(09-14-2024, 09:57 PM)jerry mcmasters Wrote: [ -> ] (09-14-2024, 02:27 AM)brewerb Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe it's just me but I get the feeling that atheists helping a believer fine tune his argument for gods existence. I wonder who will be his next set of recipients, possibly some more susceptible to arguments?
Probably, but who knows, maybe one of our little observations is what cracks the nut.
Keep on tilting Mr. Quixote.
(09-12-2024, 10:20 AM)OakTree500 Wrote: [ -> ]There is a giant leap here between "Love", something that we know ultimately is chemicals in our brain making us feel a certain way about others that forms long lasting attachments between people and: "The creator of a universe".
Those are two very different things, and that latter is a huge claim you have to start with: Prove god exists, and then we'll talk about IF that god then has anything to do with my biological/chemical reactions.
What is the chemical composition of love?
(10-09-2024, 07:46 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ] (09-12-2024, 10:20 AM)OakTree500 Wrote: [ -> ]There is a giant leap here between "Love", something that we know ultimately is chemicals in our brain making us feel a certain way about others that forms long lasting attachments between people and: "The creator of a universe".
Those are two very different things, and that latter is a huge claim you have to start with: Prove god exists, and then we'll talk about IF that god then has anything to do with my biological/chemical reactions.
What is the chemical composition of love?
fuck you, huggy bear: you know what you're doing.
Love requires a brain as the 'lock' to the chemical and electrical 'key' that is love.
a large part of love is dopamine. another part is neural pathway, which is built by information taken in by the senses. Love is no more supernatural than mind. go fuck yourself -- feel the love.
(10-09-2024, 07:46 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ] (09-12-2024, 10:20 AM)OakTree500 Wrote: [ -> ]There is a giant leap here between "Love", something that we know ultimately is chemicals in our brain making us feel a certain way about others that forms long lasting attachments between people and: "The creator of a universe".
Those are two very different things, and that latter is a huge claim you have to start with: Prove god exists, and then we'll talk about IF that god then has anything to do with my biological/chemical reactions.
What is the chemical composition of love?
Jesus’s jism squirted up you ass?
(10-09-2024, 07:52 PM)Dānu Wrote: [ -> ]H2O. It's always H2O.
But the lubricant is often CH3CH2OH.
(10-09-2024, 08:36 PM)AutisticWill Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2024, 07:46 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]What is the chemical composition of love?
fuck you, huggy bear: you know what you're doing.
Love requires a brain as the 'lock' to the chemical and electrical 'key' that is love.
a large part of love is dopamine. another part is neural pathway, which is built by information taken in by the senses. Love is no more supernatural than mind. go fuck yourself -- feel the love.
So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love. Love is the basis of morality. Without love, one wouldn’t be able to empathize. Without love, one wouldn’t have a conscience.
This is why the opposite of love isn’t hate because hate comes from the same place as love, the opposite of love is apathy.
As stated above plus hormones, oxytocin and others…all acting upon a physical brain. Aren’t we marvelous!
(10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2024, 08:36 PM)AutisticWill Wrote: [ -> ]fuck you, huggy bear: you know what you're doing.
Love requires a brain as the 'lock' to the chemical and electrical 'key' that is love.
a large part of love is dopamine. another part is neural pathway, which is built by information taken in by the senses. Love is no more supernatural than mind. go fuck yourself -- feel the love.
So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love. Love is the basis of morality. Without love, one wouldn’t be able to empathize. Without love, one wouldn’t have a conscience.
This is why the opposite of love isn’t hate because hate comes from the same place as love, the opposite of love is apathy.
If you can't think of an animal that demonstrates love then you're far less intelligent that I previously thought.
(10-09-2024, 10:12 PM)brewerb Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love. Love is the basis of morality. Without love, one wouldn’t be able to empathize. Without love, one wouldn’t have a conscience.
This is why the opposite of love isn’t hate because hate comes from the same place as love, the opposite of love is apathy.
If you can't think of an animal that demonstrates love then you're far less intelligent that I previously thought.
You know how this goes, post the peer reviewed research…
(10-09-2024, 10:17 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2024, 10:12 PM)brewerb Wrote: [ -> ]If you can't think of an animal that demonstrates love then you're far less intelligent that I previously thought.
You know how this goes, post the peer reviewed research…
Well, you either can't think or yourself, have some special definition of love that you think only a human can demonstrate or want to continue to promote a stupid proposition for the sake of argument.
FYI, a research paper on a stupid idea or written by a stupid person and then reviewed by stupid peers doesn't add up to much except for identifying stupidity. You should probably drop the 'peer' requirement. Guess what it makes you appear to be.
