Philosophy of love?

[Flip Jackson]

Here is a new one for you guys. I want to hear everyone's philosophy on love. I don't mean the love between family or friends, but the kind of love between companions or spouses.

I used to think that love at first sight was real. I was quite smitten and almost knew that this other person was for me. I thought I really "loved" this person. As a friend, I did, but thought there might be more....When I let this person knew how I felt to an extent, I got no reaction. Over the next few months, I started thinking. What if I was taking the wrong view on this? What if there was no such thing as a "soulmate" or "the one." It made how I felt a lot more bearable. I am not trying to tell a sob story, but want you to know how I came by my current opinion.

Here is what I think now. You could love a number of people. It is an aquired feeling you gain when you find someone that you like to spend time with. Someone who shares your goals, values, and interests. There is no "one" or any person "destined" for any of us. Love at first sight is a myth that causes far too many problems thes days.

I no longer belive in fairy tale love, such as in many movies. I belive in aquired lasting love. Not a feeling, but an attribute that grows when you find someone good for you.

I want ot hear other people's take on all of this.

[MadKatz]

It is confusing as hell until it grabs you through the guts and rips your heart out of your ass! After that, things settle down a bit and you go buy dishes together. It is an attribute that grows when you find someone good for you.

[Critter]

I believe in physical attraction at first sight...real love takes a bit longer.

Unfortunately, it all seems to be about "hooking up" nowadays, and that's not what I want. (At least, not right away. )

[MadKatz]

Quote by: Critter I believe in physical attraction at first sight...real love takes a bit longer. Unfortunately, it all seems to be about "hooking up" nowadays, and that's not what I want. (At least, not right away. )

You know. I don't think it has changed much. Hooking up has been called lots of other stuff but the same thing happens when you have your wits. You get attracted to their eyes, smile and then you talk and then you go for being best friends!

Casual hard sex is to be taken in very, very small doses! Or else!

[Starboy]

I think that over time nature has arranged things so that a man and a woman are attracted to each other and have a great desire to mate and play house. And that once the deed is done and the muffins are out of the oven that desire is gone. It may be replaced by other feelings but the original hormone rush is gone. My advice to my daughter is to choose a mate as you would a good business partner. They should posses strengths and abilities that you lack so that the resulting partnership is stronger than the sum of your individual strengths. As long as the relationship is more beneficial than it is detrimental then there is a very good chance it will continue.

Starboy

[Critter]

Quote by: Starboy I think that over time nature has arranged things so that a man and a woman are attracted to each other and have a great desire to mate and play house. And that once the deed is done and the muffins are out of the oven that desire is gone. It may be replaced by other feelings but the original hormone rush is gone. My advice to my daughter is to choose a mate as you would a good business partner. They should posses strengths and abilities that you lack so that the resulting partnership is stronger than the sum of your individual strengths. As long as the relationship is more beneficial than it is detrimental then there is a very good chance it will continue. Starboy

This is true...

I don't know if I would equate a romantic relationship to a business partnership, though...that brings to mind images of two people signing a contract stating, "You agree to empty the garbage no less than every other day, while I agree to cook three (3) meals per day, except in the event that one of the parties is not home at mealtimes due responsibilities brought about by current employment...etc.

I agree wholeheartedly, though, with your statement "They should posses strengths and abilities that you lack so that the resulting partnership is stronger than the sum of your individual strengths." This was basically how it was in a number of ways when I was with my now-ex. If you're exactly alike it gets boring and old fast. If you're exact opposites there's no common ground between you, and it gets boring and old fast.

IMO, in order for any relationship to work, the following must be present:

1. (see above)

2. Some physical attraction. Personally, I wouldn't want someone who looked like Tom Cruise or Luke Perry (beauty fades, and all that), and in all honesty I might not even notice the attractive physical characteristics until I actually get to know a person. A good personality makes a person more physically attractive in a lot of ways. For instance, you'll see a certain facial expression and think, "Hey, he DOES have nice eyes!"

