love were preserved in human biology because they identify and prioritize goals based on human needs. In other words, emotions appear to be necessary to motivate an individual to accomplish basic tasks, including feeding, fleeing, defending, and reproducing.

How does love act as a source of motivation? Scientists believe that love acts as the emotional mortar which binds individuals to one another in spite of changing circumstances. For example, one seemingly universal correlate of love is empathy, or the “mirroring of complex emotional states in another.” As socially adept beings, humans have developed this ability to determine emotional and sensory states in social peers. This emotional state appears to play a fundamental role in human social interaction. The evolutionary adaptiveness of empathy, however, is unclear. Some argue that empathy evolved in social species as an integral component of altruism, or the set of behaviors that cause an individual to “benefit another…at a cost to [the] self.” (Pinker, 1997).

From an evolutionary perspective, altruism appears to be counterproductive. Dawkins poses an important question: If evolutionary development has been dictated by the “selfish” actions of genes competing for limited resources, why do altruistic behaviors exist? One theory requires that altruism be defined on two levels. Although these actions are selfless on a behavioral level, altruism ultimately benefits the prospects of survival (and reproduction) of the altruistic individual (Dawkins, 1989). For example, familial altruism is thought to have evolved because family members benefit from protecting those who share their genes. Even though the individual may perish, by protecting relatives with related genes a part of the individual’s own genetic material will remain within the larger population’s gene pool. Pinker states that this is the reason why familiar closeness appears to dictate the degree of altruistic behavior between humans. Parents, for example, tend to sacrifice more for their children than for their nieces or nephews (Pinker, 1997).

Typically, when people describe acts of parental sacrifice they attribute the action to “love.” While a mother sacrificing her own well-being for her child may be an altruistic act, she does not shortchange her own state because she is feeling “altruistic.” Rather, she makes the sacrifice because she loves her child. Based on these examples, it appears that maternal (or paternal) love is strong because it correlates with an individual’s genetic survival.

Other forms of love (i.e., “love for fellow man”) also exist within the human experience. Similarly, social scientists attribute these emotions to reciprocal altruism, or the tendency to help a non-related member of a social group. Evolutionary biologists believe that this form of empathy may also increase an individual’s chances of survival. For example, certain species of primates have evolved to groom one another for harmful parasites, even though they are not related. This reciprocal behavior increases the rate of survivability for each member in the collective group by protecting against parasitic disease. As a result, the social trait is preserved in the population (Dawkins, 1989).

Social phenomena like familial and reciprocal altruism only work when constituent members of a community can reasonably rely on one another for reciprocation (Pinker, 1997). Theorists believe that over the course of our evolutionary development, individuals evolved to cheat reciprocal systems. Returning to the example of reciprocal grooming, a selfish individual will spend less time grooming, instead spending more time being groomed by others. It follows that this individual, left unchecked, will benefit from the preexisting social system. As a result, subsequent generations will mirror this dominant phenotype, eventually eliminating empathetic behavior from the population. Because altruism continues to persevere in social organisms, however, there must be a check against individual selfishness. Pinker proposes that social animals have evolved a “cheater-detector” that helps protect the majority of an altruistic group against selfish individuals. This cheater detector allows altruistic members of a social group to judge and punish selfish behavior exhibited by individuals (Pinker, 1997).

In other words, love appears to have a darker side for a reason. Related emotions like jealousy, doubt, anger, and hate may have developed to ensure that members do not break a social contract. In his article Crazy Love, Pinker talks about individuals who commit crimes of passion when they are scorned (Pinker, 2008). While these acts may not appear to be rational or logical, they do make sense when love is viewed as an evolutionary adaptation. Essentially, one possible explanation for the evolution of love is its ability to function as a cheater-detector in social hierarchies.

Further evidence of love’s importance in regulating social relationships comes from autism research. Researchers believe that an inability to empathize (which we have identified as a key component of the love emotional response) may lead to social dysfunction. Specifically, empathy appears to be necessary for proper social interaction because it allows an individual to correctly identify complex social cues. Consequently, the inability to perceive overt social cues exhibited by others leads to difficulty perceiving underlying emotional and intentional states, which in turn upsets the formation of social bonds.

In summary, it appears that love is an evolutionary adaptive emotion because it allows us to maintain relationships with one another. As a highly social species, humans depend on cooperation to survive in our environment. This explanation for love’s presence in the human condition, however, is not meant to be a complete definition of the emotion. As a highly individual experience, the act of loving something or someone is dependent on the individual’s biological, psychological, and experiential development. In other words, while social science is making strides to understand the underlying framework upon which love is based, the end product can still take your breath away. To use an example as a comparison, physics classes often teach students how rollercoasters work to demonstrate basic physical concepts. Students understand that the laws of gravity, the geometry of track angles, breaks, etc. contribute to a rollercoaster’s function, but when they strap themselves into a car it still a unique and indescribably exhilarating experience. It appears that love as an experience may be similar: While common correlates of love may be universal, the emotion is also defined by the complex interplay between biology, cultural and environmental influences, and the way that we choose to deal with the emotion on a conscious level. Based on this indescribable aspect of love as an emotion, it may be that emotions like this are too complex to rationally define at this point in time, either in a scientific or political forum. Yet the latter has already done so by restricting the rights of homosexuals, specifically in marriage law. As a result, future research is needed to help show that there while there may be differences in the ways that individuals experience love, the basics correlates of the emotion are universal. This research would help establish public policy that gives all people the same opportunities to experience love.

Yeah. My quote is better.

[Unwise]

Re: &lt;3

Love is like a cloud. In th end they all turn dark.

Love is like a snow flake. Nobody's experienced the same one twice.

Love is like heaven. We all want to believe it's there, but nobody's really sure if it is.

Just pulled those outta my ass.

Well "I smell what you're stepping in," and I shall never ever say that again.

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: &lt;3

Love is...

addiction advice back bad break clothes confused disorders eating favourite feel forum friend friends game girl good guys hair harm hey ideas iii life long love mom music normal pain people piercing post problems punk read rules science sex sexuality song story teen thread time trig world wrong year

[Quigly]

Re: &lt;3

What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
Oh, baby don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

What is love
Yeah

Oh, I don't know why you're not there
I give you my love, but you don't care
So what is right and what is wrong
Gimme a sign

What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

Whoa whoa whoa, oooh oooh
Whoa whoa whoa, oooh oooh

Oh, I don't know, what can I do
What else can I say, it's up to you
I know we're one, just me and you
I can't go on

What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

Whoa whoa whoa, oooh oooh
Whoa whoa whoa, oooh oooh

What is love, oooh, oooh, oooh
What is love, oooh, oooh, oooh

What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more

Don't hurt me
Don't hurt me

I want no other, no other lover
This is your life, our time
When we are together, I need you forever
Is it love

What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more (oooh, oooh)

What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more
What is love
Oh baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me no more (oooh, oooh)

What is love?

[Unwise]

Re: &lt;3

My god TheRapingDragon has way too much time on his hands... or something else...