The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
3 Points

love on first site is true

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,121 times Debate No: 85688
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)




Intro: I am doing this because even though i compete in debate on a team and it involves mainly political issues and arguments i find philsophical arguments more interesting.
Observation: This is more of a philosophical based topic so i put it under philosophy. Love is preety much a philosophical topic rather then something like minimum wage or the patriot act which are more economical/political based.

Pro burden= defend the love on first site concept

What is love on first site?= The popular form of love accepted in America, examples of it

“I knew I would marry her after the first date.” Al Bundy, married 40 years

“I met him, I am sure this time, He is The One.” Carrie Bradshaw, 40, single with a string of exciting but broken relationships behind her.

Conclusion: love on first site shouldn't have to be explained but i presented this just in case. It's a very popular idea of love in America.

Con= provide an alternative description of love in general/ flaws in the "love on first site"

Round 1: Clarification/acceptance

round 2: present side/arguments

round 3: debate

round 4: debate/maybe why you won.
If you would like a change for something or 5 rounds instead of 4 state your request in comments. However i will only do so if you plan on debating me after i i complete your request.



I wouldn't"t call it love at first sight but lust at first smell (and sight).

There have been numerous studies done on genetic compatibility between potential "mates". It all started with smelling T-shirts. In 1994 Claus Wedekind had 49 women and 44 men wear white T-shirts for two days straight without any cologne, perfume, deodorant then had the participants smell the opposite sex"s t-shirts and rate there affinity for the smell. The women were particularly good at this and (excepting those women on the pill) were able to pick out genetically compatible partners.

"Women could potentially find "love at first sniff" due to compatibility genes that may help them find their best match." ( Effeietsanders, CC BY 2.0, Medical Daily 2013)

Recently another study was done in which 238 participants were presented with pictures of both blue and brown eyed people of the opposite sex. The results, the woman rated the brown eyed men as more trustworthy. To test this further they changed the colors of the eyes of the males in the photographs. What they found was that it was not the eye color but the facial features of the males with brown eyes.

"the brown-eyed males had a bigger nose and mouth, a broader chin and more prominent eyebrows positioned closer to each other, compared with the blue-eyed males. These features seemed to convey more trustworthiness to the participants." (Public Library of Science online journal, 2013)

Love is more than genetic compatibility as mates. You don"t need to have any knowledge of a person"s mind, heart or soul in order to feel this, "love at first sight" feeling. It is merely nature"s way of trying to provide viable off-spring.

"Love is composed of a single soul inhabiting two bodies." -Aristotle

That is not simply smell.
Debate Round No. 1


Observation: My opponent advocates that love is something you don't need knowledge of your partner to feel. that love is something that can be obtained and properly utilized in any relationship without understanding it and mastering it. I however will be arguing that Love is an action and love is a choice. You have to act out love in order to actually love someone. You have to display your love by trusting in your partner and stabilizing that relationship.

Definition of Lust = have a very strong sexual desire for someone:

Ex: Lust for chocolate drew her into the candy store.

Explanation: This isn't the best example for the definition I found online however it doesn't serve the purpose of supporting the definition but rather supporting how fast lust takes control.

Before I go into my overall conception of love which is found in the KJV bible I will first present issues with love on first site

1. Problems with love on first sight

Well for starters nearly 58% of Americans believe in Love at First Sight 50% say they have experienced it. (1) So I bet you are wondering if there is a problem at all with this belief on love. Well only a fraction of these relationships have any staying power. 80% of ‘chemistry driven’ relationships fail in less than three months. (1) Divorce rates are another measure of the majority of Americans who believe in this. In fact 50% of marriages end up in a divorce. (2) I went to bible study today and we learned that love rushed is "dead." In other words if you seek love like crazy and go for someone based off the so called "love on first sight," you are signing a death certificate for your relationship and giving birth to a divorce. Love on first sight is inimical to any relationship of any form or fashion.

