Technology hasn't changed love. Here's why | Helen Fisher

[@xenotone3284]

Gotta love it when people watch an articulate and well researched TED talk culminating years of work by a highly accomplished person and then leave a comment saying, "Nah that's bollocks", without any sort of reasoning.

[@TheWorldTeacher]

This is what happens when one takes heed of the words of two pathetic old flat-chested transvestinal FEMINISTS. Five letters: MGTOW.

[@KalanYore]

Here's mine input... The brain is not where all of the action is as once thought...as science is also looking at the heart that is more than an organ that pumps blood...and why is it that the 1st organ to be develop is the heart and not the brain? - In all living organisms is also true including the seed of the flora being the heart is birth from the seed? The heart expresses and feels the emotions as our brains are secondary to feel and interpret the effects but you feel the changes within your heart firstly...why is that? Measureable science has shown the activity of electromagnetic fields is 5,000 more stronger than the brain...why is that? The heart center serves the core of our biological being compared to our brain - again why is that? We are not our bodies and what is it that is contained within these biological vessels? 'It' as been referred as the 'soul' but what is the soul? What is consciousness? The common forces and makeup of we understand as 'matter' is of electric and magnetic energies and other components including frequencies that determines physical matter in all of it's complexity and variants of diverse forms and living matter...basically everything is indeed 'alive' and very active state. The brain does have it's function as to organize and have memory, to communicate, sensory of our senses etc. but it is not the main emotion center of our being?

[@Deathmachine513]

+John Baldwin Are you high? Read a neurology / psychology book, and then you'll realize that the brain is pretty much responsible for all emotional processing. The heart has NO connection to it, at all. All it does is respond to chemical signals sent by other body parts, such as the adrenal glands. You really do sound like you just did a whole lot of LSD and weed though...

[@kigrovrak1538]

Deathmachine513, Are you an Atheis? Your logic sound like one, Just curious :3

[@Deathmachine513]

+Kigrovra K *Atheist. Yes, I am an atheist, however, there is no such thing as "atheist logic." There's many different kinds of atheists with varying degrees of skepticism and ideologies through which they view the world. My particular preferred way of thinking is primarily scientific, mechanistic, somewhat nihilistic (not in a depressing way), and libertarian. Basically I just listed off the primary ideologies through which I view the world, and I think the fact that I am an atheist is a byproduct of that. Nevertheless, you can find atheists who believe in astrology, magic, etc. Just because one is an atheist doesn't mean that they're logical.

[@Axle-F]

The five things ppl want: 1) respect 2) trust 3) humor 4) makes time for them 5) physically attractive

[@exzisd]

6) respeck on my name

[@exzisd]

***** respeck...

[@_Kevin_B]

big d

[@DamianSzajnowski]

Evolutionary squad where you at? Also: youth height money (influence/power)

[@beldonhuang]

Nailed it

[@cherylsuah]

Helen Fisher's gotta be one of my favourite TED speakers ever

[@333angeleyes]

I'm honestly stunned by this Ted talk. I love Esther but I felt like them bringing her on during Helen's speech was exceedingly rude! She interupts her, she doesn't let her finish her points. And she almost contradicts her in certain ways.

[@malharrison39]

Esther's commentary was in some ways, redundant to what Helen was saying, even though her tone sounded as if she were disagreeing and that what she was saying was somehow different. Dr. Fisher was looking at this from a very broad perspective, which is something Esther ironically encourages people to do often. Perel was looking at it from a narrow, hyper current perspective, and clearly expressed her profound need to show off newly attained millennial jargon. Both women are brilliant experts in their fields, and I wish Helen would have just simply had her talk. Rather than bring up someone at the end, perhaps TED could do a roundtable discussion video series. Those would be way cooler, than seeing something like this, with no real time for both women to dive deeper or explain themselves fully.

[@noemicalvomelon1441]

Good idea!

[@josephgrn2818]

It didn’t seem to me that Ester was disagreeing. It seem to me that she was summarizing when she interpreted to show where she was coming from, then adding on what was going on in her mind at the same time, then posing a question

[@ForzaTerra89]

She doesn’t really have a leg to stand on in terms of hierarchy of evidence. Broad study over dozens of cultures with consistent findings vs your personal opinion

[@highmindedlowlife]

i agree it was awkward

[@automatic5]

i agree. esther seems to extrapolate from finer details and the social context of how we express romantic love. helen studies research and data, bigger picture ideas and conclusions. esther seems to be interested in the intersection of social and scientific, but i feel in this instance it was too loaded of a question to ask.

