Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no subjective. There is reality, period. The thing that varies is our ability and willingness to identify it and act on it. That takes focus and work, and many people prefer uncertainty and determinism. Hence the proliferation of concepts such as “my truth” and “your truth”. There is no “my truth” or “your reality”. There is only reality. Our job is identifying it accurately and acting on it rationally. And that includes rationally deciding who to love, when to love, and what to expect in return for giving our love, and what is expected in return from us for receiving love from others. That’s just the way it is. And you can choose to understand it, and operate within its reality, or not. The not part usually leads to bitterness and disillusionment. And the evidence for that is everywhere.
You make statements that pretty much everyone disagrees with, then say that they are cold hard true reality and everyone who does not accept what you say as the definition of such, is delusional, in denial, or illogical... What gives you the authority to be right and make lots of other people wrong?
Where is your proof? I haven't seen it. Cite some sources that the brain is an analytical machine and love is a logical process, having nothing to do with chemicals or electrical pulses in the glob of fat and tissue in your head. You say that you've got reality all figured out and what other people believe is simply not real or true, because you have this superior ONE REAL TRUTH? Prove it.
Or else accept that it's simply what you think, an OPINION, and therefore the very definition of subjective.
And again, what about a parent and an infant or very small child? It has been proven that domestic animals can have intelligence about on the level of a 2 or 3 year old human child. Is the child a product and an object also? Is parent-child love not "real?"
You will “side” with them? Meaning what? There are no sides. Brains have chemicals and electrical activity. Who cares? That doesn’t address philosophy or the definition of love. Or the fact that a pet cannot love you, it can only have mechanistic affection based on conditioned responses that humans have engineered through domestication.
We invented and constructed pets for ego gratification and as an embellishment to life. They are a product. They don’t love. They simply react, according to the responses we have trained into them, and genetically selected and modulated for. To provide us with fun and pleasure. And for some, an escape. Love is impossible without reason, judgment, and trade. Animals don’t operate at that level. Their responses and decisions are largely automatic.
I think people romanticize the “unconditional love” they receive from their pets. Why? They wish human interaction would be this simple. Except it isn’t. Human love forces you to “measure up”. It forces you to bring your best self. And for many, the quality isn’t there and they don’t have much to bring, or are not willing to bring it. The result: “People just disappoint me and break my heart and confuse me and cheat on me”, and all the rest. Which of course happens when you don’t exercise proper judgment, transaction management, and engagement of rational expectations, both on yourself and your partner, friend, child, spouse, parent, what have you.
Pets are so much easier. Go ahead and bring your “worst self”. They won’t care, they will sit on your lap and lick you and purr or fetch the tennis ball. But is this of any significant value? No, unless we seek it as an escape. Then it becomes very valuable. Hence people who over-identify with their pets because they don’t have, or are unwilling to have, what it takes to make the more challenging trades with other beings that actually have minds that judge and expect things.
Meaning I believe the findings of the many studies on the subject and not your opinion. Emotions and feelings all boil down to a biological/chemical reaction.
Again feeling of utopia, happiness or "love" have been associated with certain hormones and neuros at the same time there is an decrease in the function of the frontal cortex (processing center for reason and judgement) and the amygdala (fear, anger, sadness and aggression). This is an actual proven fact that when we feel love our reason and judgment are diminished.
This could also explain why teenagers are so quick to "fall in love".
Meaning I believe the findings of the many studies on the subject and not your opinion. Emotions and feelings all boil down to a biological/chemical reaction.
Again feeling of utopia, happiness or "love" have been associated with certain hormones and neuros at the same time there is an decrease in the function of the frontal cortex (processing center for reason and judgement) and the amygdala (fear, anger, sadness and aggression). This is an actual proven fact that when we feel love our reason and judgment are diminished.
This could also explain why teenagers are so quick to "fall in love".
Agree, and another point I'd make is that all the stuff that Marc is talking about, is sensible in terms of consideration of relationship forming in a responsible way.
But rather than saying "this is love" I prefer to say that I separate my feelings of love, from my making of life decisions, as a mature adult.
So when I was dating for instance, I might feel flush with joy and excitement and arousal over someone...but I did not extrapolate that into planning a life with them. To commit to a future together, all of that good analysis and trade and whatnot that he's talking about, that takes more time and thinking. For me, the part that I refer to as "love" is the way I felt. It isn't the process of considered planning and ongoing commitments and all of that. Those were different things. Pointing to this factor or that one and speaking a mouth-noise at it to call it "love" is just a matter of semantic choices.