2. The concept of love on first sight alone is false

  • Let's forget the empirical evidence for a second and simply look at this from a philosophical/logical perspective. There is a difference between love and lust and desire. Look to my definition of lust and then look to my explanation of love in my 3rd contention. Lust is seeing someone and desiring them, people confuse this for love and simply act on it when really you see a girl that you simply think is super hot. Love as I state is an action and ultimately a choice, you choose to love which is why God states love others as I love you. Love isn't a random feeling. Love is like joy or peace, it's not random and takes an effort to develop and hone. But anyway lets take out the love in the statement "love on first site".
  • You now have this statement, "on first sight". We know that love isn't something that randomly happens thus it can't fill in the blank. But consider the definition of lust I presented at the top of my case. I describe it as a sexual desire, and you only walk up to a girl you are interested in if you find her attractive right? If you got the typical teen or even adult and asked them if they would choose someone they found attractive or someone they didn't they would probably choose the person they feel is good enough for them. Eros love is one of the loves I present in the next contention, this is purely attraction based and is needed in any relationship. But forget all that, now look at the example I provide, "Lust for chocolate drew her into the candy store." Notice how quick the result was, notice how lust is an instant almost instinctive force. Notice most importantly how lust theoretically activates on first sight of the weak link, or in other words the thing you desire. Therefore rather "lust on first sight," is the true meaning of this socially accepted concept.

2. What love really is

Introduction: First of all Love is an action, when you find someone so attractive on first site that's only one part of love and the least important, Eros love. You have to trust and care and understand your partner in order to love them. You have to choose to love someone after you get to know them. You can't "fall in love" because if you fall in love you will fall into a divorce.

sub point A: agape love
it is defined as a Greek word in the new testament as meaning the love of god. Here is an example from the bible For God so loved (agape) the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." (John 3:16) Also in many studies people who have a close relationship with god tend to have longer relationships. This love basically allows you to embrace the other loves better and is the most important one to have.
God is love (1 John 4:16)

Sub point B: Eros/sexual/sensational love
The world mostly defines love in this category but what they don't understand is this is just a piece to a bunch of other loves that are vital to have. This love is based off attraction/sex so you can't just have this one alone cause when your spouse gets older it will wear off and relationship would go down hill. It is logical that yes this love will be included cause Bureau of static shows that majority of people's first interest in the other sex is attraction from a distance; so yes this love can be included but it can't be alone. For example as your spouse becomes older she will of course become less attractive over time.

Sub point C: family love
A Stanford study showed that family love is the most important because it can determine how you develop and can determine your actions in the future. For example if you grow up with a family who mostly does drugs chances are you will to, or if you grow up with a family who shows compassion and gives to charity you probably will be influenced by those actions and do the same thing when you grow up. It is essential that you have love in the home you grow up in so you can understand how to love your future spouse and children. Look at Christ Brown hitting Rihanna. It turns out that Chris Brown himself had an abusive dad.

Sub point D: brotherly love/companionship love
This love is friendship love or brotherly love among members in church. This is a great love to have because you are more open and have people you can count on in hard times.

I await his response.



#1 My opponent wrote, "Love on first sight is inimical to any relationship of any form or fashion."

To paraphrase using the definition of inimical.

“Love on first sight is harmful or hostile to any relationship of any form or fashion.”

Really? Harmful, hostile even… to any relationship you say? What about the relationship between a mother and her newborn baby. Have you ever seen and appreciated the beauty of this “love at first sight” relationship?

Expecting mothers statistically have a 70% chance of experiencing “love at first sight”. New mothers experience a flood of oxytocin causing them to literally “fall in love” with their offspring sometimes even before meeting them. (Heathday, Chis Woolston) This oxytocin induced rush of euphoric love is hormonally driven and gives babies a far better shot at survival as the doting mother is absolutely devoted to the long-term well-being of her child. Would you say this instant initial bonding between mother and child is harmful or hostile to the relationship between mother and child?

Oxytocin also plays a key role in the staying power of a romantic relationship. Professor Ruth Feldman (Bar-Ilan University, Israel) spent many years researching the oxytocin induced bond between mother and baby. However, what Feldman discovered when she turned her research to examining romantic love is shocking, to say the least

“The increase in oxytocin during the period of falling in love was the highest that we ever found,” -Ruth Feldman

Couples "falling in love" have about twice the amount of oxytocin pumping thru their veins as a pregnant women (Journal of Psychoneuroendocrinology). Further, couples with this intense Oxytocin bond were the same couples that exhibited staying power. They found the relationships formed in an oxytocin rich environment, communicated better and had a greater devotion to seeing their relationship endure.

“Oxytocin was also correlated with the longevity of a relationship. Couples with the highest levels were the ones still together six months later. They were also more attuned to each other than the low-oxytocin couples when Feldman asked them to talk about a shared positive experience. The high-oxytocin couples finished each other’s sentences, laughed together and touched each other more often.” –Scientific American, Luciana Gravott, 2013

Additionally, research has found that when men experience this oxytocin high they feel more intense emotions, communicate better, make more eye contact, and are better at peaceful conflict resolution. (Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience) Would you now call this “falling in love” and accompanying oxytocin high a bad thing, or would you now say it is hostile to the formation of a relationship? These facts prove that the experience of “falling in love” or “love at first sight” and accompanying oxytocin high are actually rather beneficial and possibly even essential to the long term survival of a relationship?