(10-09-2024, 10:25 PM)brewerb Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2024, 10:17 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]You know how this goes, post the peer reviewed research…
Well, you either can't think or yourself, have some special definition of love that you think only a human can demonstrate or want to continue to promote a stupid proposition for the sake of argument.
FYI, a research paper on a stupid idea or written by a stupid person and then reviewed by stupid peers doesn't add up to much except for identifying stupidity. You should probably drop the 'peer' requirement. Guess what it makes you appear to be.
Stop it, even you as a dog owner don’t believe that animals have the ability to love, because if you did you wouldn’t separate animals from their offspring.
(10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love. Love is the basis of morality. Without love, one wouldn’t be able to empathize. Without love, one wouldn’t have a conscience.
My dog loves me without reservation, which is more than I can say of most humans I've known. Whether that says more about me or the dog, I leave to you.
Elephants mourn their dead, as do Orcas.
Like their intelligence, the love of non-humans is at a different amplitude than what we're capable of, and simpler (and purer). But it's there.
(10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]This is why the opposite of love isn’t hate because hate comes from the same place as love, the opposite of love is apathy.
This is correct, though I'd use the word "indifference". Like a stopped clock, you're right twice a day; hatred is just disappointed love.
Except for the "this is why" part of that sentence. Animals hate, too. Kick a dog around and after awhile it will happily bite you even when it's not self-defense but just an opportunity.
Quote:You know how this goes, post the peer reviewed research…
Then have you wildly misinterpret it and then be corrected on it
Also Animals absolutely have the ability to love. Also Animals can absolutely hate to.
Quote:Stop it, even you as a dog owner don’t believe that animals have the ability to love, because if you did you wouldn’t separate animals from their offspring.
The fact we separate animals from there offspring in no way shape or form says anything about animals being able to experience love (By the way we separate humans from their offspring to) This is terrible reasoning .
(10-09-2024, 11:38 PM)SaxonX Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Stop it, even you as a dog owner don’t believe that animals have the ability to love, because if you did you wouldn’t separate animals from their offspring.
The fact we separate animals from there offspring in no way shape or form says anything about animals being able to experience love (By the way we separate humans from their offspring to) This is terrible reasoning .
*emphasis mine*
Really? when is this done other than to protect the child? Which isn’t even remotely the same.
Quote:*emphasis mine*
Really? when is this done other than to protect the child? Which isn’t even remotely the same.
You understand they do remove animals from there parents if they reject their offspring or become hostile towards them so it is done to protect the offspring also the only relevant point I need for this comparison is the fact we separate human parents and offspring the reason is moot. Also this in no way refutes my point that separating animals from there offspring has nothing to do with if the animal loves their offspring or not.
(10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]...So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love. Love is the basis of morality. Without love, one wouldn’t be able to empathize. Without love, one wouldn’t have a conscience.
How do you know that animals don't have "the ability to love"?
Take birds for example—many, such as penguins, lorikeets, magpies,
and cockatiels form lifelong pairs. How do you know that's not love?
(10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]This is why the opposite of love isn’t hate because hate comes from the same place as love, the opposite of love is apathy.
Not so. Love is spontaneous and unplanned, and indefinable.
Hate is a totally human-inspired emotion, both planned and
easily defined. Hate can be consciously overcome, whereas
love cannot.
Smuggy's just here to stir shit up. He's in no way worthy of meaningful engagement.
(10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love.
Most dogs with caring, non-abusive owners will easily prove this false.
(10-09-2024, 10:12 PM)brewerb Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2024, 10:07 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote: [ -> ]So Love requires a ‘brain’, ‘dopamine’ and ‘neural pathways’, all of which are present in animals, yet animals don’t have the ability to love. Love is the basis of morality. Without love, one wouldn’t be able to empathize. Without love, one wouldn’t have a conscience.
This is why the opposite of love isn’t hate because hate comes from the same place as love, the opposite of love is apathy.
If you can't think of an animal that demonstrates love then you're far less intelligent that I previously thought.
"Love" is difficult to define. My cats are affectionate and seem to like me a lot, but I don't know if that is actually "love". I generally think they appreciate food, shelter, and attention. I have never had a dog, but I
think they tend to respond to humans as "alpha dogs". Apes might come closer to feeling some sense of "love", but the evidence seems weak.
"Love" is probably a sense of sharing a sense of self that is transferred or shared with another humans. And, so far as I understand it, sense of self is far stronger in humans than any other animals.
(10-09-2024, 08:56 PM)SaxonX Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:What is the chemical composition of love?
Dopamine
Neural Pathways
A Brain
Cut your brain out and ...
The good news is: Someone seemingly already did, so we dont need to test. Unfortunetley, that proves his point....well, if....IF he is cpable of love
