1
   

What is love?

 
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Mar, 2009 05:13 pm
@Elmud,
And its good for the woody...
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Mar, 2009 07:43 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
And its good for the woody...

what do you mean?
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Mar, 2009 08:04 pm
@Elmud,
I kin only go so far before I'm through to the others side...
0 Replies
 
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Mar, 2009 05:13 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
Love as a form of relationship is also a relationship... All relationships have their politics, even the most simple of relationships in appearance... In the proper order of things negotiation comes first, and specific performance follows...Get these out of order, and trouble is bound to result....

Certainly, if people cannot talk before love making they will not be able to talk afterwards... They just have to remember that in a sense, all talk about any other subject is the second intention as much as talk about talk is the second intention....

We all want that moment of Love... We think that for women, that it should mean more... In fact, for all people it should mean more, that not only love, but all things human have been robbed of meaning, and it is the challenge of all of us in the stuff and nonsense of our lives leading up to the act of love, that we give each other meaning, and recognize how we have all been robbed of meaning, and vow NEVER to do to our lovers what life does to all of us against our wills...Inevitably, your wife, or woman will tell you what she wants in her house, in her home, and in her life...It might be as simple as putting the toilet seat down, or cleaning it once a century or so; but doing such as we are desired to do, even if it has no particular meaning to us, is often enough to earn us love...

And can you really earn it??? Can you deserve IT, sex, love. intimacy...We take so much and trash so much in life, and we learn to devalue sex; but it is all a part of the self negation we practice in youth to defuse our fear of the future... Consider all the treasures in the bank of a woman, and whether her desire to give her self lessen her value??? Can you reproduce yourself without her??? Perhaps you do not want that now, but sterility, so you can take and trash...Can anyone else feel as she feels, smell with her scent, laugh with her music, or dance the dance of life with every movement??? How can a man taste a girls skin, and see the world through her hair and trash her, and the experience of her intimacy???It is demeaning... To look at the body of a woman as a living toy is demeaning...Can demeaning come from meaning, or is it only more of the same, the expression of a meaningless life???

There are many things an old man knows that a kid will never understand...But the reason for trashing love which is so hard to come by no old man will ever know....Only the hatred of life that comes with youth can explain it...Nothing can justify it... It is a cruel trick life plays on a man, that while he can be a good lover he does not know how to love, and when he can no longer serve love as she deserves then he can know love...

Two qualities are required of a man to love...One is perfect health, mental and physical.... Since youth is madness, no youth can love...The other quality a man needs to love is courage, and youth hides fears behind a thousand brave bluffs... Only the ability to face death, or anything less than death with perfect abandon; the ability to think once and live up to that thought, to step over that line marked eternity, and leave it all else behind will make a man fit for love... The love a woman isn't for sissys... She is life.. She is Aphrodite... Do you think you are man enough to hang on to her??? Do you have the guts to try???Bare your heart to her blade...Nothing can spare you the pain life holds for you...Your only defense is your sense... Drop the armor, the impedimenta, the pretense... Nothing can save you from love... Abandon hope... Embrace love; And love will save your soul...

I have to thank you for going into great detail in trying to define what this is. You, who is obviously in love ,probably has a better sense of the word than one who probably is not.

I think of the words, "the two shall become one". A duality that becomes a singularity. Can't quite grasp what that means. Maybe, there is a completeness in duality where there is an incompleteness in singularity. Maybe as one is alone, there is an ever present void which can only be filled by another who possesses the essence to fill it. anyway I'm rambling.

Maybe an allegory is in order. So I can try and understand what your saying myself. In woodworking, it is all about joinery. There are lap joints, dovetail joints, rabbet joints , finger joints. Where you attach two pieces of stock together using these types of joinery. Whatever joint you use, a good glue is applied covering the entire surface of the joints. When the glue is cured, the joint becomes stronger than the individual pieces themselves. You can put enormous pressure on either piece of wood, and the wood will eventually break, but the joint stays intact. Much the same is the fact that a glue lam beam is much stronger than a single piece of timber.

So, maybe love is like the glue that holds things together. Two independent pieces, joined together to become one piece.

