Yet, beneath the surface of all this sentimentality lies a stark reality: the kind of love that humans experience and celebrate on this day doesn't truly exist in the way we imagine it. What we call "love" is not some profound, mystical force or soul-deep connection. It's a temporary, biologically driven phenomenon rooted in chemical reactions in the brain, shaped by evolutionary pressures and reinforced as a social construct. True, enduring love—the real thing—belongs not to human emotions or relationships, but to God alone.
When people "fall in love," they often describe overwhelming euphoria, obsession, a sense of completeness, and an irresistible pull toward another person. Brain scans and neurochemical studies reveal this isn't magic—it's chemistry. The primary players are dopamine, oxytocin, vasopressin, norepinephrine, and fluctuations in serotonin.
Dopamine, the "reward" neurotransmitter, surges in the brain's ventral tegmental area and nucleus accumbens during the early stages of attraction and infatuation. It creates intense pleasure, motivation, and craving, much like the high from addictive substances. This explains why new lovers feel euphoric, energetic, and unable to think about anything else—the brain's reward system is hijacked, reinforcing the desire to seek proximity to the partner.
Oxytocin, often dubbed the "bonding hormone" or "cuddle hormone," is released during physical touch, intimacy, sex, and even eye contact. It promotes trust, attachment, and pair-bonding, helping to solidify the relationship after the initial rush. Vasopressin plays a similar role, particularly in males, contributing to territorial behavior and long-term commitment by enhancing feelings of protectiveness.
Norepinephrine ramps up arousal, focus, and excitement, contributing to the racing heart, butterflies, and sleepless nights associated with new romance. Meanwhile, serotonin levels often drop, mimicking patterns seen in obsessive-compulsive disorder—this accounts for the intrusive thoughts and idealization of the partner that characterize infatuation.
These chemicals create the illusion of profound love, but they are fleeting. The intense phase of romantic love typically lasts from a few months to about two years, after which the brain chemistry normalizes. What remains—if anything—is companionate attachment, driven more by habit, shared history, and oxytocin/vasopressin than by the fireworks of dopamine.
Remarkably, many everyday activities can trigger these same chemical cascades, producing feelings indistinguishable from romantic love without any partner involved. Eating chocolate, for instance, contains phenylethylamine and stimulates dopamine release, mimicking the pleasure of attraction—hence why chocolate is a Valentine's staple. Dark chocolate, in particular, boosts endorphins and serotonin-like effects.
Exercise is another powerful trigger: aerobic activities like running or weightlifting flood the brain with dopamine, endorphins, and even oxytocin in some contexts, creating a "runner's high" of euphoria and well-being. Sex or orgasm releases a potent mix of dopamine, oxytocin, and endorphins, explaining why casual encounters can feel profoundly bonding in the moment.
Listening to favorite music activates dopamine pathways in the reward system, evoking chills and emotional highs similar to falling in love. Creative pursuits—painting, writing, or playing an instrument—stimulate dopamine through accomplishment and novelty. Even simple acts like hugging a friend or pet, meditating, or achieving a goal can spike these chemicals.
Other examples include: consuming certain foods (e.g., spicy or comforting meals that trigger reward responses), dancing (combining music, movement, and social bonding), receiving compliments or gifts (social validation boosts dopamine), and novelty-seeking behaviors like travel or trying new hobbies. These show that the "love" feeling is replicable through non-romantic means—it's not unique to a soulmate but a brain state accessible via various stimuli.
This biochemical basis underscores why human "love" is unreliable. It's a social construct layered atop these physiological processes. Sociologists and anthropologists argue that romantic love as we know it—intense, passionate, individualized—is largely a product of cultural narratives, evolving from medieval courtly love traditions through Romanticism in the 19th century to modern consumerism. In many societies historically, marriages were arranged for economic, familial, or social reasons; "love" was secondary or irrelevant. Today, love is commodified—Valentine's Day itself is a multibillion-dollar industry pushing the idea that affection equals consumption.
Because it's constructed and chemically transient, human relationships built on it often falter. Divorce rates illustrate this fragility. In the United States, the refined divorce rate (divorces per 1,000 married women) has declined over decades but remains significant, hovering around 14-15 in recent years, with about 40-50% of first marriages historically ending in divorce (though rates vary by cohort and have trended downward). Common reasons include lack of commitment, frequent arguing, infidelity, marrying too young, unrealistic expectations, and inequality or abuse. These aren't anomalies; they're predictable when relationships rely on fading chemicals and societal ideals rather than deeper foundations.
