Human Attraction

Love Secret
A newly married couple said, "What shall we do to make our love endure?"

Said the Master, "Love other things together."


People, throughout history, have often considered phenomena such as “love at first sight” or “instant friendships” to be the result of an uncontrollable force of attraction or affinity. One of the first to theorize in this direction was the Greek philosopher Empedocles who in the fourth century BC argued for existence of two forces: love (philia) and strife (neikos), which were used to account for the causes of motion in the universe. These two forces were said to intermingle with the four elements, i.e. earth, water, air, and fire, in such a manner that love, so to say, served as the binding power linking the various parts of existence harmoniously together.

Later, Plato interpreted Empedocles’ two agents as attraction and repulsion, stating that their operation is conceived in an alternate sequence. From these arguments, Plato originated the concept of “likes attract”, e.g. earth is thus attracted towards earth, water toward water, and fire toward fire. In modern terms this is often phrased in terms of “birds of a feather flock together”. Later, following developments in electrical theories, such as Coulomb's law, which showed that positive and negative charges attract, analogs in human life were developed such as "opposites attract". Over the last century, researcher on the nature of human mating, such as in evolutionary psychology, agree that pairs unite or attract to each other owing to a combination of opposites attract, e.g. people with dissimilar immune systems tend to attract, and likes attract, such similarities of personality, character, views, etc. In recent years, various human bonding theories have been developed described in terms of attachments, ties, bonds, and or affinities.

In the fields of sociology, behavioral psychology, and evolutionary psychology, with specific reference to intimate relationships, romantic relationships, or friendships, interpersonal chemistry is a reaction between two people or the spontaneous reaction of two people to each other, especially a mutual sense of attraction or understanding. In a colloquial sense, it is often intuited that people can have either good chemistry or bad chemistry together. Good chemistry is thought to be associated with or the result of favorable human bondings and associations. Other related terms are team chemistry, a phrase often used in sports, and business chemistry, as between two companies. When job-hunting, the greatest credentials in the world are not enough, i.e. according to the research of career expert Debra Feldman, "personality and interpersonal chemistry, that essential feeling of trust, plays a critical role in hiring decisions."

Throughout history, the idea of alchemy or chemistry between people, i.e. "interpersonal" chemistry, is usually made in reference to romance. Those in love, for example, are said to have found the perfect chemistry with another person. In recent years, however, analogies have branched off and developed in other fields such as business or consulting. In software consulting, project chemistry is a sought after quantity. Certain people are often selectively added to project teams to serve as a catalyst for the group. From the famous 1987 book Peopleware, by Tom DeMarco and Timothy Lister, for example, a person who functions as a "catalyst" in a project group is important because projects tend to always be in a state of flux; thus if someone has the skill-sets to energize a group, the project will be completed quicker and more efficiently. Catalysts, in chemistry, whether a person or a quantity of matter, tend to encourage or speed chemical reactions by lowering the activation energy barrier of the reaction. Someone who can help a project "jell" is worth two people who just do work. A related term introduced by DeMarco and Lister, is corporate entropy, in which they view energy waste as red tape and business team inefficiency as a form of entropy, i.e. energy lost to waste. This concept has caught on and is now common jargon in business schools.

Theories About Interpersonal Attraction
Matching Hypothesis
The matching hypothesis states that interpersonal attraction is more likely when the other person's physical attractiveness is similar to our perception of our own physical attractiveness.

Equity Theory
The equity theory suggests that physical attractiveness is one reward in a relationship, but there are many different rewards and costs that appear over time. According to the equity theory, a relationship continues if the rewards are greater than the costs, however many people argue that this is not the case mainly due to the emotions involved.

Evolutionary Theories
The evolutionary explanation of interpersonal attraction is that it more likely occurs when someone has physical features which indicate that they are very fertile. According to this theory, the only purpose of relationships is reproduction and so we "invest" in someone who appears very fertile to increase the chance of our genes being passed down to the next generation. This theory has been criticized because it does not explain relationships between people who do not want children or homosexual couples.

Another evolutionary explanation suggests that fertility in a mate is of greater importance to men than to women. According to this theory, women place significant emphasis on a man's ability to provide resources and protection. The theory suggests that these resources and protection are important in ensuring the successful raising of the woman's offspring. Additionally, or alternatively, the ability to provide resources and protection may also be sought because the underlying traits are likely to be passed onto male offspring.

Evolutionary theory also suggests that people whose physical features suggest they are healthy are seen as more attractive. The theory suggests that a healthy mate is more likely to possess genetic traits related to health that would be passed on to offspring. People's tendency to consider people with facial symmetry more attractive than those with less symmetric faces is one example.




Can you ever love me for me?
For the me that I am true and true
Can you love me with my imperfections?
Can you see me as I am and not as what you want me to be?

Can you ever love me for me?
For the me that makes mistakes and speaks without thinking
Can you love me even when I am unreasonable?
Can you see me as I am and not for the Angel you seek?

Can you ever love me for me?
For the me that cries when a stranger child is hurt
Can you love me when I am sad without me having a reason to be?
Can you see me as I am not as what I once was?

Can you ever love me for me?