But, who knows. Thanks for your answers Fidoski. Much appreciated.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Mar, 2009 06:56 pm
@Elmud,
Think of the price, too often paid by others and in pain for myself to learn what love is.... What every one should begin to learn in the crib some never learn... For them all my pity...
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Mar, 2009 07:27 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
Think of the price, too often paid by others and in pain for myself to learn what love is.... What every one should begin to learn in the crib some never learn... For them all my pity...
Well hell. Maybe I am. lol.:bigsmile:
doc phil
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 02:50 am
@Elmud,
Elmud wrote:

Jesus said the two shall become one. Is that love? I don't know. All I have ever experienced was a thing that was somewhat conditional. I think. Maybe someone out there knows what that means. I do not.


So, what is love? I don't know. I don't have a clue. I am asking, even begging for someone to tell me what love is. Because, I don't know.


Do you really want to have an intellectualisation of love? If you understood it better would that mean you are better at loving?

Justin wrote:
I'll offer my opinion. Love is balance. Love is the God energy of the universe expressed in balance sexed opposites of One thing, (GOD).


So from where I sit, love is balance and what is out of balance, love brings into balance. Balance and Love being two very important keywords.



Theaetetus wrote:
I think the love of two individuals is nothing more than the obliteration of two isolated individuals to form one single individual. To fully love another, you must become them as they become you. Without that unity, there cannot be true love between two separate individual identities. In other words, love is the true opposite of pure indifference.


I stumbled upon a qualitative expression of what love is. For those who are interested:

Balance is not the whole story. Nor is two becoming one. In my opinion. I guess the best way of describing the description is to say, an ever-changing feeling of togetherness. That is, true love (experienced vividly when a stranger falls for another stranger) is a place where one changes and one belongs at the same time. I have come to describe this as, diversifying unity. New ways of achieving wholeness. And the highest love is to diversify unity constantly - to be in a state of love.

The terms have to be considered as one, to be understood. As Justin has said, balance between two individuals. Or as Theaetetus says, two individuals becoming one. Difference and togetherness, balance and change, diversifying unity.

What you guys think?
Am in the midsts of publishing my work, and am most grateful for the most relevant thread.

Morgan Daniel "A Civilised Mind?"
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Mar, 2009 11:25 pm
@doc phil,
doc wrote:
Do you really want to have an intellectualisation of love? If you understood it better would that mean you are better at loving?
"
Yeah. You may be right Doc. Maybe trying to intellectualize love, would be like trying to define God. Cannot be done. Maybe love can be whatever you want it to be. Who knows?
0 Replies
 
Jose phil
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Mar, 2009 11:35 pm
@Elmud,
Yeah. We humans are trying to intellectualize stuff that's better left un-intellectualized. Can't we just appreciate what love is without the rigmarole of trying define what exactly it is.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Apr, 2009 05:43 am
@Jose phil,
Jose wrote:
Yeah. We humans are trying to intellectualize stuff that's better left un-intellectualized. Can't we just appreciate what love is without the rigmarole of trying define what exactly it is.

As I see it; the two trends in philosophy as we know them, science and moral philosophy can be expressed in this fashion: Knowledge is virtue, and knowledge is power.. In seeking to learn about love the best anyone can hope is that knowledge is virtue...We all already know what love is... We all are the product of the love of individuals and of society...Love is life... Okay... Why learn what we already know???

It is because as a moral issue, speaking from observation, no emotion has such control over us, and no quality can cause us so much pain... People can live with little, and having much can suffer great loss... But nothing can so screw up any life as the failure in adult love relationships... And it is cool being a lover... The rest can give up, because the standard I have set is too high... But it is as nothing to the ability to love one person, love ones children, love people you have no reason in fact to love, but only that they need it... Sex is medicine, but love is the cure....And this power, this cure, this cause of our being has the power to destroy us...

Look at the human wreckage of notable, wealthy, and powerful people in the indignity of failed love... They marry one who looks good, and love one who makes them feel good, and find no matter how they manage affairs that they cannot have both....That man or woman is a fool who thinks they can be enough for two... No man can serve two masters, and if love does not make a man a slave, and he does not submit to his emotions, and admit them he is another sort of fool; but not a fool in love... But Love is an investment, and like all our forms; when we invest our lives in them we are supposed to get more life out of them... And if love does not leave us with more energy than it takes, then it is not love....