3. Trust

4. Loyalty

5. Shared values

[samsara15]

I think it's more than playing house, or a hormone rush, but it works best in the long run if the two of you have become close friends...I never have been a believer in 'love', although I have been married for 37 years and have never lost sexual interest in my wife.

[Starboy]

As far as the strengths and abilities it is a two sided thing. The woman must give as good as the man. If the man has all the strengths or visa versa there will come a time where there will be a great deal of resentment. One partner will wonder why they are carrying the dead weight. In a good partnership both partners work hard to maintain the relevance of their side of the partnership.

Starboy

[Critter]

Once again, Starboy, I agree.

I should also add a #6 to my list...you should be extremely comfortable with the person you're with. I'm not necessarily talking money-wise, but if you know all your partner's secrets and quirks and little habits and they don't bother you (or you think they're cute. ) That says a lot right there.

[Starboy]

I agree that both partners should come from a similar socio-economic background. An atheist and a thiest is a bad idea. A child from a poor family of nine with an only child from a well to do family is also a bad idea. Then again there is also the issue of mental diseases that crop up after child birth or later in life. I tell my daughter to look closely at the father and if I had a son I would tell him to look closely at the mother.

Starboy

[Prometheus]

Maybe I'm just made of stone, but this feeling of love that people speak of seems a rather alien concept to me.

I understand love in the sence of wanting someones companionship, feeling for thier comfort, and sympthizing with them. But I find these feelings to only have quantitative differences between people that I "love" and don't love. For me, love is a quantitative thing - there is no qualitative difference.

I love my family. I love some of my friends, but I really couldn't say what makes them different from people that I just like. Maybe I just "like" them more.

I am young, so I may just be lacking experiance and emotional depth, but of all the girls I have been with, I have never had love for them take over my life. A keen interest in thier well being, yes, a preoccupation with being around them, yes, and certainly an emotional attachment of trust and well wishing. But never a feeling that kept me from rational thought, never a feeling I couldn't push aside when it inconvenianced me. And this isn't that I didn;t feel strongly, it was just something within my controll.

Even if my family (for whom I care a great deal - my sister especially) died, I don;t know that it would throw me into some kind of emotional tormoil. I would be very sad, but i would not grieve for long. I would think of them often, but it would not really affect my life in some kind of catyclismic way.

Maybe I am just immature in this respect, but I have a hard time relating to the common meaning of the term "love".

[belverron]

Agreed, Prometheus. Sometimes I think I shed too many of my emotions along the line, or used up my supply when I was younger.... I can remember crying when a bug died. I haven't shed a tear in a long time, though....

[rez]

There is no such thing as "love". First off, it is a word that has no correlation with the physical body. The brain simply sends an impulse through the spine that ends up making a males penis erect and a woman's nipples hard. Only would a highly conscious human being coin the term "love". The main function of the word "love" is how it is communicated. Even though I do not believe in the word, I can add it in my vocabulary to persuade others to find me attractive. For instance, theres a group of guys and girls and the topic of "love" comes up. The girls want to hear that "love" exists, the males know this and soon cook up a couple of bullshit sentences about love. Because of the males "pretty" thoughts about "love" the woman has more of a reason to mate with the particaluar male.


There are many reasons why humans attract, language is one of the reasons, but LOVE as a feeling is NOT.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: rez There is no such thing as "love". First off, it is a word that has no correlation with the physical body. The brain simply sends an impulse through the spine that ends up making a males penis erect and a woman's nipples hard. Only would a highly conscious human being coin the term "love". The main function of the word "love" is how it is communicated. Even though I do not believe in the word, I can add it in my vocabulary to persuade others to find me attractive. For instance, theres a group of guys and girls and the topic of "love" comes up. The girls want to hear that "love" exists, the males know this and soon cook up a couple of bullshit sentences about love. Because of the males "pretty" thoughts about "love" the woman has more of a reason to mate with the particaluar male. There are many reasons why humans attract, language is one of the reasons, but LOVE as a feeling is NOT.

As I said above, I don't think that love is a feeling disdinct fron general good will and pleasure of company, but I *do* think it is more than the sexual arousal that you describe. I think love would be better defined by a heightened propensity to care about someone else, and to seek thier company and companionship, than simple arousal.

