Your prediction on the future of the human race

[DGFone]

^Uh, Just look at wolves. They live with the same partner their entire lives until death of one or both does the 'marriage' apart. If wolves can do it, so can humans.

Which is why I again said that love is not purely hormones in the head, like you claim it is: Humans would not survive if the parents came together and separate again in search of other people. The parents need to be instructively wired through genetics to stay together long enough (about 15 years) until their children are old enough to fend for themselves.

[Tora]

@Regulus, we might disagree about "what is love" (baby dont hurt me, no more XD)

No but seriously, if I say love i mean, really love someone and spend the rest of your life with them, which is unnatural. I assume you view the loce you describe as the plain feeling you get and express. So yes, that is an emotion.

Oh alright, I'll rephrase "the consequences of the temporary emotion of love"
Better?

@Tora, yes, human nature is and will always be human nature. We still carry the genes. We are limited because we are animals, there is no way to overcome them. Our intelligence suppresses them. In the end you will always value your own life the most, because when we get to the extremes, our basic instincts will take over. Look at the leaders of countries, in an extreme situation, and the basic instinct of greedyness takes over.

A simple everyday situation.
You love someone, he/she cheated on you, you get angry. Just look at the news websites, there is always a story of people killing because of cheating or other problems in relationships. Love by the brain, killing/ harming by the instincts, extreme situation. If we would love someone instinctively we would love them nomatter what. That is not the case.

So you are trying what? To get me out of an argument by complaining in an argument that I am complaining about an argument yet you are arguing with me. Makes sense

So you are telling me that when a man takes a bullet for someone else that it is his instincts to protect himself? Nonsense. I am simply stating that we should not give up on humanity and strive to fix its problems. Not sit around and complain saying how impossible it is; when the whole reason you say it is impossible is because it hasn't happened yet.

[Regulus]

The "love" feeling dies down for all humans who have to stay together. That's why marriages usually fail. What keeps marriages going for decades isn't "love" but everything else.

That something else is raising children, usually.

Holy crap, I think I might actually be agreeing with DGF on this one.

[Tora]

^Uh, Just look at wolves. They live with the same partner their entire lives until death of one or both does the 'marriage' apart. If wolves can do it, so can humans.

Of course they can, but are they willing to? Our brainfunctions are not completely identical to those of wolves, also wolves can get many babies in a shorter time period. Humans can only get one per nin months.

Ever heard of twins, triplets, quadruplets, quintuplets, or sextuplets?

@Tora, yes, because in the end or in an extreme situation, you value your own life more than anybody elses. There are no hero sacrifices like in hollywood.

Really?

[Tora]

You're blind to the fact that you think you are the only one right. Look here.

[Tora]

You honestly think that I am trying to destroy his theory? I am just saying that there is a reason it is called a theory. I am only providing evidence to show that what you consider to be in our genes isn't guaranteed. The other reason I even posted those is because you said this right here.

There are no hero sacrifices like in hollywood.

I am not saying that Darwin is wrong. I am simply saying that he is not 100% correct; that there are exceptions just like in any science theory. It just doesn't support such a theory as love is in the mind and that people value themselves more than others when things such as those happen. When I say your blind, is because you ride on his theory as if it cannot be challenged that it is solid. Hate to break it to you, but it has holes in it too.

[WildSimba]

I agree with Woeler, that it is in human nature to survive. I mean be honest with yourself, are you going to push someone out of the way of a train, and risk your life in the process, or are you just going to probably let them die? A good majority of people are probably going to do the later, because a train moves very fast, and it's actually likely you both are going to die in the process of you attempting to save them. It's a sad truth, but us humans are selfish. There are always going to be people who are willing to not just think for themselves, but is that the majority of us? No.

As for what love is, I think I actually agree with DGF on this one. I don't think a human being can live off a relationship with JUST love, but I do think that it's a big factor in a strong relationship. And also, love doesn't always mean you want a relationship with them. I love my best friend to pieces, I love my family. It's just an emotion. You feel compassion for these specific people, over other people in this world. Love isn't a moral, because it's not something you HAVE to live by. I can go my entire life without loving a single human being, of course they'd be the most misanthropic person on earth, but it is possible. And there are people out there who lack compassion or having any love for another human being. Just look at where those people end up ( take the recent Aurora dark knight rises premiere shooting as an example.) You think that guy had any compassion towards another human being? No.

You also gotta figure, there are acts of people murdering a loved one, too. I see these sorts of stories on TV all the time. Daughter killing her mother, stuff like that. Do these people do it because they don't love them? No, in fact if you haven't noticed, there's a pattern in how these people kill their loved ones. They often times go way overboard, and completely slaughter them. It's not their lack of love that pushed them into doing it, it's their lack of morals.

Hence, the reason they're not the same thing. You could live without love, it's just an emotion. If you had no morals though, or no conscience, then you'd just be an empty shell of a human being walking.

[Tora]

There are always going to be people who are willing to not just think for themselves

This is what I have been trying to say. That not all of man is greedy and full of selfishness. I am not trying to put a theory down. Woeler sorry for outright calling you blind, but you present yourself as though you refuse to accept anything to the contrary to your so called facts *cough* opinions *cough*

Perhaps you don't want to accept that people out there are capable of caring for others to the point of placing their loved one's lives in front of their own.

[Azdgari]

Kudos, Tora, the first thing I thought of when I read Woeler's post was the people (three or four I think) who took bullets and died saving the lives of their girlfriends.

I wonder how differently we would perceive things if the news wasn't unbelievably negativity-centric.

[Tora]

Kudos, Tora, the first thing I thought of when I read Woeler's post was the people (three or four I think) who took bullets and died saving the lives of their girlfriends.

I wonder how differently we would perceive things if the news wasn't unbelievably negativity-centric.

Yep the news is horribly one sided. It is always negative, with the occasional slip of a positive story.

@Woeler You have your view point from years of research, and I still see the perception that change is coming. You see your theory and I see my hypothesis and until I am proven wrong that change is coming than you can bet I'll argue til the end of the earth.