Reply to comment

I find it interesting that even after a full class and talks on the forum, we still are not able to come to any kind of conclusion as to how this research should happen. As we talked about in class, there are so many different "kinds" of love, not simply the different ones we talked about (for a parent, a spouse, a child) but also within other societies, as Natsu mentioned. I have so enjoyed hearing another side of issues that I thought were so clear, but of course it is NOT as clear as it may seem. Love is so subjective, many of us talked about how experience oriented it was, so focused on a particular mindset that, when looking back, may or may not seem so clear.

How on earth, then, can we do this kind of research at all. I was so struck by how specific all of the studies were. There was always the little note--these people self-reported being in love, and we didn't know if their spouse loved them, and on and on until it becomes so unclear as to whether we are able to conclude anything at all.


At first I was thinking about the "certainty" of being in love. I found myself considering love much more unclear...as shown in class most people seemed unsure as to whether they had been in love. Depression or schitzophrenia or other similar disorders seem much more clear, you have it or you don't, but after thinking on that I do not feel that it is true.

We know what schitzophrenia is because someone sat down and wrote out qualifications for the DSM. If someone were to do that for love, what would that entail? You must feel flushed in their presence AND want to give them your last item of food, but if you merely enjoy talking to them, it is NOT love. I am certain people would have as many problems with that kind of criteria as some feel for the DSM. Perhaps in matters of the brain we must be content to say it is much less clear.