CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Psychology › Love: A blessing, a curse, or both?

Love: A blessing, a curse, or both?

Started by Nicholas Lee41 · · 👁 6 views · 39 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Nicholas Lee41Roger Kern16Jamie Adams6Tyler Chavez3Ashley Bailey75Betty FowlerJoseph Bailey41Melissa Sanchez8Donna White50Donna Doyle2Matthew Cruz44Karen Cook6Gerald Thompson62ironrider11darkjackal7Jeremy Thomas8
Nicholas Lee41 Nicholas Lee41 NewcomerOP
9 messages
joined Aug 2018
#21 ·
Ashley Bailey75 said:And just like everything else in life, there's two sides to every coin.

Suffering is just as much a part of the deal as love is. Most people spend their lives running from it—trying to numb it out or ignore it—but honestly? It’s pretty valuable. It’s basically a signal that you’re off track or working against your own interests.

It's like when you smell something rotten—your body tells you to stay away because it's dangerous. Pain works the same way. It's necessary for survival.



I suppose you could twist that logic to use it against love. You don't consume it because it smells, or rather, it "smells" because it might cause suffering that could be fatal to your survival. Since love isn't always physically detectable—meaning it doesn't literally have a scent—your intellect tells you it's harmful because of those potential consequences.
That is a truly bizarre comparison. 😁
Ashley Bailey75 Ashley Bailey75 Member
24 messages
joined Sep 2017
#22 ·
Betty Fowler said:Exactly. I figured it wasn't worth the breath to explain...

I've always had a bit of a grudge against people who can't master the art of a good comparison, and honestly, this one is pretty terrible...

Go ahead and hate me if you want, but if you're gonna hang out in this thread, actually contribute. Make a point. Explain what's bothering you or how you see things. It's a forum, for crying out loud—it wouldn't hurt to actually share an opinion instead of just dropping these tiny, useless comments that don't say anything at all.

Don't you think emotional pain works just like physical pain? Like, a built-in signal that something's wrong? Why would we even be capable of feeling it if it didn't serve a purpose?
Betty Fowler Betty Fowler Active Member
112 messages
joined Apr 2018
#23 ·
Ashley Bailey75 said:Go ahead and hate me if you want, but if you're gonna hang out in this thread, actually contribute. Make a point. Explain what's bothering you or how you see things. It's a forum, for crying out loud—it wouldn't hurt to actually share an opinion instead of just dropping these tiny, useless comments that don't say anything at all.

Don't you think emotional pain works just like physical pain? Like, a built-in signal that something's wrong? Why would we even be capable of feeling it if it didn't serve a purpose?

😠

Ashley Bailey75 said:Go ahead and hate me if you want, but if you're gonna hang out in this thread, actually contribute. Make a point. Explain what's bothering you or how you see things. It's a forum, for crying out loud—it wouldn't hurt to actually share an opinion instead of just dropping these tiny, useless comments that don't say anything at all.

Don't you think emotional pain works just like physical pain? Like, a built-in signal that something's wrong? Why would we even be capable of feeling it if it didn't serve a purpose?

Alright, since you’re asking for a full breakdown.

Tvoj upis:

Why do we avoid food just because it smells off? It’s simple: that scent is a built-in warning system telling you something isn't safe to eat. It's nature's way of protecting your health. I suppose suffering works the same way—it's a necessary part of survival.

First.
You’re comparing something you claim is a health hazard to something you argue is absolutely essential for survival. Is that really a fair comparison?

Another one.There isn’t a single shred of evidence to suggest that suffering is actually necessary for survival.

Third.Just because something smells bad doesn't mean it's actually a health hazard. Take roasted red pepper spread, for example—to me, that stuff smells absolutely terrible.

