Not everything on earth that science is able to prove. Some remain in ions of a mysterious world, creating a no-walk-over wall between reality and abstraction. Needless to say, emotions and feelings are among the hardest part subjects which scientific findings fail to clearly identify.
Like other things solely, love matters are an essential part of the spiritual part that can't be explained in the physical realms, and therefore, scientific findings are bounced back on such points.
As Valentine's Day approaches, it must be noted that love has been a hot topic for scientific discoveries, but still, the questions remain. Should we agree on every research hit with new findings on matters, or do they need scrutiny?
As a matter of fact, scientists agree on the lines they can't prove. Though a hypothesis can help indicate a few things about love, a matter that doesn't simply imply that all love issues can be demystified by science.
Brian Resnick, the health editor for Vox's science.com, argues that love thing is a great mystery of life.
He writes in his article "What Science Can't Still Explain about Love" that scientific hypothesis, along with matchmakers and relationship coaches, can only help us think through how love starts and how to maintain it once it is found.
Resnick believes the matchmaker's hypothesis and scientific assumptions, for instance, asking about preferences and tastes such as how tall, funny, and attractive their partners would be based on thin evidence.
"A questionnaire can ask participants to rate hypothetical dates, but that doesn't tell you how the date is going to go," he writes down.
Arguably, according to Resnick's article, the majority of the hypothetical findings on love are normally based on inaccurate sources and biased at the dead end.
"People who go on dates tend to make guesses based on what they like. The issue is that we really can't find any evidence that any of those factors matter in terms of matching people," Paul Eastwick, a psychologist at the University of California Davis, quoted so in the article.
Also, the fact that people have a vague sense of their partner's nature is a complicating factor in understanding the desires of people in love. "I think a lot of people do not have clarity on what they want. But they owe it to themselves to investigate those desires further."
Dating is dynamic and never linear. Possibly, the correlation between what the daters say and what they actually choose to turn out to be different. Ask the psychoanalysts why people choose the way they choose even when it means hurting themselves, and they will actually delve into another aspect- the pleasure of pain and unconscious desire for pain.
On the other hand, neuroscientists will tell you to love mutes the brain parts by the pleasure hormones and hi-(highness) flooding into the brain.
Furthermore, as explained by Scientific America, scientific findings can be faulty to some extent despite the existence of the publicity stunt and demagogues of the media praising scientific discoveries.
"When the research is published in a major, peer-reviewed scientific journal, it can turn out to be wrong, no matter how carefully it's done," an article by the Scientific American writes.
Prominent professors and top biologists have also multiple confirmed that there are limits to scientific findings when it comes to love matters.
Actually, the things that science can prove are things like how the brain reacts to the neurotransmitter dopamine, which is known to activate the pleasure regions of the brain.
Despite the existence of huge scientific publications on love from Harvard, associate professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, Richard Schwartz, still argues that love is like a complex matter spiced up with mystery and hard-to-find things.
"It's fairly complex, and we only know a little about it. There are different phases and moods of love. The early phase of love is quite different from the latter phases," Schwartz believes so, as per the Harvard Gazette.