DSV,
Thanks for the info... kind of. I kind of feel like you ignored what I was saying.
Do you know what I mean by Chalmer's "hard problem", or how / why Damasio separates emotion and feeling? The points you addressed didn't seem to mention these things at all.
At the primitive level we're talking about reproduction and biologically implanted family bonds, just like hunger. Most of the behavior associated behavior of love has nothing to do with neuroscience and everything to do with culture. Certainly love is expressed differently around the world.
So back to the beginning, what we measure is the reaction of the brain in "love" situations. This proves that this activity is happening and that the subject does have an observable and verifiably different reaction to people he/she loves to those he/she does not.
Nothing personal, but I'm quite sure if you said this to Wolf's wife, she's call it bullcrap.
She's talking about a feeling. Not behavior. Not "love-type situations". You're talking like a scientist, and limiting things to the observables.
Love is also a feeling. Feelings are inaccessible to observation. We can observe physical manifestations which correlate with subject's self-reports of feelings.
That's Chalmer's hard problem. Explaining experience itself. Why does it feel like ANYTHING?
I doubt you're going to agree to this. But I'll put it out there once at least.
Peace man.
Ben
™ Version 4.2