Helen Fisher: Why Do Fools Fall in Love?

[griggiorouge]

@ortegad123 what percentages? this 09:36 do add up to 100 percent.

[ortegad123]

how come all these percentages don't add up to 100%?

[blackutube1]

I wasted my 10 min to know that Bill Clinton is a dog and Hilary is cat.

[Authilus]

I don't know how she does it, but she somehow manages to finish her sentences ... through her nose. This is simply intolerable; it is unacceptable. I'm sorry, I could not endure the full length of the video.

[hockeyham3]

Wow, ok..this is the biggest pile of BS I've seen in ahile. I wil take your "chart" to the bathroom. Thank you.

[Authilus]

@hockeyham3

Replying to a 3 month old comment, but it's ok: I forgive myself.

Do you have something better than this BS based on your own research?

[pants7]

I'm a white male and I really want a black girlfriend.

[acr08807]

@pants7 A good start in the girlfriend search would be to start calling youself a "man" instead of a "male."

[pants7]

@acr08807 What's the difference?

[acr08807]

@pants7 Referring to yourself as "male" makes you sound like you considerself a rat in a maze-running experiment. "Man" makes you sound like a man.

[pants7]

@acr08807 I feel like that sometimes. I guess i see what you're saying but I guess i just wrote whatever i felt. Which is what I always do. Didn't think it would be an issue

[acr08807]

There is zero science backing up Fisher's hypothesis. Whatever her merits as an anthropologist, she is no neuroscientist.

[sergioruizsocio]

@acr08807 you're right she´s not, but she does her homework, and I'm not sure about this project, but she has worked with neuroscientist and other professionals in others related to this one.

[acr08807]

@sergioruizsocio She does her homework? What would possibly makes you say something that far off base? I have done my homework, I've done a literature search, and there is no published research that supports her hypothesis. Fisher isn't a scientist, she's a shill.

[sergioruizsocio]

@acr08807 perhaps my mistake was to not let myself clear, again, i don't know about this project because I haven't read this book yet, I bought it on amazon and I'm waiting for it. But I don't agree about the fact that you had wrote that just because she's doesn't have a degree in neurology or something her work is not science. That just doesn't make sense to me, then by that same logic, your comment shouldn't mean anything because you probably aren't qualify in anthropoly and neuroscience

[sergioruizsocio]

In any case, just because nobody else before said or study this subject with the perspective she did does not make it false. Just make it disagreeable to some of us. You said she needs to back up her hipotesis with scientific facts, well until someone who make some other more "scientific" argument or response to this hipotesis that's pretty much all there is to say. I have a pretty big chanse to be wrong on this, but as you pointing out, show me some evidence to make me think otherwise

[acr08807]

@sergioruizsocio I have a PhD in neuroscience. My undergrad degree was in anthropology and zoology. But now I understand what you were saying. It's true, having a degree isn't what makes someone a good scientist. The way science works is if you want your point of view to be accepted, you have to supply evidence. Fisher has advanced a hypothesis. She has provided zero proof.

[sergioruizsocio]

@acr08807 first I want to say that I appreciate that you are being so reasonable, lot of us prefere being right than reasonable. My opinion is based in the idea that everybody ends up thinking whatever is they want to think, indepedent of what kind and amount of evidence there is, if any, and independet of whether they are scientist or not. I haven't read this book and I'm not really qualify for discusing her conclusions, so until i read and analize it, I only got your impressions on the subject

[MazeleyFanClub]

Probably some truth buried in here, but overall looks too basic to be of relevance. I tried to hybridize the system for more accuracy, scoring myself 1-10 in each of the 4 categories then doing the math for all 16 pairings to figure out the overall "best match." Again, kind of interesting but I can't tell how accurate it really is. eHarmony has "17 dimensions of compatibility", I don't like them but they are probably a lot more accurate than this.

[alexiseptimus]

Good study, fucked up examples though.

Except for Darwin.

[vids721]

This is a brilliant study! Really interesting!

[sonofwalt]

Interesting research. I would like to see it in dialogue with the more complex system of the Enniagram institute's personality profiles.

[Red0660]

You can see the high testosterone markers in Hilary's face.....

[hereaminow]

what about monica?

[SynerJetics]

Fuck these stupid generalizations. Everyone is different and there is only one race...the human race.

[FoShizzle951]

@SynerJetics you're a total "builder", i.e. stupid.

