Oxytocin, an argument against love and free will

  • Thread starter Thread starter AaronJSmith1978
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AaronJSmith1978

Guest
Janet Churchland stated monogamy has to be caused by oxytocin because the vole’s brain has the most neural receptors of any animal for oxytocin. There for it has to be the oxytocin that causes the bond. This type of simplistic reductionistic thinking is ridiculous but hard to refute. Oxytocin has been called the trust molecule, hugging hormone, and cuddle hormone. Love or at least the attachment feeling is but a puff of oxytocin.

However, I found many experiments that showed it failed to replicate its effects on human trust and social cues. Further more in mice it appears it actually used to focus on others not bond, bonding might just be a side effect of being able to focus on social cues. What’s disturbing is that they almost seem to be ignored. Despite being proven wrong when it comes to trust, shows like “nature knows best” and wiki (which doesn’t even mention one of the failed replications) still claim it impacts trust with examples of dogs and that starring at them spikes their oxytocin and suddenly they trust you. This claim seems ridiculous and doesn’t fit with common sense, I’ve seen dogs attack or run if you stare them down.

I was wondering what are your thoughts on this? Neurology and the mind have always been a spur in my side when it comes to arguing free will and God. Oxytocin is another spur. I looked at the forums, but no one speaks of it other than it does bond you. Such thought makes one think that the consciousness is simply epiphenomenal. Any help and insight on this would be much appreciated.

Thank you
God Bless
Aaron
 
We are body and soul. The body is biological (physical, chemical). It’s mysterious. It’s amazing. How wondrous it is that God created us like this!
 
One cannot and ought not* reduce* the reality of love and free will.

Anymore than one should reduce the wonders of a fine meal with family and friends - to only the need to eat prompted by this or that biological mechanism.

Man cannot and ought not be reduced to this or that biological aspect.

Man (and love and free will) indeed transcends such.
 
We are bodily beings – in fact, we **are bodies, **and not just ghosts in carcases – and so it should be no surprise whatsoever that we respond, behave and in fact live in a bodily manner.

ICXC NIKA
 
AaronJSmith1978 said:
Janet Churchland stated monogamy has to be caused by oxytocin because the vole’s brain has the most neural receptors of any animal for oxytocin. There for it has to be the oxytocin that causes the bond. This type of simplistic reductionistic thinking is ridiculous but hard to refute. Oxytocin has been called the trust molecule, hugging hormone, and cuddle hormone. Love or at least the attachment feeling is but a puff of oxytocin.

However, I found many experiments that showed it failed to replicate its effects on human trust and social cues. Further more in mice it appears it actually used to focus on others not bond, bonding might just be a side effect of being able to focus on social cues. What’s disturbing is that they almost seem to be ignored. Despite being proven wrong when it comes to trust, shows like “nature knows best” and wiki (which doesn’t even mention one of the failed replications) still claim it impacts trust with examples of dogs and that starring at them spikes their oxytocin and suddenly they trust you. This claim seems ridiculous and doesn’t fit with common sense, I’ve seen dogs attack or run if you stare them down.

I was wondering what are your thoughts on this? Neurology and the mind have always been a spur in my side when it comes to arguing free will and God. Oxytocin is another spur. I looked at the forums, but no one speaks of it other than it does bond you. Such thought makes one think that the consciousness is simply epiphenomenal. Any help and insight on this would be much appreciated.

Thank you
God Bless
Aaron
Click to expand...
Hi Aaron, I went looking for this research , as I feel , perhaps, it may have been misquoted or taken out of context.

Are you referring to a researcher called Patricia Churchland?

If so, are you referring to perhaps the words of the first paragraph in this link?

butterfliesandwheels.org/2011/twentieth-century-vole/
If so , the conclusions you have put forward are in error. Can you post a link to the scientific article with the full research publication so it can be read please 🙂

Wiki pedia and its ilk are not valid , nor to be trusted for the truth, as anyone can edit any them.

On dogs, a solid trusting dog should make and hold eye contact. Look at a sheep dog with its ‘eye’ . As for a spike in oxytocin when that happens, is there a link to the research.