The emotional state is one element, one factor, in the rational decision to commit. In fact I felt, "in love" at around 6 months with my partner. This was intense joy in his physical proximity or upon engaging in communication with him, and also feelings of fear and vulnerability at times because I've experienced many connections where one but not the other person, had intense feelings and I, or they, got hurt when that was not equally reciprocated. So that first bonfire flush of love-feelings is a bit of an emotional rollercoaster. Enter negotiation. He and I sat down over ice cream and I told him how I felt. He said he felt the same. Neat! We still didn't start planning a future, but at least things got more comfortable.
Making logistical life choices came later. We moved in together at 2 years. I just put him on my health insurance as a domestic partner at 4 years. We plan to marry next July. This is all the rational process...without affirmed reciprocal love, we wouldn't be doing all of this. But in fact, I DID do all of this in the absence of it with my first marriage. Hello, disaster. My ex, by the by, felt intense love for me, but I never really felt it for him. He also held me at gunpoint when I ended our relationship. I really cannot agree that love is, generally, a rational thing.
A responsible person can be rational and resist urges to impulsive action even when in a state of aroused "love" emotions. But the negotiation and contract making is not the part I would refer to as "love."
(Oh, and to point it back at the question of pets, too, I also think that responsible people pause and use their logical brains to make decisions about taking responsibility for a pet, rather than acting impulsively in a "love" state and letting emotion take the wheel even when it's not wise--similarly to using reason to determine if it's a good idea to commit to a relationship with a person, no matter how they make you FEEL. I know too many people who have pets they really shouldn't have.)
Really, someone touched on something here. Do we love animals because they "don't talk back", "give opinions", etc. etc. That's not a reason to love something, IMHO.
I don't delude myself thinking anything otherwise - my dog is a survivor. During his 9 years and in a variety of environments, including being out on the street, he has learned that if he does certain things with humans, he'll get the things he likes most - food, water, and attention. I'm sure he does think fondly of us, but I don't think it's "love" in the human sense. He'll "love" someone else if the opportunity presented itself and we were out of the picture. I'm pretty certain that he had a family before he found himself homeless and he's moved on. Dogs (and cats) are amazingly resilient. That's something that I marvel at.
I agree with all the above. I feel like people who say they like animals more than people feel that way because animals don't have expectations and as long as you meet their basic needs you're never going to feel like you failed them. It's never that easy with other people.
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,409 posts, read 6,555,252 times
Reputation: 6253
Because humans, by and large, are insufferable, ugly, willfully ignorant, prideful, hateful goblin like beings; and being faced with them every day makes me feel stabby.
Pets can be annoying at times, but it's out of pure dumb animal habits. They can't help it. Humans, on the other hand, CAN help it and choose not to.
Also pets don't argue about fur color and genders.
Because humans, by and large, are insufferable, ugly, willfully ignorant, prideful, hateful goblin like beings; and being faced with them every day makes me feel stabby.
Pets can be annoying at times, but it's out of pure dumb animal habits. They can't help it. Humans, on the other hand, CAN help it and choose not to.
Also pets don't argue about fur color and genders.
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,409 posts, read 6,555,252 times
Reputation: 6253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Paolella
You are a human. Is that the way you are?
Hopefully not. But I've never made myself an issue in somebody else's life, so it's hard to tell. That alone puts me above over half of the population in terms of being considerate right there.
Agree, and another point I'd make is that all the stuff that Marc is talking about, is sensible in terms of consideration of relationship forming in a responsible way.
But rather than saying "this is love" I prefer to say that I separate my feelings of love, from my making of life decisions, as a mature adult.
So when I was dating for instance, I might feel flush with joy and excitement and arousal over someone...but I did not extrapolate that into planning a life with them. To commit to a future together, all of that good analysis and trade and whatnot that he's talking about, that takes more time and thinking. For me, the part that I refer to as "love" is the way I felt. It isn't the process of considered planning and ongoing commitments and all of that. Those were different things. Pointing to this factor or that one and speaking a mouth-noise at it to call it "love" is just a matter of semantic choices.