[@billyrowe0064]

This is the best scientific researcher on love. How does this video have any dislikes?

[@samrivera2574]

Technology it's just another way to meet, to interact (like right now). Love doesn't change for it. Love change because we change and it's different in anyone.

[@hu3rrik]

She looks younger than 9 years ago

[@scotte6017]

love ted talks! Is that rude to have another speaker called up and speak on your topic? Anyhow great video!

[@luis.fonseca]

I dont think technology has changed the way we love... but it surely changed the way we choose our partners and lets be honest, people in general are more open minded now, Society has became more open minded, so its a lot easier know new people and have relations with them. But once you love someone, i do belive, its the same kind of love that our grand parents had/have!

[@TheWorldTeacher]

The term "partner" implies equality. How can a man and a woman be equals?

[@theginjaninja9541]

Reverend Eslam very easily.

[@TheWorldTeacher]

The Ginja Ninja So easily, in fact, that you fail to explain how easily Madam. ;-) Equality is non-existent in this phenomenal sphere.

[@theginjaninja9541]

Reverend Eslam by claiming women and men can not be equal you are showing your old-fashioned ignorance. unless you are claiming women are above men since we are the creators of life, we birth the human race, we do that while also working the same jobs as men. Ah, I see your point now, you are feminist and are showing that men and women are not equal as women technically do more than men. what a nice man you are by claiming this on youtube. i know there are a lot of cowardly, ignorant, arrogant, small-penised men out there who feel other wise.

[@Deathmachine513]

+The Ginja Ninja "Men who don't worship women are ignorant, arrogant, and small-penised." Good to see that feminists are still about totally about "equality" and not female chauvinism. You can easily make yourself more "equal" if you see it that way by just not creating children, it's as easy as that.

[@TheManasmita]

Well, it's true that no one can change Love because it's not something that you have invented but it's something you were born with. But technology can change the way we love and see each other without changing the value of Love. So yes, the penetration of technology can influence the Love in various ways and we are all aware of it

[@TheManasmita]

Reverend Eslam LOL:) I'm sorry , I was trying to say that the deep involvement of technology in our day-to-day life. But what you said also comes under this "penetration of technology" as it is also the technology and it is being involved and used to quench our desires:)

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Sudeep Patel No need to apologize - I was being facetious obviously.

[@TheManasmita]

Reverend Eslam Yes, I got you earlier:)

[@pocimadeoveja]

I think she means technology can't change the nature of the way we 'love' . But it can change perhaps the way we interact and communicate

[@user-cf3ul2st7s]

Sudeep Patel

[@aninnnn]

I loved all of Helen's other talks about love and relationships; but I cannot say this one makes as much sense as before, especially watching it in 2021. I understand the key outcome of her research that love doesn't change with technology because technology isn't changing human's brains and their primitive needs for love. HOWEVER as the psychotherapist questioned towards the end, what if the environment in which love is supposed to appear changes? That's my question as well. What if you change ALL the surrounding factors to something that's usually stable - wouldn't affect it in any way, if not majorly? I think it would be a bit shallow just to look at it from a brain perspective... Wish Ted Talks would have actually hosted both women to do a proper detailed discussion on this topic.

[@xMASZELx]

I think what helen tries to say is that we all desire love in the same way through all kind of contexts, but I think the context matters for if we can achieve that love maybe, because in the past(or maybe now even) it wasn't always viable to marry someone you love. It needed to be functional as well. But would be interesting to see a discussion about that with these researchers! Because now I am just guessing.

[@Bill0102]

I'm captivated by the clarity and depth in this content. A book with comparable insights was a pivotal moment in my journey. "The Art of Meaningful Relationships in the 21st Century" by Leo Flint

[@mrmagnum14]

I think love in its nature is hard to explain and describe. I'm almost sure you can make an argument on how technology has changed love. Changed it for the worse or changed it for the good. Introducing "yourself" to a potential mate is crucial to falling in love. Technology has made it more accessible to meet a potential partner.