2. My opponent stated, "love as I state is an action and ultimately a choice”

“First of all Love is an action, when you find someone so attractive on first site that's only one part of love and the least important, Eros love. You have to trust and care and understand your partner in order to love them. You have to choose to love someone after you get to know them...

-You can't "fall in love" because if you fall in love you will fall into a divorce.”

You want to talk about divorce rates? Please take a look at the following graph. You will notice that the divorce rate spikes about five years after oral contraceptive (the pill) starts to become popular around the beginning of the1960’s.

Image result for graph divorce rate and oral contraceptive use

Note: the use of oral contraceptives induces a false state of pregnancy.

Remember the women in the T-shirt test? They were most adept at smelling out the right genetic partner for viable offspring at times of peak fertility; conversely, when a woman is on oral contraceptives the ability to sniff out a partner with compatible (different enough) genetics is temporarily suspended and her oxytocin levels will not be able to hit the same peak as the woman who is “falling in love” who has twice the levels of oxytocin compared to a pregnant woman (oral contraceptives= faux pregnancy). Woman on the pill are found to be more attracted to those men more genetically similar to themselves, like family member similar, like a brother. What do brothers and sisters do? They bicker. And they don’t have sex. Does this sound like the marital problem you hear about prior to a divorce?

This is such an issue that the scientific community is beginning to suggest that it may be in the best interest of the survival of your marriage for engaged women to discontinue oral contraceptives before they get married and then see how things works out.

You said, “You have to trust and care and understand your partner in order to love them. You have to choose to love someone after you get to know them.

You can't "fall in love" because if you fall in love you will fall into a divorce.”

I am not discounting "trust, care and love", however, I am arguing that these characteristics, for a fact, are facilitated by the oxytocin surge that accompanies the "falling in love" or "love at first sight" experience. That these mechanisms are biologically coded and create the atmosphere for "trust, care and understanding".

Many couples have lengthy, well thought out periods of courting and engagement, all while a women is on oral contraceptives. This has had an unforeseen effect that when the pill is discontinued, the woman finds she is not attracted on any physical/sexual level to her now spouse and neither partner has adequate Oxytocin levels. Now after all this work done has been done on the relationship, the wife feels sexual revulsion towards her husband and her man is not feeling so communicative (both effects of low oxytocin levels). Now, we have a divorce scenario despite time, energy and intent.

Here is the happy alternative, we go back to the couples “falling in love” with the crazy high levels of oxytocin. Remember that research has found that when men experience this oxytocin high they; feel more intense emotions, are more communicative and woman on the same high are more demonstratively loving. Everyone is happy and the relationship has better staying power.

All is fair in love and war, you brought the Bible up, so I will too. In a minute.

But first. Did you know you have a second brain? It's true. Have you ever felt something was wrong despite the outside evidence you thought you had, and you could just feel it in your gut? Or had “butterflies in your stomach” when you saw that special someone?

Our “second Mind” is in our guts (or bowels). It’s called the Enteric Nervous System; our guts are filled with about 100 million neurons, over 30 different types of neurotransmitters (same as the other brain), produces about 95% of our serotonin and sends messages to the brain (90% of the time) rather than the other way around via the vagus. So, when your gut speaks, your brain is smart enough to listen. It gets better though, oxytocin is produced and regulated in our guts. The power of oxytocin has an undeniably positive effect on our emotions and our ability to remain committed to a relationship or person (Scientific American, 2010).

Now, I will fairly throw out a couple Bible verses for you, to give some insight on the importance of the guts or bowels.

“Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it.” 1 Kings 3:6(KJB)

“My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him” -Song of Solomon 5:4 (KJB)

Both of these references seem to refer to the bowels being an emotional center related to romantic love and reproduction.

In the Song of Solemn you will see the woman’s bowels longed for her man and in 1st Kings the true mother of the child “yearned” in her guts for her baby.You may want to think twice before you disregard a very important and often neglected part of knowing someone; it comes from your gut, not your head.

Your head sends input about your environment, including the people around you and sends this sensory information to your gut. Your gut in turn tells your mind some things, that may or may not fit with what seems rational to your mind. It is easily demonstrated, have you ever met someone and just known something wasn’t right, and known it down in your gut, despite all rational evidence, then it turns out, sometimes years later your gut was right. Regardless of religious belief, certainly your gut was created this way for a reason and not meant to be throttled and thrown out the window.