Now, Look!!! Everyone has but one life...No one has time for the wrong love... And it is not for the faint hearted or the ill... A love relationship is what everyone is born for... Whether you believe it or not, the only protection anyone has from a failed love is complete commitment and honesty, because lost love is normal enough; but at some point you are done, and cannot serve love as love deserves... But guilt, knowing your own infidelity, your own dishonesty, your own cupidity, or your own faults have ruined what might be your only chance for love is a curse of guilt and remorse...Everyone needs their own two feet to stand on...No one has an extra leg for kicking themselves... If you can live without love, do it, and don't screw up some one else's life...If you cannot live without love, admit it, and live for it, and give all you have to it, because considered as part of life, it is, bar none, the best part of life...

In fact, Love is life itself... And we only try to learn about it to avoid all the pitfalls of those who think they can afford to fail at life... In this thing, Love; failure is futility, and sterility...No one can learn to love... Everyone knows how to love... We only need to learn how essential is Love to life...And then we need to know that fact with every fiber of our being....
doc phil
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Apr, 2009 06:01 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
And if love does not leave us with more energy than it takes then it is not love....


Bravo!

This is a great thread and has drawn some, in my opinion, true originals. I would appreciate it if you guys would take a look at the book I have recently put to press. There is preview available of the introduction. Unfortunately the rationalisation of love is in the last chapter. But let me know what you guys think.
Its called A Civilised Mind? By Morgan Daniel
Here is the link

A Civilised Mind? by Dr. Morgan Daniel (MBChB, DTM&H) (Book) in Medicine & Science
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Apr, 2009 06:05 am
@Elmud,
Thanks doc...Check it again..I corrected some errors...
0 Replies
 
Ichthus91
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Apr, 2009 07:57 pm
@Elmud,
The Greeks have many different words for love. There is agape, eros, philia, storge, and xenia. Eros has to do with the physical attraction and sexual longing of another. Agape is a pure, ideal type of love (rather than physical attraction). I think your talking about one of these two. If you want to find out more on agape then I suggest you read 1st Corinthians 13. In Genesis where is said the two shall become one flesh is the result of love. Love is what holds that completed image together. Without the other; one is incomplete. So, you could say that love is the force that holds two together into one. How you love is another story (some couple don't give heir partner room to breath, lol).
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Apr, 2009 03:23 pm
@Ichthus91,
Ichthus91 wrote:
(some couple don't give heir partner room to breath, lol).

Yeah. got to let the other have their space. Not an obsession or possession. To be a part of someone, I guess you have to let them be who they are, and not an extension of yourself. After all, it was that person you fell in love with. As they are.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Apr, 2009 03:50 pm
@Ichthus91,
Ichthus91 wrote:
The Greeks have many different words for love. There is agape, eros, philia, storge, and xenia. Eros has to do with the physical attraction and sexual longing of another. Agape is a pure, ideal type of love (rather than physical attraction). I think your talking about one of these two. If you want to find out more on agape then I suggest you read 1st Corinthians 13. In Genesis where is said the two shall become one flesh is the result of love. Love is what holds that completed image together. Without the other; one is incomplete. So, you could say that love is the force that holds two together into one. How you love is another story (some couple don't give heir partner room to breath, lol).

From my perspective, the Greeks had a lot of names for love; but they did not have a clue....
Ichthus91
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Apr, 2009 01:13 am
@Fido,
Fido;56385 wrote:
From my perspective, the Greeks had a lot of names for love; but they did not have a clue....

Then what does that make us Americans? We only have one word for love and we use it so freely that it has lost it's meaning. I find that many people spell L-O-V-E as L-U-S-T.
Jose phil
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Apr, 2009 01:25 am
@Elmud,
"I find that many people spell L-O-V-E as L-U-S-T."

Some people do have the two confused. But there're also those who don't.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Apr, 2009 08:09 am
@Ichthus91,
Ichthus91 wrote:
Then what does that make us Americans? We only have one word for love and we use it so freely that it has lost it's meaning. I find that many people spell L-O-V-E as L-U-S-T.


