Can all life and consciousness be boiled down to nothing more than chemical reactions?

Not for me. But I can't say for everyone else.

some ppl say love is just a biochemical reaction to assure that our jeans are past onto the next generation



tell that to the woman who sighs at a lovers touch
or the baby that smiles at his mothers face

Does knowing how something works take away the sense magic and awe it inspires?

no it does not and love is much more then a chemical reaction other wise we would never experience real love and there would be no such thing as couples who grow old and die together but they exist meaning we may need a nudge but the rest is us our souls consciousness is more than a chemical reaction if that was all we where u would not be able to form ur own thought to raise the question u are now asking

I believe our interpretation and understanding of love transcends mere chemical reactions, but only because our minds do not see all the details that go into feelings of attraction and love. It is like watching a movie; you do not notice the individual frames only the illusion of video. Or that it is variations of voltages that makes this conversation possible. That how ever does not mean that the underlying causes of these illusions do not exist.

maybe

have you ever done acid?

No. Drugs aren't my thing.

There are many types of love, first off! But I think the question goes down to can we explain the universe and all it's behavoir as a conglomeration of atoms and forces acting together to produce some synthesis? I think that it is evident that the view held in that idea is not comprehensive enough to satisfy humankind's inner need to have an anwser to what makes the world operate, least of all what brings together two people to fall in love. So I say strictly no. I'm not sure that love is even of the logical variety of life experiences. One could say that it makes social sense, it provides environments for raising and progeneration. It may serve such a function, but that hardly approaches the question involving the burning of hearts. For this one would need a more biological-science driven outlook. Resorting to chemistry is trying to put new brain data into a somewhat inappropriate scientific category of placid and pale chemical reactions. If science develops with trends that change in time, like ones affection may wax and wane, perhaps this route of inserting common happenings into a logical scheme will feel more at home.

There are many types of love, first off! But I think the question goes down to can we explain the universe and all it's behavoir as a conglomeration of atoms and forces acting together to produce some synthesis? I think that it is evident that the view held in that idea is not comprehensive enough to satisfy humankind's inner need to have an anwser to what makes the world operate, least of all what brings together two people to fall in love. So I say strictly no. I'm not sure that love is even of the logical variety of life experiences. One could say that it makes social sense, it provides environments for raising and progeneration. It may serve such a function, but that hardly approaches the question involving the burning of hearts. For this one would need a more biological-science driven outlook. Resorting to chemistry is trying to put new brain data into a somewhat inappropriate scientific category of placid and pale chemical reactions. If science develops with trends that change in time, like ones affection may wax and wane, perhaps this route of inserting common happenings into a logical scheme will feel more at home. So not yet!