[@ChrisComstock612]

So dopamine people need their own kind, the spontaneous kind. While also the serotonin kind are traditional and need their own kind, its obvious they're the religious type. But the other two types, the testosterone and estrogen are attracted to each other. That's fascinating.

[@Axle-F]

Chris Comstock totally. This is the most interesting point that could do with it own TED talk. I'd love to hear more from this speaker she is terrific. Personally I think I'm a testosterone attracted to the estrogen.

[@chloebyron]

Axle she has another ted talk from 4 years ago (biology of the mind) that goes into that more

[@frankdelahue9761]

@@chloebyron Look up Big 5 personality model or five factor model. Also check out spiral dynamics.

[@frankdelahue9761]

@@chloebyron Testosterone is disagreeableness or competitiveness, estrogen is agreeableness, serotonin is conscientiousness, dopamine is extroversion.

[@janedoe12]

Esther Perel's husky voice is amazing

[@Elektron_]

Wow both great and strong women! And this is very interesting! Thanks

[@TheWorldTeacher]

GREAT and STRONG? Meaning SILLY and BOSSY? F.I.S.H Paragraph 28. Feminism is the penultimate evil at present because feminism is based on the misguided assumption that women are equal to or even superior to men. Although a female can (and often does) exhibit superior traits, skills, etcetera, to some men, a woman can never have AUTHORITY over a man. Truth be told, no true man would ever descend to the level of accepting counsel from any of his subordinates. A man should fully obey his appointed master. To read the remaining thirty-nine paragraphs of “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, which the God of all gods has graciously given to His Prophet on Earth, email: [e-mail] with the acronym “FISH” in the subject field.

[@theginjaninja9541]

Reverend Eslam soz bro, bible quotes dont trump vast studies and research. if you feel it does then im very sorry to hear your life is controlled by a fairy tale book written hundreds of years ago.

[@Deathmachine513]

+Extreme Procrastinator You sound like a totally great and totally not extremely hateful person. Must be a feminist.

[@jonsonator3576]

Oh, I am sorry you feel so, I am a man, but I find war is evil. I am also sorry that this simple statement spoiled your theory by at least one exception. I do not know about sperm donation otherwise I would comment on that as well...

[@extremeprocastinator3742]

Oh, look, someone just got triggered!

[@orlando9510]

Wow, those are two powerful women! Excellent talk.

[@umwha]

This was really fascinating, they are both so smart!

[@OliverSisson]

True, but they didn't have a conversation at the end, just talked to the audience.

[@pianosenzanima1]

_you are wrong, technology _*_HAS CHANGED_*_ the perception of love_

[@pianosenzanima1]

yeah, i always lose. i already got used to the loser mentality.

[@martingachagua4554]

The 1st Part, By First Speaker, Were Good And Informative. Yes Please.

[@jayalshehri7519]

Interesting topic, and interesting facts to be discussed.

[@Manu_Music98]

thank God there's a Helen Fischer on this planet who isn't terrible.

[@BobJoy_my_collection_of_stuff]

nice to see helen back in the game.

[@ladolcevita5582]

5:00 🎁 thanks ❤

[@kinsmed]

Three women on stage at the same time. That sound your hear is 7-year-old boy trolls heads exploding as they watch the end of this video.

[@NiteSaiya]

If we're adopting a "slow-love" model, why are fewer people having relationships AT ALL?

[@MrEdo137]

Because they're scared little children who are so afraid of consequences that they don't approve of labels. So they're not "dating", they're just chilling, you know? In my experience it's always been girls enforcing this, wether on me or other guys I know who've told me about what they went through. I like labels, we use them all the time.

[@lukagorgadze4886]

Sad that world is going towards egoistic love, when point of loving someone and living with someone becomes to be about self enjoyment

[@lornaharris17]

snap snaps. love it

[@DarrenWhitewhitelightimage]

That was a very cool video. I am sharing it so other will get to see that a sketchbook can so help them work towards better ideas

[@Barry1337G]

have expected Helena Fisher

[@bevolasko1504]

I thought it was Helene Fischer for a moment.

[@septimusprime3145]

bevolasko atemlos durch die clubs spür was vodka mit dir macht

[@xrubyxlightx]

BRUH ME TOO LOL

[@ThuyMai-ds6xl]

congaturation! she become star light! focus: she never mistake.