I am certain we have a great number of words for love, like avarice, or patriotism... We even have a discriptive word for some one who can love no one but himself: An AsssHoollle...
But let me not disagree with you completely...Many do say: making love when they are trying to do some one an injury, taking from them and giving as little as possible... None the less, how we define any word, that is, how we find the meaning of essentially moral concepts, is the work of a life time... It was Voltaire who said: If you would talk with me, define your terms... The dictionary is only a handy starting place for a definition, and I own many... But we define these terms in the course of our lives, just as we define the meaning of life with our own life, and not by any other...And when it is finally defined, it is ended...

---------- Post added at 10:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 AM ----------

Jose wrote:
"I find that many people spell L-O-V-E as L-U-S-T."

Some people do have the two confused. But there're also those who don't.

When we refer to romantic love, if there is not some element of cupidice, or devotion, or adoration then it would not rate much as romance to me...

Just as every relationship has its politics, so every relationship has it obligations and rewards... Romantic and sexual love has a tremendous cathartic effect on people, in that you can give expression to all your love and anger at the same moment, and start life again as if you were new, even naked...

If any one were forced to do what they do for love it would be the greatest indignity, and you can see your wife like that, and she can see you like that if she desires... And if you do not believe me, go look at some porn... Some monkey in a tree top with one eye out for eagles and another out for snakes has more dignity than a porn star....On the other hand, when people can see themselves going that extra step for love, to heal, to balm the pain of life, and to give the relationship meaning, it is a source of unity and strength... There is nothing else like it...
Pangloss
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Apr, 2009 10:21 am
@Elmud,
My view on the matter shifts...sometimes I find myself close to agreement with the definition given in Plato's Symposium:

Wiki wrote:

In short, with genuine Platonic love, the beautiful or lovely other person inspires the mind and the soul and directs one's attention to spiritual matters. One proceeds from recognition of another's beauty, to appreciation of Beauty as it exists apart from any individual, to consideration of Divinity, the source of Beauty, to love of Divinity.



Other times I'm tempted to believe Gordon Gekko from Wall Street:

Quote:
We are smart enough not to buy in to the oldest myth running; love. Fiction created by people to keep them from jumping out of windows.
:sarcastic:

It seems that some of these lofty, romanticized ideals of love are no longer consistent with the modern usage of the word. I might just paraphrase Plato and simply say that love is the appreciation of, or desire for, beauty. (And to Plato, it is like a helper which directs us to the higher forms). But then that begs the question, "what is beauty?".

You can't have a full logical analysis of something like love, and so you get romantic descriptions of something divine, almost like a god (and in Plato's Symposium, they did refer to love as love, the deity). As with discussions on god, we are stuck trying to extract these emotions and mental images from the mind or soul and place them into words.

The raw experience of love may be the best way for understanding the nature of love's object, whether you call it beauty, God, "the good", etc. It could work for these higher matters of the soul where logic and dialectic might fail. Or it could be a purely selfish drive, not necessarily any more meaningful than a human's other desires (except that it encourages reproduction and survival of the species), yet much more powerful.
0 Replies
 
Ichthus91
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Apr, 2009 04:36 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
I am certain we have a great number of words for love, like avarice, or patriotism... We even have a discriptive word for some one who can love no one but himself: An AsssHoollle...
But let me not disagree with you completely...Many do say: making love when they are trying to do some one an injury, taking from them and giving as little as possible... None the less, how we define any word, that is, how we find the meaning of essentially moral concepts, is the work of a life time... It was Voltaire who said: If you would talk with me, define your terms... The dictionary is only a handy starting place for a definition, and I own many... But we define these terms in the course of our lives, just as we define the meaning of life with our own life, and not by any other...And when it is finally defined, it is ended...

Avarice, patriotism, and ******* are all words that has the action of love done on something. Avarice is love towards money, patriotism is love towards your country, ******* is love towards yourself. However, none of these actually explain what love is. Indeed, they all may use a different kind of love. Of course, in English we can say "I love my car like a veteran love's his country". But, even this has limited implications. e.g. The love you feel towards someone or something may not be comparable to anything else.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » What is love?
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 06:32:16