Love

[Simon Darkshade]

OK, sorry if this seems facetious or anyhting, but I would like to attempt to spark a discussion on this matter. I am not indulging in navel-gazing, like some other erstwhile former members might of, but want to hear feelings and reactions to a broad topic. Say what you will within it; this is a very open topic.

For me, the mere mention of love is very bittersweet. The knowledge it was once there and achievable, and the the acknowledgement it is now irrevocably gone. It bothers me, but doesn't bother me at the same time. I won't moan with excruciating details, but just comment on the concept and idea.

Is love an irretractable part of humanity? Can a human live without love?
I have had correspondence in the past urging me not to give up on the notion having had one screwed up experience, but I do not wish to further that here. i can't change the past which never was, and certainly not the future which never will be.

I'll go out on a limb and say that I can live or exist without the love of other human beings. Now love is a big word, and I guess encompasses mates, but what I am speaking of is the traditional interpretation of love. I have, and will have friends, but will always remain primarily L'Etranger. Why? Because, having tasted the fruit once, and finding that piece so, so brilliant, I never want to sully its memory.

But countless milliopns have got over this stage before. What I seek to find out is how is it done. How do you start over again when most of you doesn't want to.

I apologize for the introspective nature of this post, but I felt something important and personal was needed first up to grab attention and response. I ain't a miserable person who glorifys in their misery, like other who have gone before, but I'd like to hear advice. I will take it on board. God knows, I want a life.


------------------
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you.
- N.S.Khrushchev

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

Be satisfied with who you are. Work on defining who you are.

Never seek love. This will repel the forms of love that fit you best. Be content doing whatever you are doing without a romantic companion. But be open to it if it comes.

If you do this, the best "love" for you will come to you.

Spiff

 

[Magnus]

Learn to love yourself first, and those qualities evoked will make you attractive to others who can then love you.

Regarding future love after being heartbroken - nobody else can replace that special person, but somebody somewhere someday will evoke the same feelings despite being a quite different person.

Keep hoping, though, once you lose hope, you are done.

 

[Brad]

Now, I can't tell you what to do or what not to do. But what I can do is relate personal account, and let you make of it what you will. I felt as you did to some extent once bofore. My first expierience with 'love' failed... I felt like I would never get over it, never feel the same way... I was wrong, my next expierience was so much deeper and more emotional... the thing is that with only one exp. to go off of you can't compare it to anything, can't tell if feelings could get stronger. Now, I just recently got out of a relationship, and I am already over her... evem though I thought she was the one; and now I am confident that my next relationship can be more amazing and my feelings can be stronger. Do what you feel is best for you. If you need to wait you can't rush yourself, that will just lead to more pain and bitter resentment... when you meet the right person... you will know. Hang in there.

------------------
Silence Fills the Nothingness......NERRRR!

Even though stuff happens that we don't plan, be a man... use you hand.
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/enforcer.gif" border=0>

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade:
Because, having tasted the fruit once, and finding that piece so, so brilliant, I never want to sully its memory.

What you felt was either a)an incredibly beautiful closeness and affection for a particular person, or b)an idealized feeling which made you imprint on a person, but just as easily could have made you imprint on someone else.

If a)then you're in luck. You are capable of loving people for who they are, and will surely meet someone one day whom you'll feel for as strongly. Probably many other people in fact. Your feelings for the first person can never be sullied by subsequent loves at all. Why people believe that one may only love one person at a time is beyond me. Everyone is different, and mostly everyone is worthy of being loved in their own special way.

If b), of course, then I'm sorry to say you'll never feel it again--but that's a good thing. You'll eventually realize that a)is far superior in every way to the kind of idealized storybook love that is always entirely within one's mind anyway and cannot be reciprocated no matter what people say. It feels like a drug, it causes despair and bad poetry etc etc, but at the end of the day it's nothing more than an immaturity.

 

[stormerne]

I'll give you my opinion. It may or may not be helpful. You may or may not agree with it.

I believe love is not something you feel - it's something you do, and by that I don't mean "making love". Love takes effort and constant hard work but the rewards are incomparable. I believe most people go through life without ever experiencing love, and without even knowing that they've never experienced love. It took me 45 years and three marriages before I found it, in fact before I found out what it really was. That's because love is an extremely rare combination of absolute commitment, openness, teamwork, and partnership. I can count on the fingers of one hand the couples I know who have found this.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/stormerne/stormerne.gif" border=0>

 

[SunTzu]

Love IMHO is loving someone very deeply. Being able to listen to ones problems and help each other out. Feeling good when your around each other. For a women love could be describe as feeling protected in the arms of your guy.
Well you get the point.

------------------
Civilization God of War & Economic Prosperity
http://www.civfanatics.com Staff and Forum Moderator
Apolyton Who?!

