tyowuwe
Bronze
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2025
- Posts
- 368
- Reputation
- 315
Defining Love
What is Romantic (Partner Based) Love? To answer that question I think it's best to remember love, like many other virtues, is not the product of one single neurological state. Love encompasses many positive emotions, subjective interpersonal values, and sexual systems which make love an extremely fluid and intricate concept which remains heavily affected by unconscious activity. This makes a personal interpretation, alongside typical neurological analysis, just as important in determining what gives rise to Romantic passion. But we must look and see where these personal interpretations of love come from before analyzing the brain's role in giving rise to them.Saint Thomas Aquinas, a philosophical disciple of Aristotelian thought, sees love's goal being “to will the good of another”. This interpretation of love is a selfless one, a passion motivated by the desire to watch another flourish, regardless of the immediate benefit to oneself (This remains an important neurological caveat). It's an altruistic love and Aristotle asserts that this type of love is essential for experiencing true happiness. This form of love is rooted in mutual admiration that transcends the physical, a love rooted in admiration of one another's virtues. This is the highest of the 3 following Virtues Aristotle believed:
Pleasure based Love
Utility based Love
Virtue Based love
Utility based love remains relatively unimportant to our discussion of romantic love (for this love remains mostly related to business relationships and practical and mutualistic connection, which isn’t exactly what we are looking to describe). This love serves a real world practical purpose, albeit one not as emotionally deep and the other types however. And lastly we have Sexual love, which Aristotle called Eros (from which Erotic comes from). This form of love is the lowest form of love, for it is entirely rooted in the physical while lacking the deep and truly meaningful aspects of Virtue based love. Aristotle asserts it is a dangerous and frightening form for it involves a primal and animalistic desire to procreate, and that act of its sophistication socially is a uniquely human trait that separates us and in a way, elevates our meaning of love far beyond that of other animals.
Leibniz also supports the key distinction between benefiting someone and finding their well being rewarding for its own sake. Instrumental benefit is a selfish desire, making the care rooted in what you can provide for them rather than the Virtuistic definition of love we see described by Aristotle. This Instrumental Benefit corresponds well with Aristotle's Utility based love we touched upon briefly. Leibniz, much like Aristotle, saw this form of love as inferior to his own definition of love which he posits as being:
“the pleasure one takes in the happiness and perfection of others.”
This nearly completely mirrors the former Aristotelian Virtue based love we saw prior in which one’s own happiness is directly upregulated by partaking in the selfless support and benefit of another. Definitions like these two remain almost holistically consistent across cultures and across time, allowing us to arrive at a relatively well fitted definition of love we can utilize in our pursuit of understanding how (and even if) this idealized true love can occur. Backing this definition even further we have a Study that further endorses this view. This study approved by the University of California, using a Bayesian model for probability and statistical inference across sample sizes, finds that people (with a mean of 0.94-0.97) ranked they felt most strongly loved when (in order):
Someone Cares for Them (Nurturing)
They are made to feel special (Adoration)
They are told they are loved (Reassured)
Someone supports without expecting in return (Selflessness)
So now we can finally define a roughly society reflecting definition of love:
Romantic love is a sustained disposition to will and take pleasure in the wellbeing, bliss, and flourishing of another person for their own sake, expressed through genuine nurture, virtuous admiration, passionate reassurance, and selfless support, while facilitating into this the synthesis of emotional and sexual dimensions that distinguish romantic attachment from other forms of interpersonal relationships
It would be disingenuous to claim this ideal has only been pedaled by the romance book industry to sell false dreams and fantasies to idealistic women, love described as this has existed as a religious and philosophical concept for centuries and millennia. But now that that we know what love is (take this as a rough interpretation up for personal interpretation) we now must invest time into understanding the basis of how love can begin to even take place, and what the phenomena of “love at first sight” and the mate selection habits of animals and human females show about the reality of this definition of love.
