They already can. Neurologists can also produce a religious experience, all by stimulating various parts of the brain.
However, since love is a verb as well as an experience, we're not at a point where a person can be induced to act in loving ways through brain stimulation. Perhaps some day, but I wouldn't want to turn myself into an automaton.
^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^
2007-04-13 06:08:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by NHBaritone 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Love is chemical. Just like hate, anger, sadness, and all emotion. Of course scientists will be able to produce it someday. Its only a matter of finding the correct cocktail of chemicals in the body, and exactly which chemicals are involved in the process.
You know, its amazing how many uneducated religious actually believe that things like emotions have nothing to do with the body and everything to do with the spirit.
Is there some kind of physical condition that prevents you from thinking logically?
2007-04-13 13:12:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Hehe--I'm more an agnostic than an atheist, but that's an interesting question--I just couldn't resist. Kind of a "love potion #9" scenario? =)
There are biological components to being in love--brain chemicals/neurotransmitters--but I think it really goes far beyond that. You can try to boil love down to technical gibberish, and psychology can explain it and even predict it oftentimes, but producing it is a very different thing. For one thing, I don't think scientists would be motivated to try to produce it because they're more interested in curing illnesses, etc. And would love really be love if it were synthetically produced? I think most people wouldn't want that, even if it were available. So there wouldn't be a market, thus: no production.
2007-04-13 13:11:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by kacey 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Love is nothing more than a biochemical/bioelectrical reaction in your brain caused by familiarity or fondness in someone.
It can already be produced...... have you ever read the effects of ecstacy?? All you have to do is reproduce the chemicals in your body that give one the feeling of being in love. Chocolate is said to contain an aphrodesiac that gives one the feeling of being in love. Hence the reason why people give chocolate for valentines day.... the day of looove!
2007-04-13 13:08:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
See my problem is the effects of Ecstasy and Acid (as in LSD, not as in the Zebra) are reversed in me. Which isn't surprising, as my body reacts in a totally zany way to many drugs. But it's derned inconvenient when you're in a totally different zone to the people you're with.
One of the many reasons I stopped doing that sort of thing.
2007-04-13 13:15:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's an emotion. It can be induced by chemicals that act upon the brain's receptors. It's quite amusing to watch, particularly when you're in the vicinity of rock stars.
2007-04-13 13:07:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
Let me see if I understand what you're really getting at here.
If something is so sufficiently complex that we can't fully explain it... therefore it must be from god?
Actually- most of the brain chemicals associated with feelings of love have been reasonably well researched already.
2007-04-13 13:07:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Morey000 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Love is caused by a hormonal response to stimuli within the brain.
2007-04-13 13:10:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Im not an athiest but Im going to respond anyway. If your trying to say that because God is based on faith and the athiests dont believe bc it hasnt been proven and are tryiong to compare it to love, your not going to succeed at that. Love isnt based on faith, its a feeling, an emotion. faith in God, is not an emotion. One can KNOW they are in love but we can never KNOW there is a God, though I personally BELIEVE, dosent mean its factual.
2007-04-13 13:08:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
They can.
All emotions are chemical reactions and interactions and deficiencies. That doesn't make them any less enjoyable, unpleasant, or real.
2007-04-13 13:10:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