 

[Leowind]

Spiff and Storm are speaking words of great wisdom, my friend. Anything I would try to add would be superfluous. Take their words to heart, and you'll do well. I could only add my personal experience that once I stopped looking for the love of my life, I found her right under my nose!

peace, Leowind

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

I believe that Spiff is right--'learning to love oneself' and so on. But although I understand where Storm is coming from (rather, I can conceptualize it in theory though I've never been married even once), I generally feel that it is a bit of a cop-out to say that love is this special thing that is only ever truly reached by a few people. It's a kind of dishonesty that serves only to place our life somehow above those of others.

No disrespect is intended, and indeed from what I have learned of Stormerne over the past few months here at CFC I have no doubt that his love must be special indeed.

However, love is reachable by anyone, and often is. It's human nature to believe that 'our' love is the best kind, and rare. Well yes it's rare because there are no two loves alike. But why draw lines around whom we may love or--and especially--what love is? It seems to me a bit elitist and solipsistic (is that even a word?

)

Leowind says that love was right under his nose. Well, it always is, and the reason is that countless people have the potential to be loved by any one individual. It sounds cheap to say, but the dull fact is that, if you hadn't fallen completely head over heels with your current loves, you would have met someone else and loved her just as well in her own way.

So my biggest problem is this: there are so many wonderful people in the world worthy of love how does one pick just one? I understand that the experience Stormerene is trying to convey is that long-term commitment, respect, honesty, etc, can make us love someone more and more deeply with the passing of time. I'm aware that we're speaking of two different kinds of love here and that perhaps some of you may consider my perspective a bit shallow and immature.

But I honestly feel that I can love anyone, and indeed that anyone can love anyone else. And should. Ok now I'm rambling.

(Kind of normal for a discussion on love I suppose...)

 

[Leowind]

mr_bond, I think you are right when you suggest we are talking about two different kinds of love. My understanding of simon's original post was that he was speaking of "romantic" love (for lack of a better succint nomenclature). Of course I love many people in some way or another, and as trite as it sounds, we really should try to love all others. As for "romantic" love towards more than one at a time, I've never experienced it myself, so I can't say for sure, but I'm not sure it really is possible except in some superficial way that may be more lust than love (and there is another line that can be very hard to define). By saying I found my love under my nose, I did not mean to imply she was the only one in the world for me; simply backing up Spiff's assertion that we can't truly find such love until we stop striving after it. Such was my case.
I'd have to agree with what you said about love not being so difficult to achieve as Storm suggests, but what he said about commitment, hard work, and action rather than a "feeling" I agree with wholeheartedly.

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

<u>Interesting Note:</u> The same day I posted the 1st reply above, a friend came into my office and happened to mention he found his current "love" right when he stopped looking. In his words: "Just when I got comfortable with being single..." I have personally experienced and esp. heard that storyline more times than I could tell, and now add one more ... thus the genesis of my post.

<u>I believe we are literally made of love.</u> If God is Love and our souls are born of God (or actually a part of God) then our souls are also Love. From there, when we say "look inside yourself for love first", we mean that literally. Your soul is your connection with whatever we call God. This is your closest source of love.

<u>Types of Love?</u> There are more than we can name. The Greek language has 3 different words (can you verify this Az?), all of which we lump into Love in English. Just because we lack words to describe it doesn't mean it's all even close to the same. I believe there are inumerable levels and types and genres of love ... and when you add that each love is unique between any two people, you have infinite possibilities and physical-world expressions of love. But each time you reach a new level of love, I would not recommend declaring that all other forms you've experienced leading up to that are somehow now not love. In so doing, you discredit how you got where you are, and also anyone else who hasn't gotten where you are (not to mention that someday you may discredit where you are now when you reach yet another level). At times, and evident from what Stormerne said, love is how you define it. Love need only be an energy we label "positive". What Storm says is definitely love, but the same goes for what everyone else here has said, all of which are completely different.

<u>Leo:</u> As always, thanks for the kind words. Peace, man.

<u>I also GREATLY appreciate what Mr. Bond had to say.</u> If I understood your "rambling", I feel the same way. Everyone is worthy of love and you are capable of loving everyone. There are any number of people you will come across in life who you particularly "resonate" with, esp. if you "get around" (I don't mean that as "lots of sex", but rather getting out and meeting people ... not holed up in your place playing Civ all day <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/wink.gif" border=0> and I know Mr. Bond advocates this.). Yes, I have experienced feeling similar levels of love for more than one person at the same time ... although each relationship is unique. The problem is the expectation from the other that you love only them and that your love for them is somehow impared by your love for another. People generally don't like to share. <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/frown.gif" border=0> But those who have more than one child understand that you can love 2 different people at the exact same level at the exact same time but in different ways.