Process of Mate Selection
In around 90% of animal species, females are responsible for choosing a mate. This responsibility arrives on the females brain due to the selectiveness they must exemplify in order to choose a mate who carries ideal genes for their offspring while also being a protective and safe partner in the longer term (however partnership tends to come secondary). This is supported by how females' hormonal cycles largely reflect the goal of being primed sexually for mating season, and biologically preparing their body to give host to offspring. In one study assessing the neurological basis for mate selection and courtship arrived at the conclusion that there are 3 distinct brain systems for courtship, mating desire, sexual reproduction and parenting:
Sex Drive (Hypothalamus)
Attraction (Orbitofrontal Cortex)
Attachment (Hypothalamus)
A citation from the paper is best at explaining these
“The sex drive evolved principally to motivate individuals to seek sexual union with any appropriate member of the species. Attraction evolved to motivate individuals to select among potential mating partners, prefer particular conspecifics, and focus their courtship attention on this/these individuals, thereby making a mate choice. And the neural circuitry for adult male/female attachment evolved primarily to motivate individuals to sustain these affiliative connections long enough to complete species-specific parental duties”
Now what makes this even more interesting and satisfying is how we see these 3 distinct brain systems posited by this study are a near perfect match to the 3 forms of love proposed by Aristotle
Pleasure Based Love = Sex Drive (Hormonal desire)
Utility Based Love = Attraction (Mating Choice/Particular Preferences)
Virtue Based Love = Attachment (Sustaining of parental duties/long term bond)
And in nature they follow the pattern of evolving from being motivated by their sex drive to pursue a mate (ovulating/heat/overall sexual priming), then being motivated by this sexual desire to pursue a particularly preferred mate, eventually arriving at developing a specific partner based attachment due to long term bonding and sustained parental roles. This process is heavily the responsibility of the female, and these 3 paths show varying levels of connectivity and can give us grand insights to whether our definition of love is really possible.
So when does “Love” reach its culmination? How do we neurologically and psychologically reach the stage of “sustained disposition to will and take pleasure in the wellbeing, bliss, and flourishing of another person for their own sake”? Well since we know through studies that human females are by far the more selective gender-
Females swipe Left (Reject) 95% of dating profiles they see
Males swipe Left (Reject) 47% of dating profiles they see
Females receive over 2x more messages then men while sending more messages then men
We can focus on what this female selection pattern means neurologically as this is most relevant to determining what makes love possible. Since we established the order of “love” being [Sex Drive – Attraction – Attachment] we can now look at how the brain works during the determining of an ideal mate to see when what we describe as “True Love” comes into effect.
Sex Drive
Once visual input reaches the Fusiform Facial Area (FFA) via the Thalamus and Visual Cortex, it then begins to build and relay a specific identity it has formed to the Amygdala. The Amygdala evaluates the attractiveness and emotional significance of a person immediately after receiving a formed identity from the FFA. This process is entirely subconscious and happens in the span of milliseconds. In long term relationships, activity in the Amygdala is significantly lower, showing the brain isn’t focusing on evaluating potential mates as often as the Attachment phase begins to take place. Input to the Amygdala creates a subjective level of value/importance for the seen individual which is then broadcast to the Hypothalamus which then effectively decides the impact of the person on sexual and emotional hormones. In this study experienced sexual arousal was backed by activation in the Amygdala, Hypothalamus and the Right Anterior Temporal Pole.
Tying the neurological in with the philosophical, Aristotle spoke about the dangers of this form of Sexual Love. Aristotle looked down on it as the lowest form of love as it is rooted in the animalistic desire to mate and lacks a higher virtuous meaning that gives true love its valor. An extremely interesting cross over is how we see Right Temporal Pole activity being associated with sexual arousal, as another study showed this same region was shown to be indicative of higher likelihood of cheating/deceit when at a higher baseline synchronized with the mPFC/vmPFC (Integrates personalized experiences to create subjective value) and Caudate (Creates intense partner related pursuit and focus).
