Love: Prove it.

My opinion is this:

First you must ask yourself what is love?
Love is an emotion or feeling that is intense.
Love is not selfish.
Love is kind.
Love has no envy.
Love protects, preserves that which it is directed towards.
Love is pure.
Love is a gift from God, and comes from God.

Many say there is no God, but I know that there is.
I have always known there is a God.
On Feb 9, 2010 the day I died twice, that was confirmed
for me to be true.
I got to know what true love is.

True love is a form of constant forgiveness.
True love is what moves you from day to day.
It is what powers motivation. It is what gives
someone a sense of purpose.

To say Prove love, is like saying prove yourself.
Some say its a chemical reaction in the brain.
Some say its not.

I know that it is more.
Love yes comes from the brain in part.
But love also comes from the heart.
Your heart creates your emotions.

I tend to believe that we are spiritual beings
on a physical journey.

We have body, soul, and spirit.
The connection for the soul to the physical is the heart.
The connection for the spirit to the physical is the brain.

That is why when people get angry their heart feels it first.

My heart stopped, and now has a pace-maker.
Sense that time I can feel every single emotion in my heart.

When I get angry my heart gives me a hard thump thump thump.
When I am at rest and peace I hardly even feel it.
When I feel love, my heart beats fast, and steady, but is soft.

That is why when those who get mechanical hearts become kind of
drone like, is because their physical connection was removed.

There is enough evidence to show that love is just not simply
a chemical reaction in the brain. So if it is not, then it has
to be something else. To what exactly love is: I do not believe
that we will ever be able to pin that down exactly.

But I personally believe that love is the physical result of
our spirit/soul complex showing care for another persons
spirit/soul complex.

This to me is what the word Namaste is implying.
That, "that which is within me, honors that which is within you."

Now there are many forms of love too.
Towards romance, friends, family, neighbors, pets, stuffed dolls.
There are so many forms of love to say prove it is fruitless
in the question itself.

Why try to prove something, that has so many effects.
If the effects of it are there, then that means the cause exists also.
The fruit of love is out there, that means love is there too.

But likewise the fruit of hate and fear are out there, which implys
by the same logic that hate and fear are there.

That is my opinion on the matter.

If you have to prove you've got it, you probably never had it in the first place...

Love is proven every day.

Does proof need to be "empirical"?

I understand that science explains many things that couldn't be explained otherwise. That being said, I am boggled by the prevalence of the idea that all things explained by science couldn't also be explained via other philosophical systems. Not to say you feel that way, I just know many people that do.

I don't really see anything as proof of anything...nothing can ever really be "proven." One must just judge things and choose to believe in them, or not believe in them. For me, it's like the wind...I can't see it, hear it, smell it, or taste it, but I know it when I feel it.

Of course, that depends on your definition of love. Some may say you can observe it with all your senses.

I strongly disagree. Nothing can ever really be proven? Does 1+1= 2? Does gravity affect things with mass? Does the sun give off light? Did you make your post on a finely honed piece of technology itself impossible without the steady march of scientific progress culminating in its creation and mass production?

When I first replied to this thread I found the idea of hunting down empirical data to support the opening question to be highly interesting as I had never seen any either. And I had found several things over the course of my search.

But the one thing I have not done is to give my own opinion. I feel that there are things in life we are able to “know” and things that we just “gnow.” I feel that love is one of the few mysteries we were never really meant to be able to quantify even though we are so naturally inquisitive.

Sometimes there are things that we NEED to be able to just accept on “faith”. Otherwise they would lose something of what makes them so special.

The human ape likes explanations. What it can't explain, it still "classifies" as mysterious.

Love ...

We say "one loves" and "one is loved" or not :dry: but what does this verb (or predicate adjective) actually imply ? I promise to not get too cerebral here, but just pick up on the 'faith' trail ...

For the one who loves. Do they ? Really, that is ... In many cases, to love is to fill a void in oneself with someone who agrees to do the same thing. The other is merely an accessory one dons to feel pretty. There is a script applied to it, one battered up cliché being : "I love you."

In many cases, trying to prove love is akin to proofs in quantum physics ; one finds sort of what one is looking for, and a lot of what one is not. Fill up a few blackboards and desktops and rubbish bins with pages of equations and you'll be no closer to proving love that you would be to proving where an electon is ...

So, back to the verb. Is 'to love' something we do intentionally ? Or, can we simply hold the intention open to love ? Is 'love' something that happens to us ? Not as in "to be loved", but to what degree is the Love we feel a conscious act or an involuntary phenomenon. Do we feel our Love or think it, or just 'about' it ? To what degree is it a discovery, and an annoying or terrifying one at that ? :blink:

To truly love, we have to be able to recognise the feeling and separate that from whatever we may think about it, mental models we impose on it and casting it into the future with a whole bundle of expectations and desires as balast. Love makes us a little drunk and silly by flooding our nervous system with ocytocene and like the person who has had a few too many ("gimme my gaddam keys !!" ) we try to make "sense" of it all.

It doesn't make "sense". Love doesn't have to. If we attempt to make it have a logic to it, then we're back to the accessory metaphor. And that is a mockery of Love.

So, when you feel Love, or when Love feels you -- just feel it and shut up about it ...

Desolous wrote: I strongly disagree. Nothing can ever really be proven? Does 1+1= 2? Does gravity affect things with mass? Does the sun give off light? Did you make your post on a finely honed piece of technology itself impossible without the steady march of scientific progress culminating in its creation and mass production?

Is it not possible that these things we "know" fail to reflect ultimate reality at all?

Also, do we know such things with 100% certainty?

Desolous wrote: I strongly disagree. Nothing can ever really be proven? Does 1+1= 2? Does gravity affect things with mass? Does the sun give off light? Did you make your post on a finely honed piece of technology itself impossible without the steady march of scientific progress culminating in its creation and mass production?

Lol, the popular theory is that I love and am loved.