Reply to comment

There are many potentially interesting ways to further our discussion from Tuesday, but I’d first like to somewhat address one of Professor Grobstein’s questions – what are the benefits and costs of researching the science of romance? This closely relates to Emily’s question of what are we to actually do with the information we discover? As we discussed in class, romantic love is something highly personal and individualized, but also somewhat universal. There are many commonalities that can be drawn between individuals’ descriptions of their “love”. As Professor Le stated, these specific aspects and commonalities are what he and most of his peers in the field study – directly tackling something as multi-faceted and broad as love sounds like an impossible task. However, assuming that we can actually determine the underlying neurological aspects of love, the cultural influence from a societal level, the genetic contribution, the personal experiences in one’s life that influence how one “loves,” etc., I’m not sure I would even want to know it all. There’s something interesting, mysterious, even attractive about the inability to fully understand and describe love. I guess knowing all of these things might not necessarily encompass what it actually feels like to love someone. But getting close to the point of trying to break love down into many describable parts seems to somewhat ruin the wonderful, indescribable aspect of love. Maybe I’d just get used to it, and learning more about the neurological bases of love might help science and people in some way in the future, but I kind of like the way I currently think (and don’t know how to think) about “love”.

Something else that I found truly fascinating that came up during class was the idea that people in love might not actually love their partner, but rather the co-occurrences and experiences that accompany that person. I remember learning the couples who seek out activities and do new things together usually stay together longer and are happier with their relationship as compared to couples who do not create such bonding activities. However, I never thought of it as simply being in love with those activities. In many ways, I think this idea is true. It makes sense that someone loves what they do with his/her partner and how that person makes him/her feel. On the other hand, there again seems something disheartening or unsatisfactory about that answer. Maybe it’s just that I (and I think many others) like to think about love as more than just the right mixture of activities and feelings. I’m curious as to what other people think. Do you agree that loving someone is really about loving the co-occurrences that you get by being with them? Is that true for all kinds of love? Does it lessen how you think/feel about love?

Finally, I just thought I’d let everyone know that the coverstory on Scientific American Mind this week is titled “Why We Kiss.” It’s an interesting article that definitely relates to our topic this past week. Thanks for a great discussion and see you all soon!