EDIT: Physical pain serves as a vital warning system; it’s absolutely necessary for survival. Emotional pain, on the other hand, is more of a side effect—a byproduct of our capacity for empathy, connection, and love. It's what allows us to function within a family or a community and ensures we continue to thrive as a species. But is it strictly necessary? Not really.
Psychopaths seem to navigate life quite easily without ever feeling emotional pain.
Ashley Bailey75 Ashley Bailey75 Member
24 messages
joined Sep 2017
#24 ·
Betty Fowler said:😠

Alright, since you’re asking for a full breakdown.

Tvoj upis:

Why do we avoid food just because it smells off? It’s simple: that scent is a built-in warning system telling you something isn't safe to eat. It's nature's way of protecting your health. I suppose suffering works the same way—it's a necessary part of survival.

First.
You’re comparing something you claim is a health hazard to something you argue is absolutely essential for survival. Is that really a fair comparison?

Another one.There isn’t a single shred of evidence to suggest that suffering is actually necessary for survival.

Third.Just because something smells bad doesn't mean it's actually a health hazard. Take roasted red pepper spread, for example—to me, that stuff smells absolutely terrible.

EDIT: Physical pain serves as a vital warning system; it’s absolutely necessary for survival. Emotional pain, on the other hand, is more of a side effect—a byproduct of our capacity for empathy, connection, and love. It's what allows us to function within a family or a community and ensures we continue to thrive as a species. But is it strictly necessary? Not really.
Psychopaths seem to navigate life quite easily without ever feeling emotional pain.

You're being way too literal here—I'm not talking about flavor profiles, man. The sense of smell exists specifically to warn you when something isn't right.

Don't get hung up on the smell itself; look at the sense behind it. It's what guides you through life. It's what keeps you alive. You feel emotional pain for a reason. If you ignore it for too long—or worse, if you feed into it—that's when you actually put yourself in danger. That's just facts.
Betty Fowler Betty Fowler Active Member
112 messages
joined Apr 2018
#25 ·
Ashley Bailey75 said:You're being way too literal here—I'm not talking about flavor profiles, man. The sense of smell exists specifically to warn you when something isn't right.

Don't get hung up on the smell itself; look at the sense behind it. It's what guides you through life. It's what keeps you alive. You feel emotional pain for a reason. If you ignore it for too long—or worse, if you feed into it—that's when you actually put yourself in danger. That's just facts.

But not all senses are equally important, which means they aren't all strictly necessary for survival.

I added an edit to my previous post regarding the reasoning behind emotional pain.
Joseph Bailey41 Joseph Bailey41 Veteran
1K messages
joined Apr 2021
#26 ·
Nicholas Lee41 said:

I suppose you could twist that logic to use it against love. You don't consume it because it smells, or rather, it "smells" because it might cause suffering that could be fatal to your survival. Since love isn't always physically detectable—meaning it doesn't literally have a scent—your intellect tells you it's harmful because of those potential consequences.
That is a truly bizarre comparison. 😁

And that’s exactly why you’re stuck in this state of total apathy. You can't spend your entire life dodging everything (whether it's love, flying on a plane, crossing a busy street, or even grabbing a burger...) just because there's a *slight* chance it might lead to some kind of pain down the road. I mean, sure, you could do that, but what kind of life is that?
Nicholas Lee41 Nicholas Lee41 NewcomerOP
9 messages
joined Aug 2018
#27 ·
Joseph Bailey41 said:And that’s exactly why you’re stuck in this state of total apathy. You can't spend your entire life dodging everything (whether it's love, flying on a plane, crossing a busy street, or even grabbing a burger...) just because there's a *slight* chance it might lead to some kind of pain down the road. I mean, sure, you could do that, but what kind of life is that?