I think "love" is used to describe something marginally complex - whereas sexual arousal is very simple.

[rez]

Quote by: Prometheus I think love would be better defined by a heightened propensity to care about someone else, and to seek thier company and companionship, than simple arousal. I think "love" is used to describe something marginally complex - whereas sexual arousal is very simple.

why would anybody have a "heightened propensity to care about someone else"? Could the want for "companionship" really be confused with the human instinct to survive?

To define love, one must first define the difference between humans and animals. Here is a definition that I think holds truth.

http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/primer.html It was (and is) common to think that other animals are ruled by "instinct" whereas humans lost their instincts and are ruled by "reason", and that this is why we are so much more flexibly intelligent than other animals. William James took the opposite view. He argued that human behavior is more flexibly intelligent than that of other animals because we have more instincts than they do, not fewer. We tend to be blind to the existence of these instincts, however, precisely because they work so well -- because they process information so effortlessly and automatically.

Love only exists to those who want to use the word to further gain success. I think there are a lot more honest ways to understanding male and female attraction. Prometheus said it best "I think "love" is used to describe something marginally complex - whereas sexual arousal is very simple." The ironic thing about "love" is that if left unexplained it becomes dangerous. If people were more honest they would not have to describe their relationship with just one word.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: rez why would anybody have a "heightened propensity to care about someone else"?

Well I have friends. We have fun togather, we talk, we help eachother. We care about eachother's well being. Some of my friends I feel more that way about than others. Some so much that I might call it love. But as I said before, "love" is probably only useful quantitativly, sonce I don't think is has a unique meaning.

I agree that it may be a dangerous word becase it is so enigmatic. I basically don't use it, and when I do, it is not to describe something special, buy only to describe a lot of something that is very common.

[Osborn F Enready]

I personally, believe love is a bond that grows over time through many things including attraction, respect, trust, fascination and compatibility.

I think when we are young, and first learning and experiencing relationships for the first time, that is love, in its raw "feeling form", it is just pure unbridled love, due to all defenses being down. As we age, and are hurt by bad relationships, or "lovers", our defenses increase, and become harder to let down when meeting someone new. I think as we age, it takes longer to truly find love, because experience jades us to be more defensive about truly opening up, and truly establishing a trust/respect bond, for fear of being hurt again.

I do believe however that "true love" is special, and occurs rarely, but often on first sight. I would bet it has a lot to do with a lot of things, (most of it subconcious) but you only know it when it happens. It is almost like connecting with someone on another level entirely, just by sight, almost as though you have always known them, or thought of them.

I am a romantic though, so to me love is many things. Love can be a feeling, or a state. It can be ideal, or impossible. It can motivate you, or drain you. Regardless though, to me it is a bond of the heart, and not of attraction.

[iHu]

It is fun, entertaining and self-revealing to put yourself "out there" and pretend there's love. It's a game. We love games.

[MerlinsByte]

believe in physical attraction at first sight...real love takes a bit longer. Unfortunately, it all seems to be about "hooking up" nowadays, and that's not what I want. (At least, not right away.

merlin writes...I agree. I am a red blooded southern man so don’t take this wrong guys, especially guys! I have a couple of long term man friends that I truly love. It when I say love it sounds somewhat “gayish” doesn’t it? It doesn’t? Oh well maybe its my hang-up! These couple of friends are the ones that I need not see them every month year or ten years to know they my friends. I “know” they love me as well. Ah the warm fuzzies of male bonding.

I had a woman friend (my wife of 10 years) who went to meet her maker three weeks ago. She was my best friend and the female counterpart of the couple of man friends listed above. This kind of love was special and so far (even though it was my third marriage) the only person I felt real love for that got stronger with each passing year. Most of my relationship go the other way after the ummmm' mutual sexual attraction wears thin.

Oh well ,that’s my bit on love. Religious love is again different !

[Starboy]

To me love is a complicated set of animal behaviors that have several explanations and purposes.

Starboy