<u>Mr Bond:</u> Do you have to pick just one? No. It's a socio-cultural convention placed on us at a very early age. There's no reason you ever have to get married, and if you can find companions as open-minded as you, you can "date" multiple people indefinitely. In fact, Mr Bond, if you feel that way, I recommend you NOT seek marriage. Honestly. I mean it, Bond. You may live to regret making that promise to only one when someone else later seems to fit you much better.

<u>So how's this for a different model of relationships?</u> (and I anticipate the adverse reactions to this one): Today, people who truly do not love each other anymore stay together ONLY because of a promise made X years ago. At this point, the marriage, intended to be an expression and declaration of love, is phony anyway, but it's too hard (emotionally and legally) to break it off. But is this a way to live out the rest of one's life? (This scenario isn't included in the already vast numbers who are dissatisfied and leave regardless.)

<u>What if we remove the legal bindings and emotional expectations of "forever"?</u> Most would say something about "how can you depend on the other person to be around" or something like that. But, to my mind, relationships should not be used as security blankets. If you are secure within yourself, you have no NEED for another, only a WANT or DESIRE (not in the sexual sense here). So you don't NEED them to be around. Two people needing each other is co-dependence and, to me, not the purpose of any relationship.

<u>So after the initial, natural, knee-jerk reaction, let's look at this more closely (and with a cool head).</u> What if there was no promise of "forever"? A: You would be absolutely 100% sure that if this person is still with you, they absolutely still love you. Why? Simple: since they can get out at any time, no one who's with you who really wanted to leave would stay. (I wonder why one would want them to, anyway?) And you never have to suffer the rest of your life for making a poor choice. You can leave if that is what's called for to truly have love in your life. Have you ever doubted if someone really means it when they say they love you? No more of that. And if the expectation of "forever" was never there to begin with (i.e., the arrangement was clear upfront), there is no such thing as a "messy divorce", which is bad for everyone. Both sides knew this was never promised.

Plus, if you end up staying with that same person under those conditions for 50+ years and die with them, you die knowing they could have left at anytime and chose not, too. They REALLY must love you! What truer expression of love could there be? You never have to wonder if they stayed all this time out of guilt or anything less pure than love. This is a practical implementation of an addage I consider to be true: "If you love something, set it free" etc. In this case, if he/she never leaves, you know why. And if he/she chooses to leave, would you have wanted them to stay if they truly felt that way? Would you want to do that to another? Would you have wanted to use a stronger agreement to force them to stay anyway? Kinda like chaining them down? And if so, for what purpose?

<u>Bear in mind this would only work if there's a lot of maturity in both parties.</u> I'm not talking about folks who would leave at the first sign of trouble (and if they did, now you know that about them ... move on to someone better). I'm talking about folks who would make a decision to leave the same way they make a decision to leave a job (assuming for the moment that people generally put a lot of time and consideration and thought and "keep trying" into that). I know for me, I made a commitment to my company (not forever, of course). I won't just not show up one day because I don't feel like it anymore. I only leave quickly if the job is abusive (as one should also do in relationships). Otherwise, I only leave after giving it more chances and trying to make things work ... ultimately it's a hard decision for me. The same consideration should go into any relationship that's lasted for a while. I'm also talking about folks who are secure enough that jealousy does not really exist for them (at least not as anymore than a twinge). And, obviously, if kids are involved, that factors heavily into the decision to begin with and leaving a partner relatively freely doesn't obsolve one of parental responsibilities.

To my knowledge, marriage is the only entity that requires a promise of "forever". But this can lock you into an expectation from another of being/feeling the same way forever. The one constant about people (and all life) is constant change, so you cannot be/feel the same forever. If you and someone you resonate with right now end up growing in completely different directions, does it really make sense to stay together because of a promise made a long time ago, when you were different people, when you were younger and much less wise? Hmmm. I just wonder.

As usual, wrote more than initially intended. <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif" border=0>
Spiff <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/scan.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by SpacemanSpiff (edited July 13, 2001).]

 

[Loaf Warden]

I've only been in this world for just over two decades, to my knowledge, so as far as humans go, I haven't had time for many life experiences. I also don't pretend to have the wisdom that stormerne and Spiff et al. have acquired, though I aspire to someday.

Nevertheless, I like to think I have learned a few things in my life, and though very few of them are relevant to this word 'love', now seems as good a time as any to expound upon my thoughts on the concept.

The one useful thing I have learned about love over the years is that it cannot be rationalized. It is an emotion, which has its seat in the brain, like all other emotions, rather than in the heart or the liver or any other region that has been named through the ages. Yes, I would feel a pain in my heart when I would see the woman I thought I was in love with and her boyfriend, but then I would feel a pain in my stomach, too. The one thing I did not get was a headache, but nevertheless, that is where my feelings were based.

