4 ms·

Surely love has functional meaning, just like all sensations and feelings. Love is one of the most powerful feelings that can bring joy or so much sorrow for

by raducu 5y ago

Surely love has functional meaning, just like all sensations and feelings. Love is one of the most powerful feelings that can bring joy or so much sorrow for some. Do the biochemical aspects of love matter that much? When it is no longer functional, sure. Besides, all pleasurable feelings/sensations are "bribes". Really funny how we make separations about male vs female dating strategy, and they are right to a great degree, but both men and women share a lot of DNA, I don't know if there are many male specific genes. Sure, all animals are the same and just a few different hormones make a huge difference (male vs female gorilla?) but not to that extent in humans. Men can be manipulated too when they fall inlove, I wish the article talked about that.

sanxiyn 5y ago
Re: sharing DNA. That's like saying why does this same binary behave differently depending on configuration: in other words, non sequitur. It is normal: some female fish is 10x larger than male fish.
- raducu 5y ago
  But there's no need to look into fish or gorillas, as a child I was very different than today. Hormones, neurotransmitters, all make a big difference, sure. But humans do not show such a pronounced dimorphism and human minds are extremely complex things, surely the brains/minds of male/female share a lot more than they differ on average. There are outliers -- like a man pumped with testosterone, a leader's brain flooded with dopamine, an adrenaline junkie, a nymphomaniac and so on, but these are outliers. My problem is people who take the "men produce billions and billions of sperm and women ovulate once a month, therefore men and women are completely different" -- that's a tendency sure, and there are differences and different drives, but not to the extent people interpret them to be.
  - xenocratus 5y ago
    > and there are differences and different drives, but not to the extent people interpret them to be. Do you have any meaningful data that backs those claims up? I mean, first of all - "not to the extent people interpret them to be" - which people, more precisely, and what's that extent? And secondly, how do you know that it's not to that extent? Don't want to be pedantic here, but we could be rambling on about how "people say this, but it's actually like that" all day long - show me the numbers, how they were obtained, and your interpretation of them and we can discuss, something like [1], hopefully. [1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0261438 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
  - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
    Some counterpoints to consider .. You can get very large differences in computer systems just by flipping one single bit. Anecdata is not the opposite of anecdata. But this is all conjecture, if we seek to understand reality instead of just what we imagine, then we need to empirically measure reality.

by raducu 5y ago

sanxiyn 5y ago

Re: sharing DNA. That's like saying why does this same binary behave differently depending on configuration: in other words, non sequitur. It is normal: some female fish is 10x larger than male fish.

raducu 5y ago
But there's no need to look into fish or gorillas, as a child I was very different than today. Hormones, neurotransmitters, all make a big difference, sure. But humans do not show such a pronounced dimorphism and human minds are extremely complex things, surely the brains/minds of male/female share a lot more than they differ on average. There are outliers -- like a man pumped with testosterone, a leader's brain flooded with dopamine, an adrenaline junkie, a nymphomaniac and so on, but these are outliers. My problem is people who take the "men produce billions and billions of sperm and women ovulate once a month, therefore men and women are completely different" -- that's a tendency sure, and there are differences and different drives, but not to the extent people interpret them to be.
- xenocratus 5y ago
  > and there are differences and different drives, but not to the extent people interpret them to be. Do you have any meaningful data that backs those claims up? I mean, first of all - "not to the extent people interpret them to be" - which people, more precisely, and what's that extent? And secondly, how do you know that it's not to that extent? Don't want to be pedantic here, but we could be rambling on about how "people say this, but it's actually like that" all day long - show me the numbers, how they were obtained, and your interpretation of them and we can discuss, something like [1], hopefully. [1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0261438 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
- hackerfromthefu 5y ago
  Some counterpoints to consider .. You can get very large differences in computer systems just by flipping one single bit. Anecdata is not the opposite of anecdata. But this is all conjecture, if we seek to understand reality instead of just what we imagine, then we need to empirically measure reality.