What a Loving Debate!
Sorry for the delay in posting fellas, but here it is.
First, my thoughts from Jon's first post on the topic.
"Love may come from the brain, but your reaction to its thought always starts from the heart."
Not true. Everything you perceive that makes your heart race has to go through your brain first. I won't go into the neuropsychological aspect of it cuz it's tedious to read and understand (if you want more detail, feel free to email me and I'll send you some lecture notes lol), but simply put, when you perceive someone that you are particularly fond of, your reaction to him/her comes from your brain. And yes, chemicals that are a mix of neurotransmitters and hormones curse through your blood, innervating your heart. Although, I think the lines "heartbroken" and "my heart aches" stems from the actual feeling you get when you're hurt. You don't feel it in your head usually; your heart feels it first. But just to make it clear: your heart feels it because your brain perceives and drives your heart to react.
"In fact, I've not met a SINGLE person who believes that not having a boyfriend or girlfriend signifies that you're a loser."
High school can provide many instances for this one. I've had friends who have felt worthless without a significant other in their lives. It's completely irrational, yes, but this stigma exists. No one outwardly admits to it because the idea is absurd, but it exists. It stems from culture, it stems from society, it stems from the media, what have you. Think about it. The hot hero always gets the girl. The hot girl is expected to have a boyfriend. The attractive people are always taken or gay. You see what I mean? No single person will say "you're a loser without a significant other" but it's felt in the things we say. This exists. You see what I mean?
"So is it better to have loved and lost than to never to have loved at all? Yes it is."
I, who have never fallen in love before, can say that I agree. I know people who have fallen in and out of love who do not regret their experiences. But that's only because we're considering the most ideal relationships here. On the flip side, there are friends of mine who have been in such terrible relationships, who have been hurt so deeply, that they feel the relationship has scarred them in the worst possible way. And in this case, would you say it is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all? I don't know. I'm not so sure about that. It's these cases that make me so scared to fall in love, cuz I don't know if I can deal with that sort of thing. Are you ready to deal with it? *shrug*
Now, back to the topic at hand...
Correct me if I'm wrong David, but I think what you're referring to is social conditioning; our perception of love has been completely shaped by society. The hugging, the kissing, down the the very act of sex has been exposed to us through society. How else could we have learned about it? It's difficult to imagine any other world that has no social influence, because we are just so incredibly seeped into it. The biological aspect, I'm going to stay away from because there's no possible way I can prove that two people will or will not learn, for example, how to have sex without society. So I'm not touching that topic.
The things to consider though, are these darling little quotes that are just so incredibly irksome:
I'm waiting for my prince to sweep me off my feet!
Oh my knight in shining armour!
Candlelight dinner? Wow that's so romantic!
My dream date would be a walk along the beach ^_^
Well, if you consider those things romantic, by all means gang ho! But realize that all these little tidbits that we consider an element of love are ingrained into our minds from what we are exposed to. Think about it: Disney movies illustrate the women to be damsels in distress, and the men are their saviors. Yes, these ideals come from sappy writers who have conjured the idea, but would we have believed them as children if we were not exposed to such material?
Ah, herein lies the debate of nature versus nurture again. Well, considering how frivolous the debate is, here comes my oh-so-satisfying conclusion: our perception of love is a nice mix of what our biological needs are and the superficial ideals that we have been exposed to since we were kids. We can't deny that what we consider "romantic" is surely influenced by our culture; and our culture, as David has been stressing, is influenced by European literature. It all goes both ways, I think.
Quick note to consider: Have you guys considered looking at cultures that lie outside of our bubble that is Western society? I'd assume their perspective on love and attachment are different, don't you think?
If we're going to talk about human nature, we can't just focus on our society in North America. There's a whole world of people to consider. I want to see what you guys think about that.
First, my thoughts from Jon's first post on the topic.
"Love may come from the brain, but your reaction to its thought always starts from the heart."
Not true. Everything you perceive that makes your heart race has to go through your brain first. I won't go into the neuropsychological aspect of it cuz it's tedious to read and understand (if you want more detail, feel free to email me and I'll send you some lecture notes lol), but simply put, when you perceive someone that you are particularly fond of, your reaction to him/her comes from your brain. And yes, chemicals that are a mix of neurotransmitters and hormones curse through your blood, innervating your heart. Although, I think the lines "heartbroken" and "my heart aches" stems from the actual feeling you get when you're hurt. You don't feel it in your head usually; your heart feels it first. But just to make it clear: your heart feels it because your brain perceives and drives your heart to react.
"In fact, I've not met a SINGLE person who believes that not having a boyfriend or girlfriend signifies that you're a loser."
High school can provide many instances for this one. I've had friends who have felt worthless without a significant other in their lives. It's completely irrational, yes, but this stigma exists. No one outwardly admits to it because the idea is absurd, but it exists. It stems from culture, it stems from society, it stems from the media, what have you. Think about it. The hot hero always gets the girl. The hot girl is expected to have a boyfriend. The attractive people are always taken or gay. You see what I mean? No single person will say "you're a loser without a significant other" but it's felt in the things we say. This exists. You see what I mean?
"So is it better to have loved and lost than to never to have loved at all? Yes it is."
I, who have never fallen in love before, can say that I agree. I know people who have fallen in and out of love who do not regret their experiences. But that's only because we're considering the most ideal relationships here. On the flip side, there are friends of mine who have been in such terrible relationships, who have been hurt so deeply, that they feel the relationship has scarred them in the worst possible way. And in this case, would you say it is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all? I don't know. I'm not so sure about that. It's these cases that make me so scared to fall in love, cuz I don't know if I can deal with that sort of thing. Are you ready to deal with it? *shrug*
Now, back to the topic at hand...
Correct me if I'm wrong David, but I think what you're referring to is social conditioning; our perception of love has been completely shaped by society. The hugging, the kissing, down the the very act of sex has been exposed to us through society. How else could we have learned about it? It's difficult to imagine any other world that has no social influence, because we are just so incredibly seeped into it. The biological aspect, I'm going to stay away from because there's no possible way I can prove that two people will or will not learn, for example, how to have sex without society. So I'm not touching that topic.
The things to consider though, are these darling little quotes that are just so incredibly irksome:
I'm waiting for my prince to sweep me off my feet!
Oh my knight in shining armour!
Candlelight dinner? Wow that's so romantic!
My dream date would be a walk along the beach ^_^
Well, if you consider those things romantic, by all means gang ho! But realize that all these little tidbits that we consider an element of love are ingrained into our minds from what we are exposed to. Think about it: Disney movies illustrate the women to be damsels in distress, and the men are their saviors. Yes, these ideals come from sappy writers who have conjured the idea, but would we have believed them as children if we were not exposed to such material?
Ah, herein lies the debate of nature versus nurture again. Well, considering how frivolous the debate is, here comes my oh-so-satisfying conclusion: our perception of love is a nice mix of what our biological needs are and the superficial ideals that we have been exposed to since we were kids. We can't deny that what we consider "romantic" is surely influenced by our culture; and our culture, as David has been stressing, is influenced by European literature. It all goes both ways, I think.
Quick note to consider: Have you guys considered looking at cultures that lie outside of our bubble that is Western society? I'd assume their perspective on love and attachment are different, don't you think?
If we're going to talk about human nature, we can't just focus on our society in North America. There's a whole world of people to consider. I want to see what you guys think about that.
posted by MsKarenAu at 12:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home