08 Oct 05
Originally posted by echecero"primarily" - important word. When it comes to instinct (sexual desire, fear, etc) you can explain these "emotions" with simply bio-chemical reactions.
Emotions.
1.) Psychologists have shown in numerous studies that emotions are primarily a physical response interpreted by our brain. For example, certain stimuli result in a heightened response state (adrenaline, rapid heart rate, etc.). After this heightened state is reached, an emotional response will be assigned based on other environmental cues.
Soci ...[text shortened]... paper on the evolutionary view of emotions: http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/emotion.html
However, when it comes to moral decisions and non-instinct-based emotions, it gets a little more complicated. If this was a science and could be observed and documented, then human response in every hypothetical situation could be predicted. This is not so. You cannot predict if a man will risk his life for another in peril. You cannot use science to match-make.
The experiment you pose is quite an interesting one, however, what you have here is a case of psychology (all of which still can't be called empirical science) with a short-term reading. Will this love be long-lasting, or would it be classified as "being smitten"? Just to consider: one cannot predict the outcome of any marriage by what the couple go through in the first week, month or even year. What happens when one is found sterile or becomes fat and ugly? How would evolution-based psychology explain undying love between an old, sterile man and a sickly girl dying of cancer?
Thanks for the link, I'll take a look-see...
09 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXThe interesting thing is that the length and quality of a marriage has nothing to do with love. It has to do with loyalty and the individuals' beliefs concerning what marriage is and should be. Any number of people who love each other divorce or are never married. Any number of people who do not feel love, and sometimes have negative emotions towards one another, remain in marriages. If people's actions were determined by their emotions, then this comment would mean something.
Just to consider: one cannot predict the outcome of any marriage by what the couple go through in the first week, month or even year.
09 Oct 05
Originally posted by echeceroWell this is also quite true...
The interesting thing is that the length and quality of a marriage has nothing to do with love. It has to do with loyalty and the individuals' beliefs concerning what marriage is and should be. Any number of people who love each other divorce or are never married. Any number of people who do not feel love, and sometimes have negative emotions towards one a ...[text shortened]... If people's actions were determined by their emotions, then this comment would mean something.
But I'll say that many, many people's actions are determined by their emotions - from murder to marriage. How else does one explain the often ridiculously short Vegas marriages?
09 Oct 05
Originally posted by RatXOr, just as easily, their emotions are determined by their actions: "Why did I do this? I must be in love..." Where the emotion their were feeling was just nervousness or excitement...
Well this is also quite true...
But I'll say that many, many people's actions are determined by their emotions - from murder to marriage. How else does one explain the often ridiculously short Vegas marriages?
09 Oct 05
Originally posted by echeceroInteresting... let's deviate from the bliss of marriage and look at crime. If a person commits what is defined as "a crime of passion" - eg. murder in a fit of rage - were his actions (the murder) a result of his emotions (rage) or the other way around? This might either become a big circle of emotion-action-emotion ad nauseam, or probably putting the cart in front of the horse...
Or, just as easily, their emotions are determined by their actions: "Why did I do this? I must be in love..." Where the emotion their were feeling was just nervousness or excitement...