is love even real? or is everyone just a sociopath/narcissistic

> /r9k/

>>8452583
i want a scientific answer

>>8452578
>suddenly extremely attracted, think you're perfect love
Fades and is just a biological process, it's for procreation purposes

>content shared understanding, empathy and familiarity between two beings
isn't quite love either but it's a lot closer to the meme that is love, than the former occurrence

yeah, it doesn't really exist

>>8452578
I believe one should give up on the Disney-Hollywood false ideals of love first and foremost.
Just see it as a theme park ride - enjoy it while it lasts knowing it is not there to remain forever.

It's just the human condition. Be rational about it.

>>8452578
>is love even real?

Nope.

It's real, if you're lucky, but it's not what you get sold by Hollywood.

File: c-web-clients-ctfumbraco-_tmp-christopher-hitchens[1].jpg (16KB, 200x300px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 200x300px

>>8452578
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It wouldn't really make sense from an evolutionary type of view. Why should the man be in love with the girl forever? She's only usefull as long as she can have babys. The other way around doesn't make sense either. Why should the woman be on love with the guy forever? Sure he can provide safety etc. but once he no longe can there is no reason to not move on the next guy.

Then on the other hand I still think about my ex gf on pretty much an at least weekly basis even though it's been about 14 years and I've had several different girls and was even married a few years back.

Really no idea

FUCK U NERDS

>>8452585
Pretty sure love is the word we use to describe both of those things, so by definition yeah it exists. It seems there's a common misconception of the definition of love

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-03 at 17.52.48.png (54KB, 666x178px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 666x178px

>>8452885

>>8452578
Depends. Are you going to give any of those terms a useful definition? Then yes, those are all terms that describe real things.

Do you want to define love into non-existence and narcissism into ubiquity to sound edgy? Then you're totally right - nobody *truly* loves anybody.

It is real but we are only conduits for it so far.

>>8452578
I love you, OP.

File: Capture.png (237KB, 1501x497px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1501x497px

>>8453027

These threads should be bannable

>>8453021
None season monogamy is observed in animals were the off-springs have long development period(more than a year) where they have to remain under the protection of the caretaker. In the case of homo sapiens, this period last between one to two decades.

> Why should the man be in love with the girl forever?
Because
>Sure he can provide safety etc. but once he no longer can there is no reason to not move on the next guy.

>Why should the woman be on love with the guy forever?
Because
>She's only usefull as long as she can have babys.

i regret watching disney channel

File: 1455292408322.png (643KB, 649x703px) Image search: [Google]

643KB, 649x703px

For men, love is real. Men do experience the feeling of love towards a woman. Women on the other hand are incapable of genuinely loving someone. They are inherently sociopathic and devoid of empathy. They can pretend to love when it serves their egotistic goals, but they don't actually feel anything for a man. Their husband can die and they simply don't care.

one interesting thing to consider is when and why a person thinks they are in love. I can't help but notice that people feel no emotional reaction towards someone who has very strong feelings for them, while the very moment a girl has a chance with a cool/manly/charismatic/confident guy, or a guy with a pretty girl, they're inclined to say they're in love almost immediately.

>>8453583
What was her name anon... You are safe here