Thanks for this post… I had questioned you previously how one goes about measuring love and this helped answer that question.

I found your “inferring motives” section interesting and it caused me to question my own actions if I were involved in such a situation.  To see someone suffering through electric shocks is not an easy thing to do.  Of course, neither is homelessness, financial duress or the dissolution of a marriage.  If I call myself a Christian, one who knows the love of Christ, then what do I do when I see these things?  Do I find myself acting on them, since I know that I come from similar situations and need help myself?  Or do I comfortably sit back and allow my head to do the talking while my body enjoys the comfortable state that it finds itself?

This will cause me to notice my actions in the future as I drive down the street, talk to my neighbors and see people in the local Wal-Mart.  Thank goodness for the “science” of love that has opened my eyes to myself.

Jason

Maybe I’m just a cynic (okay I admit God has blessed me with the gift of cynicism)but, how reliable are self-reports? In my experience most people try to make themselves look better or think their actions are more ‘pure’ than they may actually be.

Have there been parallel studies which utilized both the self-reporting and inference methods? It would be interesting to see if the self-reports align with what the observers thought. But let’s face it both methods are subjective, not that subjectivity doesn’t occur in other branches of science (maybe it is easier to hide the subjectivity in the so called ‘hard’ sciences).

Your discussion on the motives for love was interesting. Our real motives are not always obvious. Sometimes the real motive for showing love and acceptance has an ulterior intention that is not as pure as it seems. When the real intention for the fake motive is uncovered it results in hurt feelings. As a children’s pastor it is always refreshing to spend time with the very young child. They do not know how to cover their motives. They are innocently honest in showing love and accepting unconditional love from others.  The very young will smile for the unlovely and bless them with an outreached hand.  As they are developing socially, many children learn how to manipulate and coerce others with a false motive to gain love and acceptance.

This blog with its’ scientific research just touches the surface of human motives to love. How can scientist come up with a tool that can measure love?
Motives for what human beings vary due to what it is at risk for them or what will they get out of the relationship. This may sound harsh but it seems to be truer today than in the past. Jesus took on our stuff to the point of death.
How are we to be Chrisit-like if we are concern with what we get out of it? Are we will to step in the gap for others even to the point of death?
Observation of others actions can reveal their motives to a point. How many people are will to take care of the untouchables? I think about Mother Theresa and her love for those living on the street.  If one could observe her they would have to inform the reporters that she showed compassion and self-sacrifice for love of other and the oppressed. I believe she had pure motives to love those people. It is hard for me to see her doing this act of love out of guilt which would have made her act cover up her selfish desires. She is the most humble person I can even compare the love of the Lord too.
God had to be her center which gave her the strength to reflect the steadfast love of God.
What are our motives when we say we love someone?

Motives definitely drive behavior, including acts of love.  God is our source of love, and He also influences our motives through heart transformation.  Where we may some times find motives to be measurable, I think it’s important to recognize the driving force behind motive.  I believe that our motives flow from the heart. 

Research, study, and trend analysis can be effective means of identifying primary motives to love, but they don’t get at the source of our motives - the attitude of our heart. 

As we are wholly transformed from the inside out through Christ, our motives are changed.  The very love we share with others flows through our lives as God empowers us.  While the heart has proved to be a mystery in light of behavioral study, we can’t ignore its integral part of why we do what we do. 

Difficult of a process as it might be, studying motive-driven acts of love should make room for our very unscientific heart.

As you concluded your study your talked about the importance of God being the source of love and motivating us to love.  You also mentioned the aspect of “cooperating” with God or joining in His mission.  I think it is so important to realize the key role that we play in loving others because God inspires and empowers us to do it.  Without God, it would be impossible to love.  This idea is even expressed in people who don’t believe in God who still have some “original image” of goodness to love that God created them with.

Motives is something that we do not think about much when talking about love, but you make some interesting points.  Why do we love?  What is motivating us?  Even in our “religious experiences” I think we respond with wrong motives in many situations…but if love happens does it matter what the motives are?  I’m still wrestling with this idea…

Tom, I found this blog to be helpful in trying to figure out how we should go about measuring love. I agree with you that all love comes from God but also due to our free will we choose when, where, how, and why we show love. As Christians we do play a role in sharing the love of Christ with a broken, hurting world.

Is it actually possible to measure love? It is interesting to read how scientists have figured out a way to measure motives of love. I see a few difficulties when people self-report their motives of loving actions. People do not see all of themselves. Other people may know aspects of me of which I am not fully aware, so they can give me insight into my own actions. However, other people cannot always accurately know someone else’s motives for doing something.  People’s actions might not always follow their motives. They may mean to do well, and try to act in love, but it could turn out wrong.  I am interested to see further developments on how to measure love.