Sorry, I don't really get that first sentence. I think I follow, but I can't quite make it fit. Help?
By the way, I'm not actually avoiding anything; I was just responding to that comparison with a little bit of humor.
In my opening post, I think I expressed pretty much exactly how I feel about love.
As for this idea of proactive avoidance, it feels the same to me as "tempting fate." I don't like it because it seems pointless to me, because... well, I want to live. If you hold yourself back, you're limiting your own experiences (which is huge for me), and if you go out looking for trouble, you aren't respecting life—unless, I guess, you just don't care or you're actively seeking self-destruction.
Joseph Bailey41 Joseph Bailey41 Veteran
1K messages
joined Apr 2021
#28 ·
Nicholas Lee41 said:Sorry, I don't really get that first sentence. I think I follow, but I can't quite make it fit. Help?
By the way, I'm not actually avoiding anything; I was just responding to that comparison with a little bit of humor.
In my opening post, I think I expressed pretty much exactly how I feel about love.
As for this idea of proactive avoidance, it feels the same to me as "tempting fate." I don't like it because it seems pointless to me, because... well, I want to live. If you hold yourself back, you're limiting your own experiences (which is huge for me), and if you go out looking for trouble, you aren't respecting life—unless, I guess, you just don't care or you're actively seeking self-destruction.

I was actually responding to what you mentioned on the previous page:

Nicholas Lee41;71252119 said:Regarding apathy, I find it pretty easy to reach and maintain when it comes to most things, but I can never be apathetic about the fact that I'm feeling apathetic. Apathy works fine if you can keep it under control and stay indifferent toward specific targets; the trouble starts when it bleeds into a general state of indifference. For me, that became incredibly toxic, and even a tiny spark of logic would drive me straight toward suicide.

That's exactly why this part confuses me:

Nicholas Lee41 said:Sorry, I don't really get that first sentence. I think I follow, but I can't quite make it fit. Help?
By the way, I'm not actually avoiding anything; I was just responding to that comparison with a little bit of humor.
In my opening post, I think I expressed pretty much exactly how I feel about love.
As for this idea of proactive avoidance, it feels the same to me as "tempting fate." I don't like it because it seems pointless to me, because... well, I want to live. If you hold yourself back, you're limiting your own experiences (which is huge for me), and if you go out looking for trouble, you aren't respecting life—unless, I guess, you just don't care or you're actively seeking self-destruction.

How does being indifferent or seeking self-destruction equate to "respecting life," especially when that mindset leads toward suicide? I also don't quite see why you feel that tempting fate is a sign of disrespecting life. To me, taking certain risks means you aren't afraid to live life to the fullest. Even love is a risk—one where you prove your strength and vitality. Cowards don't dare to love.

The desire to cease existing—whether expressed through suicidal thoughts or anything else—is a pathology rooted in childhood, not some profound philosophical stance like people like to claim. At least, that's how I see it.
Nicholas Lee41 Nicholas Lee41 NewcomerOP
9 messages
joined Aug 2018
#29 ·
Joseph Bailey41;71253609 said:I was actually aiming at what you wrote on the previous page:

Nicholas Lee41 said:When it comes to apathy, I find it incredibly easy to reach and maintain regarding most things in life, but I can never quite bring myself to be apathetic about the fact that I am apathetic. I suppose apathy is fine as long as you can keep it under control—being indifferent toward specific targets or goals is one thing—but the real issue arises when it starts bleeding into everything, evolving into this pervasive, generalized indifference. For me, that state was absolutely toxic; even with just a tiny spark of rational thought, it would steer me straight toward suicidal ideation.

Another complication with love is how much it limits a person. For instance, if I didn't have these feelings holding me back, I’d probably have already taken the risks my mind tells me to take. Whether those moves would actually pay off or if I'd end up scrubbing toilets in a county jail, I guess it doesn't really matter, but at least I wouldn't be hesitating.

Why doesn't that part make sense to you for that reason? 😁
I think I actually said the opposite. It makes sense to me that tempting fate happens when you are apathetic toward life or don't respect it—meaning, either you simply don't care whether you live or die, or you are indirectly striving to be dead.
I misspoke when I wrote it in a way that made it sound like tempting fate inherently implies disrespecting life; I jumped straight to the life-death connection...
I actually agree that life should be experienced to its absolute maximum, tasted fully...

