Love, chemistry or fate?

[Fyshhed]

Prepare the bombardment. I know there are aspects of emotional attachment that include chemical reactions in the brain that resemble drug-induced high, and I know that there are interpersonal relations that cause a sort of hook-effect that gets us to attach to each other. Which side is more important though? Or which side is left out?

[Liemmaster]

Prepare the bombardment. I know there are aspects of emotional attachment that include chemical reactions in the brain that resemble drug-induced high, and I know that there are interpersonal relations that cause a sort of hook-effect that gets us to attach to each other. Which side is more important though? Or which side is left out?

I feel that the interpersonal relations are more important than the chemical functions in our brains. Love is an indescribable feeling. I think that love stems from interpersonal relationships that builds up the chemicals in the brain. If everyone went by the chemical reactions in the brain, love would seem more like a mechanical matching game than personal relationships. "WOW my brain chemicals reacted and created 28% more than normal! I think I"m in love" <=== doesn't really seem to work out :P

[TheOriginal]

I think that to some extent one's past may play a part in who they partner with.

Example: John is raised in a high class society & learns that his partents have expectations. Jill is raised in a slightly lower class than John,but grew-up with the same values. Jane is raised in a much lower class than both John and Jill. Jane is more attractive to John than Jill, but lacks concern/understanding of his values. I this situation, I belive that John would most likely choose Jill over Jane due to the nature upbringing & the fact that Jill would be more suitable in both an understanding of John values & higher probability of them having similar intrest.

Do you :) or :mad:?

[FruitandNut]

There's got to be more to love than a chemistry set wired up to a battery. Animals appear to function quite well on the afore mentioned to mate and pro-create. Some even pair off for life with a chosen or opportunistic mate. But they never seem to go through some of the contortions, joys and angst that 'we' go through, with and over, this thing called LOVE. Attraction of some kind is all we need to pair bond and bang out the next generation - why do we complicate things? Perhaps it is in the greatest loving moments that we transcend what is otherwise untranscendable. We do after all talk about being 'out of our minds' in love.

It can't be all down to propositional calculus - can it!?

[MoMo]

Yes, there are chemical reactions that take place when we are attracted to someone. It may be in fact similar to a drug induced high but as with any high-you come down. If these reactions were the most important or all we had to go by, when they lessen or cease to exist, what then?
Of much greater importance should those interpersonal relations. We should focus on learning about and communicating with each other. I believe relationships built from friendships develop into far more nurturing and lasting ones. Especially when considering someone to share our lives with. Life throws far to many things at us to have our relationships built solely on attraction!
As for The Original's example, I agree Jim SHOULD consider more than just his attraction for Jill and Jane when chosing between them. Although this is often not the case. People tend to gravitate towards physical attraction. Example: Average Joe 1,2,3!!!!

[Symantix]

Example: Average Joe 1,2,3!!!! LOL...perfect example of a bunch of dumb-butts struggling to make in-depth decisions about personal relationships and love, and in the end going for the carnal tug. What a waste of time that series was. I watched everyone, hoping that some spark of wisdom would sprout up in the main players. IT MADE ME SO MAAAAAAAAD!!!!! :mad:

[CC]

I think one must be ready to accept being in love, what it means and all it entails. I spent nearly my entire life (drugs and sex and rocknroll) never even claiming anyone as a girlfriend. I had married and divorced young and wanted no part of that. I danced all along the edge of the razor so to speak for many years, not committting myself to any one thing much at all.

I had no problem with bedding women, even under my conditions. But as I neared thirty or so I began to feel a change. It started with that darn dog of mine. HE taught me how to accept unconditional love and commit my very life to it. Once I learned that I stopped dating entirely. I knew I was ready to love someone and I knew that the type of someone I wanted would not want the type of someone I had been being. I exchanged women and wine for friendship and nature.

It was over two years and I admit, there were times I thought to myself that "she" would never appear. Still I waited, being diligent not to have a fling with anyone just because they were attractive. Some people even began looking at me a little weird.......*g*.......

But (see "Love at first sight"), when I finally did find the right girl every fiber in my body knew it with absolute certainty. I've compared it to how people who truely believe in a god must feel. I caught her eye right quick but I was used to that. Fortunately there were many obstacles I had to overcome before I won her hand.

Chemistry? Perhaps, but if so then I believe it is not good enough to look for the right person. Rather YOU must be the right person. You must also be at a place in your life (as does your other half) where you have some understanding of that level of love and life or death commitment a family entails.

Fate? Also perhaps, but if if you are not ready for love, or if you really have no understanding of that kind of love and the commitment required, then the chemistry won't be working. You could have your soul-mate working next to you everyday and never notice them.

Chemistry AND fate?......I like that....I pick that one....................:O)

[FruitandNut]

LOVE, CHEMISTRY, or FATE (chance) - why has it got to be OR, why can't we have some AND occasionally?