Typically, I do not have a high value of scientific research especially as it pertains to theological issues. My perspective may be highly reactionary due to the over-appeal toward reason in our post-enlightenment culture. However, it is interesting to consider human observation to begin to discover motivators and intentions for altruism and love.

While I agree that God is the ultimate source of love, I think that even those whom one might say is not spiritual, non-religious, or even atheist, has the capacity to love. Love is something that has been and will continue to be demonstrated from person to person. Though there are many distortions of love, people will always be influenced by some type of divine or human expression that is genuinely loving. Ultimately, even without a specific recognition of God, love can be both experienced and enacted.

Pay it forward.

http://www.subversiveREFORMATION.com

I read your article on entitled “Measuring Love” so it was interesting to read this and compare the two.  I still question in love can truly be measured.  Regardless, I found the three theories interesting and I particularly agreed with your conclusion.  As others noted, I do not know how reliable a self-portrait would be.  But, I do see people act on the convictions. 

Bottom line, God is love and He is teaching us how to have agape love for Him and others so we can follow His will.  Is it necessary to understand if love can be measured or how to do it?  I feel as if I would rather spend my time with Jesus learning to love than knowing how to measure it.  Whether right or wrong, it is where I feel my heart called to.

This is very interesting research and I am willing to admit is a little over my head.  One of the reasons I think this is so complext is because I believe human beings are often very uncertain about what motivates their own actions.  There have been many times when I have prayed and asked God to give me discernment into my own motives, because I have been confused about whether I was acting out of compassion for someone else or if there was some underlying motivation of pride or selfishness.  I think God is the ultimate judge of our motives and many times we can only discern our own motives with His help.

Having said that, I do think that our actions are an excellent test of our motives.  We can often times look at people’s actions and easily see what their motivation is.  I think the world often times looks at the church’s actions and sees their motives as self-serving.  That is why it is so important that we operate out of love when interacting with our communities.

Brandin Melton

There are additional potential impacts to Batson’s research that are not included that give rise to a separate set of questions the potentially impact the results. 

A factor not stated in the brief synopsis but may be included in a more complete handling is the influence of the assistant in the decision of the observer.  Would an attractive assistant inquiring of a potential male suitor be more likely to elicit a given response?  Is the very fact of the assistant a hindrance to the determination of altruism?  As Batson points out himself, the response may be one of selfishness (or many other factors) instead of any altruistic feelings.

Tom,

Measuring love does indeed lend itself to several challenges.  Among them, testing your theological conclusion that Christians love as a response to God’s love.  Other than the self-reporting version of research, I am not sure that there is a way to “research” that.  It may indeed by possible by personal observation over time.  There are certain people in my life that I have observed doing things that are specifically contrary to their nature in the name of God’s love.  While there is certainly merit to it, I am wondering more how Christians would choose to research loves ‘motivations’ in the future.

Another issue that you briefly touched on early in the post: can we single out motives?  The lines are quite blurry in my mind as to a ‘singular’ motive of someones actions.  In fact, I don’t believe that a pure motive exist.  Perhaps a better way of discussing this would be to talk about the things that have shaped the overall identity and value system that a person adheres to.  This would look at cultural and social settings, narrative traditions, etc…  In this way, we could speak intelligently about the larger contributing factors to someones motivation.  Then specifically single out any altruistic means.

I recently read the book freekenomics.  One of the ideas that an economist approach to measuring love may come from an idea from the book.  The human incentive.  This basically argues that human activity is centered around incentives.  If Christians were to continue to set up experiments where the incentives would either be (a) the greater good for all or (b) the good for self, we may be able to also see more results for measuring love.

I think this is something that needs to be developed by theologians and psychologist alike.

Todd

I also agree that God is the ultimate source for we as Christians to love.  Whether or not we respond to what God lays on our hearts is up to us, but in doing so, I believe that’s how we as Gods Children achieve true happiness. I found the outcomes involving the study with Elaine very interesting but not very surprising. Referring back to the movie Beyond the Gates, there was a line that one the characters said which claimed that because the people being slaughtered were different than she was, being of African decent, she didn’t really see them as people, but rather just Africans. This same principle, if you will, seemed to influence the people involved with the experiment with Elaine. Those who were more similar to her were more likely to help her. I wonder why this is? Why should it matter and what is the significance of a person’s similarities that influence peoples will to engage in aiding someone? Whatever it is, its strong enough to make some individuals reluctant, which is not only sad but rather cowardice.