[McArrowni]

This has nothing to do with generalizations. They are trends and statistics. She's merely pointing out where the big part of the bell curve where most of us resides is.

[DonQuixotedeKaw]

I took their test, it said that there was not one human on Earth that would tolerate me. Nice.

[hereaminow]

that's cool

[ashestoyoursoul]

I feel so bad for you, but it's a dating site

[MassZombicide]

Virtually every one of the rare girls I fall in love with at first sight tries to initiate a relationship with me or flirts with me, that has to be physiognomical, I can attest to my own attraction being based on physiognomy, my interest being that I fancy they've the same temperament as my own. Maybe there's a subcategory of negotiators or they fit into a more specific / reliable blanket category. I like the theory, just not keen on her findings on account of attested inconsistencies with them.

[MassZombicide]

Fuck's wrong with you, woman? None of this applies to me. When it comes to the closest, I must say I am not random, more importantly, I despise robotic, psychopathic, apish, overly assertive, belligerent, soulless, zombie piece of shit directors passing their selfish biological imperative & lack of soul off as logic, I basically hate talking (selective mutism), I'm terrible in dealing with generic people. Builders/religious are "gullible", "placation" is for directors.

[mrzack888]

true, none of her categories applied to me either. i feel special.

[Andybaby]

This is about as scientific as Astrology.

ForaTV: the world is not thinking.

[midij]

it seems she's just reinvented tempers (choleric, phlegmatic etc.)

[sijour]

this collection of "subjective impressions" based on prejudices and stereotyping is simply hilarious.

when will they realize that its meaningless to categorize people into study groups without taking into account the infinite factors of cultural, racial, environmental, educational backgrounds?

[endsequence]

You missed part of the premise, I think. She starts off by acknowledging those very things.

[sijour]

no. she's basically saying that people fall in love because of their chemical makeup. while what i said was you cant simplify and categorize people with just a single factor (in this case the chemical), without taking into consideration other influences.

[blackiron60]

I couldn't agree more: these people love to categorize the diversity of humanity to suit themselves.

[arknihil]

surprisingly this rings true in my own life. i am definitely more of a director than anything else, and anyone who i have ever been attracted to or who has been attracted to me has been a negotiator, yet this seems to spit in the face of a lot of other psychological theories i have heard. it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense that opposites would attract in the case of rationality vs. emotion.

[clk211bu]

we love because of 'mind consciousness systems', we are organic robots.

love, divine experiences, feelings etc anything you can imagine, was implanted there to make sure we lose ourselves in bliss and nirvanna--accepting diversity as unity--that change quickly when we are on the receiving end of this polarity called consciousness. Bernard Poolman

[GWOZ0Z0]

Hillary full of testosterone

[tempemonkey2323]

I swear to god, I am the smartest person on the planet.... here we go again, another video to explain...

People become sexually attracted to eachother initiallly. Circumstances determine whether this sexual attraction will play out. After the initial sexual attraction certain qualities in each person become noticed by the other person. If the two parties like these qualities then they will stay together and become attached- that is, they fall in love. That is the process... easy.

[AimiriZ]

*I swear to god, I am a troll.

[PuppetXeno]

@AimiriZ there's no reason to assume that either even can exist, so your argument falls apart.

[AimiriZ]

*kneels before the fallen apart argument, stares at the pieces with unbelief for a few seconds, turns to the sky and yells "WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA­AAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY­YYYYYYYYYYYYYYY"

[hereaminow]

and then i tickle you

[AimiriZ]

and then I take my cock out and rub it in your face

[hereaminow]

LOL noo..

[mrzack888]

when nobody laffed at her obama joke, she was a bit nervous.

[ncfwhitetigress]

i remember that headline. it was hilarious!!

[magina23]

i am type 4 i guess ...

[1RadicalOne]

Maya and I do not fit any of these descriptions; we are both likely closest to the "Director" style, as we are both analytical (we are both scientists), but we also exhibit several traits from other groups.

[1RadicalOne]

And it was not a case of "opposites attract", either.

[quangjd]

This looks like another case of our progressive culture wanting to see something so we find a way to fit reality into these neat boxes.

I do think she has done a interesting work, but in my opinion it is nothing more then interesting. Many people have very different set of attributes and even if one were to say the chemical makeup in a combination of those descriptions, there's no logical way to piece it together to formulate all the general different personalities.