# Can "love" be chemically explained? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 26, 2003, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294 "2003-04-26T09:54:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dolomite21](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Dolomite21](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dolomite21)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/1 "2003-04-26T09:54:03Z")
The Sub says it all. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/2 "2003-04-26T10:17:01Z")
That depends on what you mean by “love”. Note that a typical dictionary will have dozens of definitions, and there are many specialized definitions in all the philosophical disciplines, like science and theology. Certain kinds of love, such as sexual attraction or maternal adoration, are clearly manifestations of synaptic discharges. Other kinds, like agape, are harder to peg and possibly represent a gestalt that is outside traditional materialist dogma. ---
**Author:** ![Dolomite21](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Dolomite21](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dolomite21)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/3 "2003-04-26T10:26:52Z")
What I mean by “love” is just that… The feeling of being in love…not lust… and certainly no “self” love. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/4 "2003-04-26T10:42:14Z")
Maybe. There was a report in New Scientist on this topic, but it doesn’t seem to be online anymore. Here’s a [second hand account](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/407125.stm): > [@](#): > > Falling madly in love may really make you mentally ill, according to Italian scientists. > > Their research found emotional and biological similarities between people in love and those suffering from a psychiatric disorder, says a report in New Scientist magazine. > > Psychiatrist Donatella Marazziti, of the University of Pisa, noticed how lovesick youngsters’ one-track thoughts mirrored those of people with a mental illness called obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). > > \ > > In 1990, Dr Marazziti found OCD was linked to lower levels of the brain chemical serotonin, which affects people’s moods. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/5 "2003-04-26T11:20:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dolomite21 \* > \*\*What I mean by “love” is just that… > > The feeling of being in love…not lust… and certainly no “self” love. \*\* You’ve identified two things that you are not talking about, but the equivocation remains. Perhaps if you would offer a cogent definition of “love”. ---
**Author:** ![Dolomite21](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Dolomite21](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dolomite21)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/6 "2003-04-26T11:30:16Z")
Can someone help Lib on what it’s like to be in “love” He needs a definition. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/7 "2003-04-26T11:39:55Z")
The term “infatuation” is probably better. It’s the “falling in love” part, rather than the “being in love”. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/8 "2003-04-26T12:35:56Z")
Ah. Infatuation. Yes, that has a chemical explanation. Phenylethylamine facilitates the production of dopamine and norepinephrine, and voila, you have a crush on someone. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/9 "2003-04-26T12:41:04Z")
You know the rules, **Lib**. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![FranticMad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c68b51/32.png) [@FranticMad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FranticMad)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/10 "2003-04-26T13:01:42Z")
Hint to Libertarian: I think you’ll have more success if you spend an hour searching on “oxytocin”. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/11 "2003-04-26T14:52:56Z")
I think Al Pacino said it best in Devil’s Advocate: > [@](#): > > **What is love? Chemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate.** ---
**Author:** ![mipiace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@mipiace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mipiace)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/12 "2003-04-26T15:03:21Z")
Al was wrong. I can eat enough chocolate to put me into a diabetic coma and it’s no where near the feeling of infatuation. ---
**Author:** ![Goodbeem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/958977/32.png) [@Goodbeem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Goodbeem)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/13 "2003-04-26T15:46:55Z")
Perhaps, but chemically you might be no different from when you are madly in love… So while a chemical condition (e.g. having large amounts of certain neurotransmitters in your brain), is probably necessary, it is not sufficient for infatuation. You need someone to be in love with, for example. I would say that there remains a gap between the chemical explanation (even if neccessary **and** sufficient) and the experience of being in love. So I guess it boils down to what you mean by explanation. ---
**Author:** ![handy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@handy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handy)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/14 "2003-04-26T23:42:01Z")
Ask a hundred people here what love is & get a hundred answers. I don’t think anyone agrees & just as well, I don’t think anyone knows what it is… How about endorphins for a chemical basis? love=endorphins (opiates of the brain) ---
**Author:** ![Dostromin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c0e974/32.png) [@Dostromin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dostromin)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2003, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/15 "2003-04-27T00:12:03Z")
Of course it is chemically explained. Hormones. If you cut off your testicles now, you would never consider once getting married or setteling down. Makes love seem a bit superficial… The truth will occasionally ruin the commonly accepted image. ---
**Author:** ![skaterboarder87](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@skaterboarder87](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/skaterboarder87)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2003, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/16 "2003-04-27T02:33:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dostromin \* > \*\*Of course it is chemically explained. > Hormones. If you cut off your testicles now, you would never consider once getting married or setteling down. > Makes love seem a bit superficial… > > The truth will occasionally ruin the commonly accepted image. \*\* So you define “love” as being purely sex-driven? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2003, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/17 "2003-04-27T03:37:12Z")
> [@](#): > > So you define “love” as being purely sex-driven? This is why Libertarian keeps asking for a definition. Lust, love, infatuation, most people can’t tell the difference. 😉 So the question at least has to be specific enough to be answerable. There are surely chemical, and also biological, reasons for love. What they are, I have no idea. ---
**Author:** ![don\_t\_ask](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@don\_t\_ask](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/don_t_ask)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2003, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/18 "2003-04-27T03:54:58Z")
In the case of “falling in love” as opposed to love of other family members there is a large element of lust involved. I can’t believe that anyone who has ever been in love with a member of their target sex group can’t tell the difference between those feelings and the love you feel for Grandma Betty. ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2003, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/19 "2003-04-27T13:40:35Z")
No human emotion can be “chemically explained”. This is because all human emotions are more than just a chemical state. We have _physiological_ reactions and states, but the actual emotion is as much cultural and self-semantic as it is physiological. When I was much younger, I used to “fall in love” at the drop of a hat. I still undergo the same physiological reaction to meeting women as often as I did at that age, but I no longer “fall in love” with them. Instead, I recognize their more-than-mere-physical attractiveness and don’t let it rule me. I’m sufficiently self-aware to realize that a recognition of attractiveness need not be followed up by fatuous behavior. I still “feel” the same thing, but I no longer “feel” the same thing. My interpretation of the chemical state has changed, and thus the emotion associated with the chemical state has changed. The chemistry has not changed, but the emotion has. ---
**Author:** ![Gozu\_Tashoya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/7993a0/32.png) [@Gozu\_Tashoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gozu_Tashoya)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2003, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294/20 "2003-04-27T19:18:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dostromin \* > \*\*Of course it is chemically explained. > Hormones. If you cut off your testicles now, you would never consider once getting married or setteling down. > \*\* I don’t know about this. Tax benefits, shared employee health insurance…there’s still plenty of reasons to get married! [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-love-be-chemically-explained/171294.md?page=2)