Fun results! The methodological problems of studying love are of
course enormous, so one should take them with a grain of salt (even if
the London group people are *good*).
> These love doctors believe the lovey-dovey instinct is all in the
> brain the medial insula, the anterior cingulate, the striatum and the
> prefrontal cortex to be exact.
OK, the insula and cingulate are not unexpected. Insula seems to be
very much about our bodily "feelgood" or "feelbad" feelings, and the
cingulate is the link between the frontal lobe thinking and the limbic
emotions. Striatum and prefrontal cortex is more unexpected, that is
usually more action-oriented (the planning system, what to do in this
context etc). Maybe it is an artefact. Or maybe they are thinking
about what to do when they meet the loved one.
"D. den Otter" <neosapient@yahoo.com> writes:
> Interesting research. Of course, this kind of thing should be done on a
> *much* larger scale; that would really help us to understand the brain.
> Also, maybe it's time for us rational transhumanist types to get less
> romantic about love, and see it for what it really is; a dangerous,
> anti-individualistic, anti-intellectual addiction which (presumably) only
> serves the "interests" of "blind, selfish genes", not your own enlightened
> self-interest. Being in love is about as "transhuman" as smoking crack.
> "But if feels so good"...Yeah, sure it does, JUNKIE! To quote from the
> article:
>
> "These ["love"] parts of the brain are also the parts which are active in
> euphoric states generated by exogenous substances such as cocaine,"
> noted research partner Dr. Zeki. "Romantic love is to for many people,
> at any rate, intoxicating."
>
> There's obviously nothing wrong with "feeling intoxicated/euphoric"
> (feeling good is more or less the interim meaning of life, after all), but
> such states should only be generated in a highly controlled, emotionally
> autonomous mental structure. Anyway, here's the article...
Well, I think the same systems get activated in me when I write
creative texts or do research - the problem isn't the euphoria, but
the framework. Continous control might not be the best framework
paradigm, another possibility could be that you shape your emotional
system during metaprogramming sessions to value suitable things or
channel its energy in the right directions - the system is tuned to
behave right natrually rather than requiring constant supervision.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:08 MDT