The emotional state is one element, one factor, in the rational decision to commit. In fact I felt, "in love" at around 6 months with my partner. This was intense joy in his physical proximity or upon engaging in communication with him, and also feelings of fear and vulnerability at times because I've experienced many connections where one but not the other person, had intense feelings and I, or they, got hurt when that was not equally reciprocated. So that first bonfire flush of love-feelings is a bit of an emotional rollercoaster. Enter negotiation. He and I sat down over ice cream and I told him how I felt. He said he felt the same. Neat! We still didn't start planning a future, but at least things got more comfortable.
Making logistical life choices came later. We moved in together at 2 years. I just put him on my health insurance as a domestic partner at 4 years. We plan to marry next July. This is all the rational process...without affirmed reciprocal love, we wouldn't be doing all of this. But in fact, I DID do all of this in the absence of it with my first marriage. Hello, disaster. My ex, by the by, felt intense love for me, but I never really felt it for him. He also held me at gunpoint when I ended our relationship. I really cannot agree that love is, generally, a rational thing.
A responsible person can be rational and resist urges to impulsive action even when in a state of aroused "love" emotions. But the negotiation and contract making is not the part I would refer to as "love."
(Oh, and to point it back at the question of pets, too, I also think that responsible people pause and use their logical brains to make decisions about taking responsibility for a pet, rather than acting impulsively in a "love" state and letting emotion take the wheel even when it's not wise--similarly to using reason to determine if it's a good idea to commit to a relationship with a person, no matter how they make you FEEL. I know too many people who have pets they really shouldn't have.)
I agree.
Most people, well at least many people, do not separate analytical and logistical thought from emotion when it come to love. It is pretty evident in the number of failed relationships and dysfunctional ones.
We can also learn to love by endearing things another does for us like keep us safe, provide, kindness, loyalty. There are different types of love. And IMO animals can love. They can love us, they can love another of their species. Not saying everyone's pet loves them, but I refuse to believe pet/animals dont have the ability to love. They certainly have the same hormones and neurotransmitters and studies have reveled increased levels in these when interacting with humans. No different than humans when bonding or displaying "love".
As well when you observe animals acting affectionate towards humans in a way that goes against their nature you have to believe something is going on. The gorilla who protected the kid that fell into their enclosure, the lionesses (Christian) that ran and hugged the humans that cared for them 10 years previously, geese, chickens, horses, cows that "hug" and snuggle humans. The dogs who will sleep on the graves of their human or refuse to be separated when their human is hurt and being attended by first responders. The dogs and cats who travel 1000's of miles to find their way back home. Etc.
Most people, well at least many people, do not separate analytical and logistical thought from emotion when it come to love. It is pretty evident in the number of failed relationships and dysfunctional ones.
We can also learn to love by endearing things another does for us like keep us safe, provide, kindness, loyalty. There are different types of love. And IMO animals can love. They can love us, they can love another of their species. Not saying everyone's pet loves them, but I refuse to believe pet/animals dont have the ability to love. They certainly have the same hormones and neurotransmitters and studies have reveled increased levels in these when interacting with humans. No different than humans when bonding or displaying "love".
As well when you observe animals acting affectionate towards humans in a way that goes against their nature you have to believe something is going on. The gorilla who protected the kid that fell into their enclosure, the lionesses (Christian) that ran and hugged the humans that cared for them 10 years previously, geese, chickens, horses, cows that "hug" and snuggle humans. The dogs who will sleep on the graves of their human or refuse to be separated when their human is hurt and being attended by first responders. The dogs and cats who travel 1000's of miles to find their way back home. Etc.
Nice cherry picking. Ignoring all the animals who viciously attacked and killed humans that violated their zoo property rights. Or even family pets that have attacked and killed their owners or the children. And Christian the lion was not 10 years, it was one year, and they raised the lion as a pet. The fact that he recognized them, cautiously at first, is not amazing at all. In fact it would be expected. And the dog story of the dog showing up to “sleep on his master‘s grave” has been exposed as a fraud. The dog sleeping on the grave was shown to be a cemetery mutt who lived there. And was not related to the owner.
Nobody is arguing that animals can’t form dependent attachments on human beings they become familiar with. But they’re not doing anything that is not completely natural and expected. It does not come even close to meeting the definition of love. It seems that humanizing animals is an interesting psychological feature of human beings. I would guess that it is ego-based.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