Sociologically, modern individualism, delayed marriage, economic independence (especially for women), and shifting norms have amplified experimentation: hookups, friends-with-benefits arrangements, polyamory, multiple partners, and same-sex unions. These reflect a rejection of traditional monogamy in favor of personal fulfillment, yet they often lead to instability because the underlying "love" is still biologically short-lived and culturally fluid.
From an evolutionary perspective, humans didn't develop "love" for romance's sake. Non-human animals rarely exhibit anything resembling romantic love. Most mate opportunistically—lions, chimpanzees, or dolphins engage in promiscuous or seasonal mating without long-term emotional bonds. Some kill rivals, eat young, or abandon offspring. Even in pair-bonding species like certain birds or prairie voles, bonds serve reproduction and survival, driven by oxytocin/vasopressin, not poetic emotion. Prairie voles form strong attachments, but if chemically disrupted (e.g., blocking oxytocin or vasopressin receptors), bonds dissolve—proving it's biology, not transcendent love.
In humans, romantic love and pair-bonding evolved as adaptations for survival. Human offspring require years of care due to big brains and helplessness (altriciality). Two parents cooperating dramatically increase offspring survival odds—better resource provisioning, protection, and teaching. Pair-bonding, motivated by love-like feelings, ensured males invested in offspring (paternity certainty) and females gained support. In evolutionary terms, two people (or a bonded pair) have far better chances than one lone individual in harsh ancestral environments. Love, then, is an evolved mechanism to glue societies together, promote cooperation, and boost reproductive success—not an end in itself.
Yet this human "love" is imperfect: jealous, conditional, self-seeking, prone to games, compromise, and failure. It envies, boasts, dishonors, seeks its own, gets angry, keeps records of wrongs, and delights in evil at times. It fades, betrays, and disappoints.
Contrast this with real love—the unchanging, perfect love of God. Scripture declares: "God is love" (1 John 4:8). This isn't metaphorical; God's essence is love. Divine love, as described in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8, is patient and kind. It does not envy or boast. It is not proud, dishonoring, self-seeking, easily angered, or grudge-holding. It does not delight in evil but rejoices in truth. It always protects, trusts, hopes, perseveres. Love never fails.
Human love compromises for convenience, plays games for control, grows jealous over perceived threats, and ceases when chemicals wane or circumstances change. God's love never ceases—it is eternal, unconditional, sacrificial. While human love stems from physiology, evolution, and social construction, God's love is the source from which all goodness flows. We are capable of glimpsing it because we are made in His image, but our versions are distorted shadows.
This is why so many search desperately for fulfillment in romance, only to find emptiness. As the song poignantly expresses, "I'm searching for a real love"—a cry echoing through hearts tired of fleeting highs and broken promises. On this St. Valentine's Day, amid the chocolates and roses, recognize that true love isn't found in another person but in turning to the One who is Love itself.
Seek the real love—the one that never fails, never compromises, never plays games. It is patient, enduring, perfect. Human love may mimic it chemically or culturally, but only God's love satisfies the soul's deepest longing. In a world of constructs and reactions, pursue the eternal reality.
Sources (Peer-Reviewed and Official Links):
- Neurobiological Basis of Love: Meta-Analysis - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9313376/
- Neurobiology of Love and Pair Bonding - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10295201/
- Molecular Basis of Love - https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/4/1533
- Neural Correlates of Long-Term Romantic Love - https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/7/2/145/1622197
- Pair-Bonding, Romantic Love, and Evolution - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25910380/
- Prairie Vole Pair-Bonding Studies - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10295201/ (includes vole models)
- U.S. Divorce Statistics (CDC/NCHS) - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/marriage-divorce.htm
- American Community Survey Divorce Trends - https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2024/10/marriage-and-divorce.html
- Social Construction of Love (Anthropology/Sociology Review) - https://www.academia.edu/92708298/The_Social_Construction_of_Love
- Dopamine/Oxytocin Release via Activities (e.g., Chocolate/Exercise) - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11591571/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for reading and for your comment. All comments are subject to approval. They must be free of vulgarity, ad hominem and must be relevant to the blog posting subject matter.