[@amrfigueroa]

Ohhh --- I dont quite get the point of the question.. was Elena asking if the NEED FOR LOVE is dependent on CONTEXT? Or was she asking about what LOVE'S TRUE CONTEXT should be to qualify it as a need? Wahh 😳😳😅🤪 Interesting thoughts tho from both speakers-- i love the way they were able to study and research about something that could be rather elusive...

[@BenJones1127]

Why did that women come up at the end? Get your own TED talk

[@PhoenixAurelius-138]

She has her own TED talk lol

[@jonsonator3576]

Towards the end of the dialog they rush in their conversation like real women : -)

[@stevekennedy5380]

The primary purpose of love and marriage is the propagation of the species. The happiness of the couple is secondary. It is the marriage industry that is causing confusion.

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Love has no rhyme or reason ;-) F.I.S.H Paragraph 29. Marriage is the physical, emotional, intellectual and spiritual union of a man with one or more women. They should be brought together by the parents and some sort of ceremony performed. If one’s parents fail in their duty to select a suitable mate, then one should very carefully choose a compatible spouse. Sexual or romantic attachment is insufficient reason for the choice of a husband or wife. Polygamy has been taught by all the major religions. Unfortunately, the “westernized” religious cults seem to have done away with the practice for unbeknown reasons. The reason for polygamy is simply due to the fact that EVERY woman NEEDS a husband. There is no such thing as a nun in the eyes of God. Marriage is mandatory for men too, apart from missionary priests and those unfortunate males who are unable to support a family for reasons of mental or physical incapacity. To read the remaining thirty-nine paragraphs of “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, which the God of all gods has graciously given to His Prophet on Earth, email: [e-mail] with the acronym “FISH” in the subject field.

[@xXbudred123Xx]

I like how you just state that we are a partner-based species without providing any data as to why. Most of human history we did not mate with a singular partner. And your little anecdotal discussion with the polygamist even goes against your own narrative, he said he'd rather have no wife, not one.

[@Miranox2]

This is what happens to liars. They eventually contradict themselves.

[@TheWorldTeacher]

This is what happens when one takes heed of the words of two pathetic old flat-chested transvestinal FEMINISTS. Five letters: MGTOW.

[@extremeprocastinator3742]

A reverend going MGTOW is not surprising at all; after all your kind always preferred young boys.

[@Deathmachine513]

+Extreme Procastinator Last time I checked MGTOW was not homosexual pedophilia...

[@MK-tq5ec]

Wow. Why don’t you read some of her books and about game theory on love and decision making.

[@DorianMattar]

Love is a four letter word.

[@nhinhiha5674]

Nếu được dịch sang ngôn ngữ Việt, thật tuyệt

[@patriciam492]

What I got from this was that we are shifting to wanting more than just one partner (sexually)? correct me if I'm wrong.

[@ratatataraxia]

First ted talk I've seen with a rebuttal.

[@astridk109]

beatngu what is a rebuttal?

[@ratatataraxia]

Astrid K it's a type of counter argument.

[@astridk109]

Oh thaaanks

[@timmysinvestments3110]

I would love to have TED talk with Hugh Mungus

[@mikedelam]

too solid

[@krool1648]

As I was going to St Ives I met a man with seven wives Every wife had seven sacks Every sack had seven cats Every cat had seven kittens Kittens, cats, sacks, wives How many were going to St Ives?

[@thesocialthink7997]

sometimes the strictest of technologists actually rear the fiercest romantic arguments and gestures forward...:)

[@LeonidasGGG]

I never saw anyone saying that it did... Pointless Talk. I just want an advance cybernetic playmate, is that too much to ask?

[@How.Dare.You.]

there are still a lot of snobs who need to marry someone from the same background to get approval from mommy n daddy

[@dystopiaproductions9869]

In that case it's not love.

[@How.Dare.You.]

no, its snobism

[@krool1648]

World is becoming a global village, this can be seen in the popularity of neo-shamanism, global integration and connectivity.

[@MichaelDeeringMHC]

What about robots?