Examining motives may be a great starting point in someone who is forming themselves in a habit of love but I think there should be some point where actions of love become reactionary to the situation. I have not read the book Some do Care but I don’t think Suzie Valdez would give a specific motive to why she does what she does. Instead I would expect an answer suggesting that it is a desire for her, not a decision she came upon using a formula. From what I have seen the greatest acts of love are those that are not thought about but take place in an instant of decisiveness.

I think that its impossible to measure love through motives, and its impossible to really measure someones motives. The only way you can know someones motives would be a self report but even then you don’t know their true motives; they could be spinning the truth. I agree with David’s comment about examining motives as being a good starting point. I think motives are a part that makes up love and can indicate the type of love one is showing.

Daniel Batson’s research is amazing to me.  By using self-reports and inference, I believe Batson places us as close as we can to defining motives.  Once the motives are defined, though, what are we doing with them?  What drives the motives we discover through scientific research?  What motives underlie the scientific research in the first place?  To even begin scientific research on motives, I think, demonstrates an innate desire to our humanity.  Are we selfish, giving, loving, hateful?  Can we learn these behaviors or are we born with them?  Researching motives helps give definition to how we act, but we have to take it further and ask ourselves what is behind the motives.  How you do that through scientific research, I don’t know.  More self-reports maybe?  However it’s done, I believe defining the pinpointing the motive, is only the first step.  As Dr. Oord says at the end of the blog, the arguments presented on motives “…should also prompt Christians to ask about the sources, shaping experiences, and mechanisms of motives.”

It is an interesting idea to bring science into the study of love. One would not think it is something that could be scientifically measured. Using self reports is an ok place to start, but you always have to worry about factors such as participants only giving the socially acceptable answers rather than their honest motives. It’s certainly a good idea to look at people’s primary motives to engage in behavior. Sometimes loving acts have motives that are less selfless than it initially appeared. If I were in that experiment I’m not sure if I would have come to her aid. I would think of my own hypersensitivity and pain and probably would be extremely hesitant to help. Not sure how often that has held me back from helping people, but it’s probably the reaction a lot of people have.

I find it interesting that at times one will take the place of another person’s sufferings because they have something in common. For instance the Batson study where only participants who had something in common to the patient took her place to receive the shocks. Then there are people like Suzie who sacrifice their own safety and life for others because they enjoy helping people. I do not think that one can study love and identify the motives that cause it. I agree with the conclusion statement that Dr.Oord provides in this blog. God is the ultimate source of our motives but other things such as our religion and beliefs also shape how one loves and expresses love.

I am very skeptical when it comes to researching “love” on a scientific basis. I believe that you can observe love and ask about all the self reports you can get. However for me to believe that you can set up a fair “scientific” experiment on the motives of love is very hard for me to believe. As you stated previously it is not black and white and that is why it is so hard for people to define love in a common unified term because it can be an experience, a feeling, promoting well-being (an action) or promoting self-well being. I understand that love is very hard to define, its hard for me to even understand the readings on what love is because it seems like such a broad category. I am thankful that there are people that research love and highly respect these scientists such as Batson, but it is not a task I would take on and try to prove in an experiment. I just dont believe it can be done in a fair manner as compared to something that is tangible.

I do agree that motives are important when determining the extent of one’s acts of love, but I don’t think it is easy nor completely accurate to scientifically test and conclude one’s motives. No matter how well the test is set up to exclude external factors that may influence one’s motive, there is no way of eliminating internal factors which end up being different for everyone. I can understand the reasoning behind performing the shock experiment, but I just don’t see how anyone in their right mind would allow another to be shocked and volunteer to take their place. I think it would be most loving to demand the whole experiment be stopped for everyone’s sake. I like the last research project on one’s intentional act to love on their own convictions. I think this is a better research project on love because it is a long term project which demonstrates consistency in one’s motives and it is easier to determine where one’s motives are coming from.

I think the degree of love ranges different from people and how they perceived, recognize and appreciate that love. Intentions are valuable aspect in measuring how much love is in the act, but there should be an examination about the act too. How difficult is the act to carry through? Their faith in keep up on the act even though it’s difficult – that too is importance in knowing how much love the act carries.

The analysis here seems good: scientific research on love can provide us with some interesting and perhaps helpful information but should not be relied on too strongly because of inherent limitations. I don’t have a problem with this. I have a lot of initial skepticism toward psychological research about something as hard to study as human intentions. A lot of factors can influence the experiments that are very difficult to account for. But I do think that, recognizing the limitations, it is okay and can be helpful to study love scientifically.

It seems logical to use science to try to figure out love. It just seems hard to really figure out someone’s motive of love so how can your research really be truthful. I don’t see the problem with trying to see if we could figure out why people love, but it would just be hard to find out fact from fiction because everyone has been brought up in different ways and everyone has a bias starting out on what love is.