Measuring emotions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlotte408
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Charlotte408

Guest
Can you measure love? As in, any type of endomorphine or something that comes out of a gland somewhere?

I was in a discussion, where someone had said,

“Love is real. People feel it everyday - God on the other hand, is debatable”

And I thought that was rather unfair of her. Why wouldn’t she give the same fighting chance in the arguement for God as she did with love?

Both are intangible. Both are immeasurable. What’s the difference? I see NONE and I don’t understand how anyone could say that LOVE is real objectively and then count God out.
 
You have encountered one of the great errors of our age: the concept that matters of faith are strictly personal and cannot be communicated. It is part of the “unknowing” aspect of being an agnostic. We Catholics believe in the totality of the human person as including not only the physical being (one who emits measurable chemicals which affect them); the intellectual being (one who is affected by their thoughts and ideas); the emotional being (one who is affected by their feelings, sufferings and joys) and the Spiritual being (one who is affected by Grace, Revelation, Vocation, Mystery and the experience of transcendence and Glory). We also believe that it is the Spiritual level of our being that is the highest because unlike the physical level it does not age or decay and unlike the emotional and intellectual levels it is not limited to human thought or experience. Rather it is in the Spiritual level where we find that the three other levels lead us to a greater knowledge of God and his Salvation.

Can you measure emotions? Yes if you are speaking of how emotions can come and go. But it is the things of faith that are immeasurable because only faith calls us to enter into an eternal mystery which we as Catholics, call the God of Love, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
 
Emotions are the easiest thing in the world to change.

We go back and forth all the time.
 
Just a guess, but perhaps you can have a guide to the measure of emotions (love) by meditating upon the distance from agape/to the nearness to eros; and/or(put another way) the distance from eros/to the nearness to agape??

God Bless
 
I was just thinking that, in the same way that she was saying Love is real, because it is experienced by people every day, you see them in love, they profess their love…

God has been experienced by countless people throughout the history of all time. They feel a real, true presence. They profess their faith. They testify to Him. They die in His name.

How could a person admit that ‘love’ is real - based on these arguements, and come to the same conclusion about God? Weird…
 
I was just thinking that, in the same way that she was saying Love is real, because it is experienced by people every day, you see them in love, they profess their love
Yes, so we can conclude that love exists as a subjective feeling.
God has been experienced by countless people throughout the history of all time. They feel a real, true presence. They profess their faith. They testify to Him. They die in His name.
And so we can conclude that this God exists in the same way that love does – as a subjective feeling.

Love isn’t some entity that exists independently of human minds. If you wish to demonstrate that God does exist independently of human minds, then you cannot simply rely on subjective feelings.
 
Yes, so we can conclude that love exists as a subjective feeling.

And so we can conclude that this God exists in the same way that love does – as a subjective feeling.

Love isn’t some entity that exists independently of human minds. If you wish to demonstrate that God does exist independently of human minds, then you cannot simply rely on subjective feelings.
Yeah but Love exists independently of your mind. You don’t have to be in love for love to exist somewhere else.

And even though we might interpret love subjectively, liiike, maybe I love my boyfriend one day, but dislike him the next-

Love itself is a reality - it’s there, somewhere, always in the world. Wether at the time I myself feel ‘in love’ or not.

🤷
 
Yeah but Love exists independently of your mind. You don’t have to be in love for love to exist somewhere else.
No, no, you misunderstand.

The word “love” is a label that we put on emotions – subjective feelings that exist only within minds. “Love” only exists in minds.

What I’m saying is that we have lots of evidence that “love” exists as a subjective experience contained in minds. Whether I personally feel love or not doesn’t change the fact that it exists – but it exists only as a subjective experience contained in minds.

But when people talk about gods, they’re not claiming that their god is nothing more than a subjective feeling contained in the mind – they’re claiming that their god is a real, independently existing entity who exists apart from minds.

When you want to demonstrate that an entity exists independently from your mind – or from anyone else’s mind – your deep personal feelings, all by themselves, cannot logically confirm it.

That’s the difference between “gods” and “love.”
 
Like what [evidence is there for the claim that "love exists as a subjective experience contained in minds]?
Well, for starters, we can take the nearly universal claims of people having experiences that they term “falling in love.” In addition to individual reports of this experience, we have the experience dramatized in a number of sources – film, literature, etc. – in remarkably consistent ways across all cultures (there’s a legitimate question to be asked about the extent to which media representations of love influence individuals’ experience of it, but that’s a little too complicated for this thread).

From these accounts – and from our own experiences – we can broadly conclude that there are various emotions that get grouped under the heading of “love”: romantic love, familial love, fraternal love, the love of friendship, the love of a fine cigar, etc. All of these categories are different experiences and emotions, but we use the same word (“love”) to classify them because they have enough similarities in common.

Finally, we can actually hook people up to machines and watch the neural patterns and changes in brain chemistry as they experience various kinds of love. Something is clearly happening in the brains of these people and, we would correctly suppose, something is happening in their consciousness.

In all of the above, the evidence suggests that love is something that exists inside consciousness. There’s absolutely nothing to suggest that love is a “thing” that exists independently of minds (love is not, for example, a fat cherub with a bow and arrow floating around outside of us).

What I’m saying on this thread is that people who claim that “god is real” on the basis of the same sorts of evidence – individual reports, personal experience, depictions in literature, measurements of brain activity – only have enough evidence to support the claim that “god” is an experience contained in the consciousness. “God,” on the basis of this evidence, is nothing more than an inner emotional experience – this kind of evidence can’t demonstrate that god is an independent being, any more than it can demonstrate that love is an independent being (with wings and a bow and arrow and everything).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top