SMBC Comics Forum

"I love you unconditionally!"

"Really? No matter how I look? No matter how I act?"

"Yes."

"Really? Even if I became an entirely different person?"

"Yes."

"What if I spontaneously duplicated? Would you love me, both of me, even the me who's not the original?"

"Oh. Well, yes I would."

"What if I duplicated, then my duplicate became a different person? Would you love both of me, even if you didn't know?"

"Um--"

"And THEN, what if I duplicated billions of times, then all my duplicates went and replaced everyone else in the world, changing into perfect copies, just as the other people vanished? It all happened in an instant. You couldn't see it, and you could never know. If you love me unconditionally, you'd have to love me, even then, even if you didn't know."

"..."

"Well? Would you love everyone in the world, just because they might be me?"

"Never mind. Turns out I hate sappy people who can't shut up and take compliments, and I hate them even more unconditionally."

I don't think "I love you unconditionally" is a compliment.

"...You have an unlimited supply of neurotransmitters..." this statement is correct. We have air, water, food and sleep that make this possible.

This comic was awful. The one preceding and the one following weren't too bad though.

I thought it was pretty deep and amusing, especially the kid's response of "wowwww!" . But I had a nerdy hangup here: unconditional love is not unlimited love. The whole argument the kid makes is based on an idea of infinite love. Unconditional love, at the neurochemical level, would just have to be a sufficient level of neurotransmitters such that one never falls below the threshold of love for another person. It really could just be a reduction in reuptake inhibitor activity, longer neurotransmitter binding times, or neuronal insensitivity to factors that would impede the feeling of love.

But tldr; explaining jokes more makes them less funny.

Science: Ruining everything for everyone.

Mark v1.0 wrote:"...You have an unlimited supply of neurotransmitters..." this statement is correct. We have air, water, food and sleep that make this possible.

I could be wrong, but aren't an unlimited supply and a renewable supply[effectively unlimited] different things?

I could be wrong, but aren't an unlimited supply and a renewable supply[effectively unlimited] different things?

Name something with an unlimited supply?
The Sun? It will burn out in about 5 billion years from now they predict.

Mark v1.0 wrote:

I could be wrong, but aren't an unlimited supply and a renewable supply[effectively unlimited] different things?

Name something with an unlimited supply?
The Sun? It will burn out in about 5 billion years from now they predict.

Well yes, but conceptual terminology is nevertheless a thing in quite a few fields.