God bless our journey home
 
Goodness, even from a purely materialistic point of view that’s absurdly reductionist. Our brains and hormonal systems are quite a bit more complex than “oxytocin=monogamy” (for one thing, oxytocin does a lot of stuff unrelated to monogamy, such as causing uterine contractions. It’s also involved in breastfeeding).
 
Roseeurekacross did you get my pm I just wanted to make sure you knew I wasn’t ignoring you 😬
 
AaronJSmith1978 said:
Janet Churchland stated monogamy has to be caused by oxytocin because the vole’s brain has the most neural receptors of any animal for oxytocin. There for it has to be the oxytocin that causes the bond. This type of simplistic reductionistic thinking is ridiculous but hard to refute. Oxytocin has been called the trust molecule, hugging hormone, and cuddle hormone. Love or at least the attachment feeling is but a puff of oxytocin.

However, I found many experiments that showed it failed to replicate its effects on human trust and social cues. Further more in mice it appears it actually used to focus on others not bond, bonding might just be a side effect of being able to focus on social cues. What’s disturbing is that they almost seem to be ignored. Despite being proven wrong when it comes to trust, shows like “nature knows best” and wiki (which doesn’t even mention one of the failed replications) still claim it impacts trust with examples of dogs and that starring at them spikes their oxytocin and suddenly they trust you. This claim seems ridiculous and doesn’t fit with common sense, I’ve seen dogs attack or run if you stare them down.

I was wondering what are your thoughts on this? Neurology and the mind have always been a spur in my side when it comes to arguing free will and God. Oxytocin is another spur. I looked at the forums, but no one speaks of it other than it does bond you. Such thought makes one think that the consciousness is simply epiphenomenal. Any help and insight on this would be much appreciated.

Thank you
God Bless
Aaron
Click to expand...
Oxytocin is a part of the body which body is animated by the spiritual soul in humans. Without the soul, oxytocin is worthless in a dead human corpse or a dead animal. Brute animals also have souls which animate their bodies but these souls are not spiritual immortal souls such as in human beings.

Both human beings and brute animals experience sensory passions such as love, hatred, joy, sorrow, fear, etc. The sensory powers of the soul in both humans and brute animals operate through some bodily part or organ. So sensory love is an act not only of the soul but of the body too or some part or organ of it. So it wouldn’t be astonishing if science found something in the body that is associated somehow to sensory love just as the soul’s power of sight is associated with the bodily eyes. Humans, however ,also possess the spiritual faculties of intellect and will and these powers operate independently of any bodily part or organ, though in this life they are dependent more or less on the proper functioning of the soul’s lower sensory powers and bodily organs or parts. Besides the sensory love which is a passion of the soul and the body together, humans have a spiritual love founded in the will which is beyond the observation of experimental science even as the soul itself which is spiritual and immaterial.
 
AaronJSmith1978 said:
Roseeurekacross did you get my pm I just wanted to make sure you knew I wasn’t ignoring you 😬
Click to expand...
Hi Aaron, I did thanks. Its taking a bit to learn how to use the forum. 😀

I have a friend doing a Ph.D on dog behaviour. Her research is geared towards standardizing temperament testing for shelter and impounded dogs. She measures both behavioural, physical and chemical reactions to certain stimuli. I must ask if she included oxytocin.
 
I found a lot of research showing oxytocin simple hightens the ability to focus on social cues. In mice it was first thought it forced them to preform maternal behaviors, but now with current research, what it does is inhibit neural noise and allow for better focus on things like a mouse pup crying. Also when they mouse couldn’t produce oxytocin it couldn’t recongnize members of its own spieces. When oxytocin was delivered to its brain it could start telling who was who with in the group of mice. This has also be demenstrated in humans for facial recognition. Simply put a dog isn’t trusting you more because oxytocin popped into its brains it’s just paying more attention, which makes sense. Most research is now pointing in that direction along with the fact they have found it plays many roles as a messenger and an inhibitor. To be honest Richca, put it best in his last post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top