The important nuance of this (which makes it all the more fascinating) is that this set of neurological activity brain regions aren’t directly motivated towards cheating/infidelity/deceit, but rather they’re designed to turn evaluation of potential partners and executive processing of those signals into a desired outcome, which in the case of desired romantic partners leads to cheating. Since morality exists as a social construct, areas of the brain rooted in self interest tend to be excited during cheating as the areas of the brain in charge of assessing societal outcomes and social norms get trumped by self interest, and what more of a self interest driven desire than sex? In the way vmPFC – and Right Temporal Pole correspond with cheating behavior we see the inverse occur with the vmPFC – Left Temporal Pole:
Heightened vmPFC:Right Pole = Cheating + Sexual Arousal
Heightened vmPFC:Left Pole = Honesty + Social Meaning
This assessment is further backed by the existence of Klüver–Bucy syndrome, a syndrome induced by lesions to the Left Temporal Pole. This syndrome directly impacts the Honesty + Social Meaning we saw above, as it causes fearlessness, irrational decision making/risk taking, and hypersexuality which are all traits associated with heightened Temporal activity in the Right (Opposite) Temporal Pole. But what does this mean for Love? The heightened vmPFC:Right Temporal Pole related cheating is a baseline level, not a risk level induced by normative
Activity in those brain regions. However this still puts pressure on the initial basis of attraction which relies on the mPFC, Caudate, and Right Temporal Pole in sexual attraction while also being the first initiator of which further attraction must seemingly be built upon.
It is important to note though that species that display long term associative partnerships prior to reproduction (Humans) have preferences for a particular mate that precedes the choice to mate. In non monogamous species we witness a preference displayed for individuals of a particular phenotype (AKA: “Her Type”) is expressed prior to mating. In many
So as expected, the first and unavoidable step in the female's decision of a mate is a milliseconds long subconscious neurological process in which the female determines your external attractiveness and sex appeal based on where you fit within her phenotypical preference, activating a hormonal response before the next stage begins and attraction begins. (Aristotle was right)
Attraction
Quoting a former study“It is hypothesized that the neural system for courtship attraction is distinct from but closely linked to some of these primary circuits associated with the sex drive and that these two neural systems, attraction and the sex drive, operate in tandem in most avian and mammalian species”
Attraction is defined as the action or power of evoking interest, pleasure, or liking for someone or something. So after we have explained what drives sexual desire we now look into its closely related neurological system of attraction. Attraction has been studied for as long as you can imagine, yet we cannot conclusively determine an objective scale of attractiveness, as attractiveness remains heavily reliant on person to person subjective hormonal and neurological responses elicited from visual stimuli which are not always uniform. Culture, Age, and Race, all play huge roles in attraction that are far too nuanced to objectively narrow down. We know that women prefer facial symmetry, physical dominance (Height), lean athletic physiques etc but since the goal here isn’t the analysis of individual female preferences we won't be getting into such. The goal with this section is understanding the neurological basis of what elicits feeling attracted to someone
Now once the Hypothalamus assesses and regulates the hormonal response this then gets relayed to the VTA which in turn releases dopamine. Here we get to where attraction happens. The VTA sends these dopaminergic reward signals to the OFC alongside the Amygdala sending signals regarding emotional significance, the hippocampus sending personally associated memories with the visual subject, and the Accumbens which converts dopamine into desire and romance (Accumbens-OFC pathway disruptions lead to OCD). All of these culminate in the OFC reaching the culmination of External Attractiveness, Emotional/Social Cues, and Memories into one oversimplified answer:
“How much is he worth?/How attractive is he?”
The OFC then sends this information to the dlPFC, which in turn thinks over what decision it should act upon. In one of our earlier studies it was found that heightened baseline activity between the dlPFC and vmPFC show higher prediction likelihood of cheating, largely due to the dlPFC’s role in choosing desired outcomes while self referring to one's own already established subjective value of the other person/end goal of an action (Lacking social normative outcome recognition: Selfish).