[@keeferdiejesusreallovemeto3716]

Technology. Is way too advanced than it used to be I remember when I didn't have a phone it's funny how much people take advantage of it

[@beatboxer6462]

Iam from Egypt I like you sooo much

[@brunowalker99]

10:40 but for muslims still this is a thing, and they are not gonna change so soon, at least in the majority of muslim countries.

[@Johnnybomb1]

And that's a good thing!

[@jqyhlmnp]

Based human 😎

[@madetolove5675]

tl;dr: Don't do drugs >How many wives would you like to have? "None." Imagine a future where it is obsolete to have marriage partners or to marry.(period) Her study shows that people are coming to the realization that humans no longer need to be restricted or confined by marriage and simply that marriage has very little to do with love. Marriage as a representation of love is obsolete and people who think marrying means you love each other are naive. Technology hasn't changed love yet, but with telepathy, robotics, A.I, Vr, and many other promising things on the horizon it is only a matter of time. Technology will redefine love as we know it. In my opinion she wasted too much time talking about marriage (and for some reason felt the need to downplay technology's influence on love while relying on things like brain scans) instead of showing how despite technology's advancements love is still stagnated or even regressing. The slow-love she talks about is the byproduct of humans realizing they need a new way to ascertain true love and technology is more than likely the path to it. Marriage is obsolete, the old way of baby making is obsolete, our definition of love is crooked and needs to be reformed and restrengthened. The coming of DNA modding, telepathy, cloning, and all things technology will truly test and redefine our definitions of love and will show whether we humans have actually just been abusing our right to love or that love truly prevails all.

[@CarrotofGreatness]

Technology is everthing! this is heresy, glory to the omnissiah!

[@jaraposs1031]

There is no perfect. Individual or partner in this world of relationship or marriage U must be real fool to ask this kind of questions If u can find perfect person in relationship or marriage U will not be the perfect person for him or for her .

[@beldonhuang]

I think this fits really well with Swiss-British philosopher, Alain de Botton's saying that "You will always marry the wrong person". Obviously, this doesn't mean that the person you're married to is a fool (though you might think like that when you get into an argument with them), it means, rather, that it's not that you find the "right" person to marry to, but you find a person you're in love and you feel happy staying with, and make them the person to be married to through time. Soul mates are made, not found (most of the time)

[@keeferdiejesusreallovemeto3716]

I like to show America's Most Wanted cuz they get Justice for the kids

[@theemeraldgaming_yt2825]

first viewer!

[@FAROOQ95123]

sea of hollow opinions.

[@user-qz3tr9wr8t]

жена любовь единая ОДНА

[@LqdHt777]

show this to all the people that post som "Dating in 2016" or "Love then & now" bullshit

[@216trixie]

Incomprehensible from 14:00 on.....

[@dkkempion8744]

I feel dumber now.

[@alexgagnon52]

love was created by hallmark and there is no such animal.

[@DigitalWraith]

*We are not a pair-bonding species. We are a competitive one.* She even said the man who had multiple wives said he wanted none.

[@samuelsmith5063]

maybe they want none because of the cognitive overload. I think we all need to look into how each person is really living more than just coming to conclusions based on 1 situation. there is obviously something we all can learn from this, but not if we are all looking to validate our own belief systems shaped by the same norms that are sometime even shaping our judgments and perceptions.

[@DigitalWraith]

Samuel Smith If that was the case, the men would have said they only wanted 1 wife instead of none. Even biologically, we are not monogamous. The human penis and the behavior of sperm when they are in contact with sperm from another man, are dead giveaways.

[@jheregreign]

I think you're just speaking from personal experience and identifying with other examples of similar behavior from other like-minded people. As depressing as it is for me, it does 'seem' as if a significant portion of people aren't really monogamous and have no problem going from one partner to the next. Although for what it's worth I'm a complete counter-example as I am a guy and want nothing more than to keep my number of romantic/sexual partners as close to 1 as possible. I have always absolutely felt this way, loyal to a fault, not for it's own sake either, it's just how I feel and I wouldn't change a thing. Even the prospect that my potential future partner will have probably been with someone is almost enough to be a deal breaker. Sucks to be me I might expect some to say, cause yeah. In any case, as a rule of thumb I err on the side of myself being statistically normal. Despite the prevalence of this promiscuous attitude I see, it's not a 'vast' majority, so I would say my attitude is probably fairly common, or at least not exceptionally rare.

