The Five-Criterion Test for Human-Type Love
A checklist for judging whether a being experiences human-like love, not just basic attachment
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 55%
Dr. Anna Machin distinguishes basic love — attachment underpinned by oxytocin and dopamine, shared by all mammals — from human-type love, which she says must be established against a five-item checklist rather than assumed. The criteria are: attachment; complex neurochemistry that includes beta-endorphin (the opiate that underpins long-term human bonds, absent in lesser mammals); grief, the loss of love; friendships that have nothing to do with reproduction; and cognitive empathy, meaning seeing another's distress and helping in the appropriate way, as opposed to mere emotional contagion or emotional empathy. Running a being through these criteria yields a graded judgement: cetaceans, great apes and possibly dogs clear the bar, while a checklist of just one or two items does not. The model doubles as a caution against holding animals to a stricter standard of proof than we hold fellow humans.
Origin
Drawn from Dr. Anna Machin's evolutionary-anthropology research on love and neuroscientist Jaak Panksepp's framing of love as a 'cupcake' most animals share.
Core principles
- 01Basic love (attachment) is common across mammals; human-type love is a higher bar
- 02Evidence, not assumption, should decide whether love is present
- 03Different neurochemicals and behaviours mark different depths of love
- 04Cognitive empathy — helping appropriately — is a hallmark of human love
- 05We hold animals to a stricter standard of proof than we hold other humans
How to run it
- 1
Check for attachment
Look for genuine attachment behaviour — intense, developmentally significant bonds marked by separation anxiety and desire for proximity. All mammals show some form of this.
Watch out Attachment alone signals only basic love, not human-type love.
- 2
Check the neurochemistry
Look for complex love neurochemistry, in particular beta-endorphin, the body's opiate that underpins long-term human bonds. This is more sophisticated than the oxytocin and dopamine seen in lesser mammals.
- 3
Check whether it grieves
Assess whether the being experiences grief — the loss of love. Grief indicates the bond carried real emotional weight.
- 4
Check for non-reproductive friendships
Look for relationships that have nothing directly to do with reproduction or passing on genes — friendships formed 'just for the hell of it'.
- 5
Check for cognitive empathy
Test for cognitive empathy: seeing another is upset and helping in the appropriate way. Distinguish it from emotional contagion (catching the feeling) and emotional empathy (seeing distress but not knowing how to help).
Pro tip The appropriate-help response is the strongest single marker of human-type love.
Watch out Do not mistake emotional contagion, which many animals show, for cognitive empathy.
- 6
Weigh the evidence
Tally how many criteria are met and grade the conclusion. Meeting all five points to human-type love; meeting only one or two does not.
Watch out Apply the same standard of proof you would grant a fellow human, rather than a harsher one.
In the wild
Applying the checklist, cetaceans such as dolphins and whales, along with gorillas and chimps, meet all five criteria — attachment, complex neurochemistry, grief, non-reproductive friendships and cognitive empathy — so Machin judges that they experience human-type love. Dogs meet most criteria and may reach human levels of love, but the evidence on their cognitive empathy is still unclear, so they sit in a 'possible' bracket rather than a confirmed one. The same five questions produce a graded, evidence-based verdict instead of a yes/no guess.
→ A consistent, evidence-graded judgement across species rather than assumption or anthropomorphism.
Common mistakes
Holding animals to a higher bar
We assume every human feels love but demand rigorous proof from animals; the test should be applied evenly.
Treating attachment as proof of human love
Attachment is shared by all mammals and signals only basic love; the higher criteria must also be met.
Confusing contagion with cognitive empathy
Catching another's fear is emotional contagion; human-type love requires seeing distress and helping appropriately.
Is it for you?
Best for
Anyone reasoning carefully about animal cognition, empathy, or what separates human love from basic attachment.
Not ideal for
Deciding your own subjective relationships, where lived feeling matters more than a checklist.
From the transcript
“to actually tell whether an animal experiences human-like love you kind of have a checkbox of five different things”
“there's cognitive empathy which is I can see you're really upset and I'm going to help you in the appropriate way which is what humans…”
“love is like the cupcake and loads of animals have the cupcake but what humans have done is they've over decorated the cupcake”
From the episode
The Evolutionary Psychology Of Love, Lust & Cheating - Dr Anna Machin - #817
Dr Anna Machin