Science doesn't detract from love.

Since you can't put love under a microscope, how can "love" even exist in your world view ?

This is true - but not for the reason suggested here: science doesn’t detract from love because it doesn’t (and, by itself, cannot) establish that love = brain activity. It shows, at most, that the experience of love, in humans, is *causally dependent* upon brain events.

I think love has to also be a trancendental thing. Something greater than just a chemical reaction. A hint of the ultimate reality.

Dawkins can't explain love, but the other guy loves him anyway. Coz, science.

Your work helps us make sense of ourselves to improve ourselves

I am a great fan of science. My background is in Biochemistry and I specialized, inspired by you Sir and the likes of Sagan and Tyson.

science is a method of removing the ways we delude and bias ourselves, it’s truly beautiful

Oxytocin is indeed a powerful hormone for mammals, similarly Mesotocin for birds. That there is an underlying evolutionary drive behind both chemical counterparts, reaffirms 'love' as an effective and important tool for the survival and replication of our genes.

Wait. Is it "just brain stuff and hormones" or is it "an intense emotion"? If it is "an intense emotion" then plainly it isn't *just* "brain stuff and hormones."

Science is a love of the truth