Now that attractiveness has been set and the dlPFC has now sent signals to the Caudate to create persistent thought, daydreaming, and pursuit of the male (while also wanting to be chased, hence why women send mixed signals about whether they are interested). This releases an inhibitory brake known as the GP which in turn sends these released actions to the Thalamus where they eventually are expressed as outward action.
(Another interesting note to have is a study was done on men and women and their honesty where Right-anodal/left-cathodal DLPFC stimulation significantly increased honest choices in female participants during conflict trials, whereas no significant stimulation effect was detected in male participants, showing women's self interest/deceit motivations have more DLPFC related basis, alongside this, when making decisions to act honestly, individuals who cheat more often show greater activation in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC))
Now let's say now the female (or alternatively the male) gets their partner. Now a relationship has begun and we begin the final stage of love. But the question still remains, does this love meet the definition of love we have formed prior?
Attachment vs True Love
In this study, results showed common neurological phenomena in Thalamus, Right Posterior GP, Bilateral SN, Insular Cortex, and mid-insula (Many of which have a high density of Oxytocin and Vasopressin receptors). In the same study, Obsession related scoring was lower in the Long Term Relationship grouping (Likely due to the dominance of more stable security based hormones like Oxytocin and Vasopressin). In Long Term Relationships the left Amygdala showed more activation when seeing their partner and in early relationship stages the right amygdala showed less activation. This is intriguing because the right amygdala when stimulated induced sadness and fear, showing connection with the comfort felt within a new relationship due to its downregulation while the left amygdala in children with anxiety disorder, PTSD, and OCD tends to be smaller. An interesting potential takeaway is that as a relationship goes on, rather than stress/negativity being lower and dopamine being higher, it actively builds a relationship not built on Obsession but built on true Attachment through the expression of Vasopressin.Early Stage: Dopamine/Norepinephrine (Obsession, Excitement, Yearning)
Long Term: Oxytocin/Vasopressin (Security, Trust, Stability)
Much of what we deem “Attachment” relies on those “Long Term” hormones building on the already earlier established dopaminergic pathways that relay assessments of attractiveness to decision making centers and hormonal regulators to elicit responses. And in studies done on long term relationships we still see the VTA and Caudate having the highest connection with higher “romantic love” scores (Involved in the release of Dopamine and cultivation of desire).
So now let's revisit our definition of Love:
“Romantic love is a sustained disposition to will and take pleasure in the wellbeing, bliss, and flourishing of another person for their own sake, expressed through genuine nurture, virtuous admiration, passionate reassurance, and selfless support, while facilitating into this the synthesis of emotional and sexual dimensions that distinguish romantic attachment from other forms of interpersonal relationships”
Does the neurological processes we have described actually point to the existence of this definition of “True Love”?
NO
The prerequisite for this romantic love to even come into play is rooted in already preexisting phenotypical preferences (Height, Face, Physique) which subconsciously determines which people you will be open to eliciting feelings of love towards. The female preferences, known or unknown, already exist within the opposite person's mind. No one is exempt from this reality, as entities geared towards the preservation of our species we have evolved to not want to procreate with the hideous, mothers abandoning their deformed young, women with unideal hip ratios weren’t favored. Love and bonding in all species has underlying prerequisites that you must hope to meet. TRUE Selfless love does not exist because even if your standards are low, they’re never zero, and even if you were somehow able to actively filter out your biases, you’d never be able to entirely erase them. However we CAN still get true joy and experience pleasure in helping one another, we CAN still want to watch our partners succeed and smile, we CAN still still “will the good of another”. This is the joy of romantic attachment and if your partner truly chooses you amongst all possible mates as her ideal partner (Which probably won't happen unless youre at least Low Chad) then Love can occur. But we will never escape what all of those opportunities to love are built on; an entire future determined in the span of milliseconds when a woman looks at your bone structure.