[@DigitalWraith]

Jher Nifol No, I'm not. I'm referring to human evolution. We are not monogamous.

[@jheregreign]

Oh yeah, fair enough, I guess I lost myself responding to what I perceived as a general social perspective. You just meant literally, my mistake. Although for what it's worth in continuing the discussion, I'm a human male and "romantically/sexually competitive" does not describe me in any way. Pair-bonding (according to the Wikipedia) pretty much sums me up. A bit depressing to have to declare "We are not a pair boding species. We are a competitive one.", even if it's probably legitimate as a majority might fit such a description. Although, as with most things, perhaps it's more of a Gaussian distribution?

[@banyentertainment]

All i heard from the other lady is "rights, freedom, experiment, me me me, serve me" As if duty in marriage was an outdated concept... Careful ladies, obligation and lack of duty goes both ways you can be easily kicked into the curb for someone younger

[@clearly_blurry3416]

Disgruntled Tail-wagger careful Men, obligation and duty goes both ways and you can easily be kicked to the curb for someone younger.

[@elinope4745]

+clearly_blurry not really, it is very rare that a woman can get a man 10 years her junior or more. not so rare for men. men are attracted to physical beauty like women are attracted to men who can provide resources.

[@mashudakarbary1470]

Eli Nope true dat

[@How.Dare.You.]

which fairy tale is she coming from? I'm 31 and haven't yet met a man who wanted to settle down

[@Mastikator]

Hey wanna settle down? HAH SIKE

[@TheGryffindorable]

butterfflyess where do you meet these men?

[@loredanadruiu]

Mastikator errtýq3 l0

[@dystopiaproductions9869]

Marriage and love are different things. Their combination is ideal but not always go together. Your comments shows your need for marriage, not love. This is probably what you're doing wrong in meeting new people. And it's wrong because as mentioned people don't marry fast due to fear of divorce.

[@timmysinvestments3110]

maybe they did want to settle down, but not with you. women tend to see everything from their own perspective. just saying.

[@keeferdiejesusreallovemeto3716]

Becca nice. Just scared

[@jamesdesantos4950]

She's not a very good public speaker but oh well

[@Axle-F]

james talking to a crowd that size and knowing millions of ppl online are gonna watch? She did pretty well.

[@rmc2066]

Why did she get a facelift tho

[@shiftywily]

what

[@VanoArts]

In Germany we have Helene Fischer ... look her up on youtube she does pretty much the same as her and looks even the same

[@globalvillage423]

António Guterres, UN chief is estrogen type.

[@Juuhjooh]

Oh, another woman talking about feelings. What a surprise.

[@SuperFaceStomp]

Meanwhile in another video where a man jumps from a building... Oh, another man dead because he didn't talk about his feelings. What a surprise.

[@shinobudev]

This one was actually about the objective history behind our civilization and how love has changed throughout.

[@themadlibrarian2933]

Check out her book, "Why We Love". The better question is why men might not want to talk about feelings.

[@themadlibrarian2933]

And why men might ridicule anyone who talk about feelings.

[@zethsito.]

like si eres español y viste esto :v

[@xoxogirl101xoxo]

i enjoyed her the content of her speech but her speaking and body language irked me.

[@faisalt8578]

first

[@TheWorldTeacher]

That's what TWO others have said.

[@neiljackson1717]

she sounds like shes crying

[@tsukuyomikai5480]

So Ted is encouraging catfights on stage now?

[@exmachinainap4813]

Silly feminist...

[@adinace]

ExMachina inap you sound alone.

[@WorldofPossible]

adinace I really don't see any feminist streaks and hypothesis do match some of changes looking at history. Both have good points.

[@WorldofPossible]

and yes this comment was directed at exmachinma

[@WorldofPossible]

No, they are not. If they did, the context has long since been lost in the third wave of feminism. People have making distinction for a reason because no one in the right mind wants to associated with SJW nonsense.

[@WorldofPossible]

Amani Kilumanga because third wave feminist aren't really interested equality. They're interested in there own enrichment. Not exactly egalitarian frankly.

[@DankyDankerson69]

This lady is too old to understand that technology has changed love

[@DankyDankerson69]

+Aviri Char thats your bad opinion