I'm not entirely sure if it's a matter of pathology. I'm not currently in a phase of contemplating suicide, nor would I want to be, because as soon as I start with that nihilistic crap, everything suddenly gains a sense of purpose while life itself loses it. 😁
Edit: aaaaaahahaahha, it looks like I'm just answering my own posts now, this is actually hilarious.
Donna Doyle2 Donna Doyle2 Member
30 messages
joined Sep 2015
#30 ·
What do you all think about that old saying that you can't truly love unless you've known what it's like to suffer? (I mean, if we set aside the actual masochists, victims of abuse, or anything pathological, do you really feel like there's some deep-seated truth buried in the human soul there?) And honestly, what would that even look like in real life?
Ashley Bailey75 Ashley Bailey75 Member
24 messages
joined Sep 2017
#31 ·
Betty Fowler said:But not all senses are equally important, which means they aren't all strictly necessary for survival.

I added an edit to my previous post regarding the reasoning behind emotional pain.

Look, I’m not here to play philosopher or talk down to anyone—especially when we're dealing with abstract concepts that are basically just matters of opinion. I don't buy the idea that emotional pain is some byproduct of love; I think they're two sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other.

Psychopaths make up a small percentage of the population. If everyone suddenly went off the deep end, I doubt it would be good for us as a species. Besides, psychopaths thrive by stepping on others—so if they were surrounded exclusively by people just like them, they'd pretty much cease to exist. Deep shit.
Matthew Cruz44 Matthew Cruz44 Active Member
80 messages
joined Aug 2018
#32 ·
Roger Kern16 said:I think I’ve been calling infatuation Love for way too long. Same goes for that anxiety you get from those toxic push-pull relationships... It just isn't it. Love is more of a state of being than some fleeting emotion, and you can only really measure it by actions. I don't (really) believe it should be a source of weakness, sadness, or suffering anymore; if that's what you're feeling, then it’s just pathology or something else entirely.

"It's only love and that's all"

I would argue that those intense emotions aren't actually substitutes for love, but rather just one specific, often distorted, manifestation of it.

If you were raised with the idea—drilled into your head from a young age—that loving someone means constant self-sacrifice, then you might just be using that sacrifice to compensate for a lack of steady, reliable affection, but that doesn't necessarily mean the love itself isn't there.
Joseph Bailey41 Joseph Bailey41 Veteran
1K messages
joined Apr 2021
#33 ·
Nicholas Lee41;71253895 said:
Joseph Bailey41 said:I was actually responding to what you mentioned on the previous page:

How does being indifferent or seeking self-destruction equate to "respecting life," especially when that mindset leads toward suicide? I also don't quite see why you feel that tempting fate is a sign of disrespecting life. To me, taking certain risks means you aren't afraid to live life to the fullest. Even love is a risk—one where you prove your strength and vitality. Cowards don't dare to love.

The desire to cease existing—whether expressed through suicidal thoughts or anything else—is a pathology rooted in childhood, not some profound philosophical stance like people like to claim. At least, that's how I see it.

I have to admit, your inconsistency caught me off guard, though I get why it’s happening—you’re still trying to figure out the best way to navigate life. I’m actually glad you realized that diving headfirst into a specific worldview, like nihilism, inevitably shifts your emotional state. Being able to spot those cause-and-effect relationships is really just a sign of intelligence. Without that kind of insight, there isn't much point in taking risks, big or small, because if you aren't learning from them, you're just spinning your wheels.

Donna Doyle2 said:What do you all think about that old saying that you can't truly love unless you've known what it's like to suffer? (I mean, if we set aside the actual masochists, victims of abuse, or anything pathological, do you really feel like there's some deep-seated truth buried in the human soul there?) And honestly, what would that even look like in real life?

I’d frame it as a phrase used for mass-scale indoctrination. In that kind of worldview, suffering is rebranded as something worthwhile because it supposedly leads to a reward of love—it’s a clever way to make labor feel less like exploitation and more like a sacrifice. Masochists or victims of abuse are essentially just people who have internalized this lesson a little too effectively. Their pain ends up serving the exploiters, while they themselves try to find some sense of purpose in it, clinging to a feeling of moral or spiritual superiority just to cope.