Nevertheless, feelings cannot be explained or controlled by Reason. Any attempt to do so is pure folly, and is bound to fail.

So what caused this? What synaptic misfire ensured that I had these feelings when I was around or thought about that particular woman? There was nothing about it that made sense. We wouldn't have been a logical match. Our personalities aren't all that similar. She's been in this world some eight years more than I have. Nothing about the situation could have made my feelings make sense.

For my part, I haven't even been able to get a date since I was 15 (I turn 21 next week), so I haven't exactly been out there experimenting with love. It all seems like something of a chimera to me. I understand need, I understand want, I understand desire. I even understand longing. But how any two people could both honestly say they are 'in love' with each other is beyond me. Yes, I wanted this woman, I desired her, and I'm not even saying that in a sexual sense. But was I in love with her? It would seem not. For all the females I've had crushes on in my life, I don't think I can look back on any of them and say, "That was love." And the one girlfriend I've had in my life? That wasn't love, either. Of course I thought it was at the time, but looking back on it, I can see that it wasn't really love keeping me with her, it was just fear of loneliness.

So how does anyone fall in love with anyone? And given the vast number of people in this world, what are the chances that the person you fall in love with will also fall in love with you? What makes any one of us so special that we should have the great fortune to just happen to fall into such an arrangement? The miracle is that it ever happens at all, if it even does. I have to say, I have my doubts. It seems too incredible to me to think of it as something that's likely to happen to anyone. It just doesn't strike me as realistic.

 

[Sprayber]

You won't find love if you activly search for it. You will constantly dismiss people because they are not exactly what you think is the "one" I recently got out of a relationship that was very one sided. I cared for her very deeply but she only used that to help her. At first I went out and tried to force the situation by jumping right back in the game. Only when I had struck out twice did I stop looking and start seeing. Now I am seeing a girl that gives back what I give her. To be honest, the situation is more complicated than with the previous girl. But this time we are both working at it. Only time will tell. Never give up, but never try and force it. Like everything else in life, a middle ground must be found.


*Brought to you by Sprayber's School For The Advancement Of Love And Other Human Emotions. SSFTAOLAOHE*

I'm not only the president, I'm a proud graduate.

------------------
Apolyton Refugee....

 

[a_disciple]

I think the main - or you can say, fundamental question is: What is love?

The best description of love, can be found in the bible at 1 Cor. 13:4-8a, it says:

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails."

If a human being has found this qualities in life, wheter it is seen in another person, or he is showing it himself, the person has found love. All other terms of "love" is a fruit or result of the experience, mentioned in the passage.

The greek word used for love in this passage is Agape - which is the highest condition of love, it is divine - a love that is unconditional.

------------------
"How happy your men must be! How happy your officials, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom!" (The Bible about Solomon)


[This message has been edited by a_disciple (edited July 17, 2001).]

 

[Leowind]

Spiff, yes, the Greek has three words for love. Phileo, brotherly (or sisterly) love, as in Philedelphia, city of brotherly love; eros, erotic or romantic love, and agape, complete unconditional love (as a_disciple has pointed out).

And a few remarks from your (as usual very articulate) post.

Yes, love exists at many levels (as evidenced by the three Greek words), and all are valid at some point. I don't think I'm comfortable calling love "only an energy we label 'positive'." How do you define "an energy?" Burning petrochemicals are "an energy," which can be positive (inside the cylinder of your car) or negative (inside the exploding gas can bomb). Love is not something outside of us, and energy, but something within what we are, part of us (as you point out

)

Loving two children is different than loving two lovers. We're talking about two different kinds of love again.

Your definition of love and advice to mr bond would seem to indicate that you support bigamy, swinging, and open marriages. Is this the case? Given all you've described above, I have to ask: why are YOU married? Your definitions seem intended to discredit the need for marriage, so I'm curious why you are married.

I think love is more than an emotion (Loaf, this is response to you, too), but is partly a choice, and act of the will. If my wife and I loved based on emotions and feelings, we would have split at one point. But love for us was a choice, so we kept working at it, and are closer than ever. Why should someone stay just because of a promise of forever? Because the promise itself is part of the love. The promise is NOT that I will always feel this way. The promise is that NO MATTER WHAT I will always be here for you, I will always love you. In fact, we DO need each other. That is not necessarily co-dependency. Not one of us (perhaps an occasional, very rare exception) is all we can or should be alone. We all need someone to help us along. The marriage covenant is not a promise to be the same/feel the same. Two people in love don't grow seperate ways. They grow together. They may grow individually, and in seperate areas of interest/need, but they will grow their seperate paths together. Two people who grow apart as you suggest have, I would suggest, stopped loving already.

Don't know if I've said all I wanted to, or if my rambling makes sense, but there it is, in either case.

peace, Leowind