By the way this is "her" response.

Debate Round No. 2


It would have been nice if you actually posted a good argument for round 1 so I could be aware of my mistake. I didn't realize I was debating someone way older who has been in collage and has had an occupation. You are more then twice my age loll with way more wisdom and experience . It's like a middle school debater going against a high school debater but a even bigger gap. I have no chance.

Forgot to set age limit and thus I will FF

There is nothing I can learn from something I can't understand/not interested in. I read a bit on what you presented and I don't have the intelligence yet to really respond. Also I am a math/politics guy anyway and may never be able to fully comprehend this anyway.


My opponent wrote, “You are more then twice my age”

Geez, thanks for making me feel old. Just kidding. I didn't realize you were a kiddo.

My opponent wrote, “There is nothing I can learn from something I can't understand/not interested in. I read a bit on what you presented and I don't have the intelligence yet to really respond.”

Now you have triggered my maternal instincts. You are doing well for your stated age and you’re not lacking in intellect. Hang in there.

My opponent wrote, “Also I am a math/politics guy anyway and may never be able to fully comprehend this anyway.”

Try not to undersell yourself, to yourself.

Do you want to try and duke the rest of this out?

Debate Round No. 3


MikeTheGOd forfeited this round.


Nicholesarah forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MikeTheGOd 2 years ago
I'll try an argument next round I'll post something later
Posted by Nicholesarah 2 years ago
U.n wrote, "I'm of the opinion that this is a premier dating site."
That is hilarious actually.

but as for me, no one needs worry, I am not here for dating. still funny...
Posted by Nicholesarah 2 years ago
Well, it was my first time debating on this site also. I got a little confused as to exactly which side/what I was debating on the first round.
The mother - child bond is valid as it relates directly to better understanding the surge of ocytocin during the "falling in love" experience and it's effects. Ocytocin is alternatively known as the:
"hug hormone, cuddle chemical, moral molecule, and the bliss hormone due to its effects on behavior, including its role in love and in female reproductive biological functions in reproduction. "
part in quotations from:
Posted by U.n 2 years ago
I'm of the opinion that this is a premier dating site.

You list your age, gender, relationship status, political and religious views. Provide your cell phone number. Share pictures of yourself. State your interests and hobbies. Get all the big issues out in the open and out of the way right from the start. Maximize your compatibility.
Posted by MikeTheGOd 2 years ago
well now I know... never debate a 40 year old. Half the stuff you stated I don't even understand. I thought I established an age limit for this debate to like 26-27 guess I forgot. Also the intro statement was a bit on the unfair side. I made it pretty obvious what form of relationship I was talking about. I didn't even mention a parent and child relationship.
Posted by MikeTheGOd 2 years ago
I know you don't compete in debate since you think both sides have to share a definition. I can present a definition and he can present his.

The whole debate is proving my love is more correct then his love so my definition of love is my argument. I am advocating for a type of love.... come on it's not rocket science.
Posted by MikeTheGOd 2 years ago
I don't even know what a elo ranking means first of all. Next the definition of love is pretty obvious. Just find a definition that defends what love means on "love on first site". My definition will be different sice I am advocating for a different form of love. Also just because I am not setting some 100% equal on both sides debate doesn't mean I am not on a debate team. I don't care if one side is harder then the other, in fact on some topics one side is more better then the other especially in congress debate. ]

Again I am not debating you so stay in the box.
Posted by DogInTheBox 2 years ago
A clear definition of what you are arguing about is needed otherwise you'd have the advantage because you know the definition of the topic. I doubt you are on a debate team because again, this was set up for an easy win so you can get a higher elo ranking
Posted by MikeTheGOd 2 years ago
Also my bad for spelling sight wrong. It happens
Posted by MikeTheGOd 2 years ago
a definition of love isn't needed. also DoginaBox stay in a box. I don't care how you feel about the resolution it's my debate I set up thus I will make it how I want it.

Not all debate topics are equal for both sides. Some topics have one side that is a bit easier to do in any debate. I know this from competing myself.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by kkjnay 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Come on now Con, if you had stuck in there and kept going this would be a good debate. I'll give you some words of encouragement: debating isn't a contest of intelligence, experience, age, or wits, it is a contest of convincing arguments. The fact is the only real reason you lost is because you gave up, don't give up. I thought you presented a good argument in Round 2, as did Pro.