Matthew Cruz44 said:"It's only love and that's all"

I would argue that those intense emotions aren't actually substitutes for love, but rather just one specific, often distorted, manifestation of it.

If you were raised with the idea—drilled into your head from a young age—that loving someone means constant self-sacrifice, then you might just be using that sacrifice to compensate for a lack of steady, reliable affection, but that doesn't necessarily mean the love itself isn't there.

I can't help but feel like your only real shot at receiving stable, unconditional love happens during those very first years—maybe even months—of your life. If you miss that window for whatever reason, there isn't really a way to make it up later. In adult relationships, I don't believe true unconditional love exists; everything eventually turns into a transaction, a series of compromises, or a power struggle where love just ends up being a hostage.

Giving, or rather "sending out" love, is something anyone can do. Once you grow into a full-fledged human being, you're capable of loving without keeping score. At least, that is until you run into an emotional vampire. You know the type: they believe love is a sacrifice, and they view themselves as some kind of deity that requires constant offerings just to keep the relationship afloat, offering nothing in return but toxic drama. It’s that cliché version of love you hear about in gritty rock songs. Love as drunken jealousy, romanticized violence, manipulation, and macho posturing—love as the total destruction of the other person. Love as your own personal shadow.

After dealing with the absolute bottom of the barrel of the human psyche, it's incredibly hard to reset and try to understand love in its ideal form again. I mean love as synergy. Love as a volcanic merging of two minds. Love as closeness, or the simple joy of seeing someone exactly as they are. Love as a blessing that we both give and receive simultaneously.

There is no light without first confronting the darkness. There is no real love before you dismantle power dynamics, before you stop feeling the need to control someone else or martyr yourself for them just to soothe a deep-seated sense of unworthiness. That sense of inadequacy is the very thing that drives our entire economy, our political maneuvering, and almost every addiction we face. There is no love without freedom.
Nicholas Lee41 Nicholas Lee41 NewcomerOP
9 messages
joined Aug 2018
#34 ·
Joseph Bailey41;71261345 said:
Nicholas Lee41 said:Why doesn't that part make sense to you for that reason? 😁
I think I actually said the opposite. It makes sense to me that tempting fate happens when you are apathetic toward life or don't respect it—meaning, either you simply don't care whether you live or die, or you are indirectly striving to be dead.
I misspoke when I wrote it in a way that made it sound like tempting fate inherently implies disrespecting life; I jumped straight to the life-death connection...
I actually agree that life should be experienced to its absolute maximum, tasted fully...

I'm not entirely sure if it's a matter of pathology. I'm not currently in a phase of contemplating suicide, nor would I want to be, because as soon as I start with that nihilistic crap, everything suddenly gains a sense of purpose while life itself loses it. 😁
Edit: aaaaaahahaahha, it looks like I'm just answering my own posts now, this is actually hilarious.

Yeah. I'm young (even if I don't feel it), I'm twenty years old, and honestly, I have no clue if I want the things I don't want, or if I actually want the things I do want. It's... awkward, I guess.
Karen Cook6 Karen Cook6 Member
11 messages
joined Mar 2022
#35 ·
God bless.
In the beginning, everything I poured out seemed to come back at me in such a twisted, negative way.
But, I suppose I didn't let that discourage me; eventually, all that stubborn persistence in giving unconditionally came back to me three times over—because, you see, there is always someone out there who is truly worthy, just as much as you are worthy of them.
It’s only then that you really realize what a blessing love actually is.
Because if it wasn't a blessing, then it probably wasn't even love to begin with.
Roger Kern16 Roger Kern16 Member
33 messages
joined Nov 2017
#36 ·
Matthew Cruz44 said:"It's only love and that's all"

I would argue that those intense emotions aren't actually substitutes for love, but rather just one specific, often distorted, manifestation of it.

If you were raised with the idea—drilled into your head from a young age—that loving someone means constant self-sacrifice, then you might just be using that sacrifice to compensate for a lack of steady, reliable affection, but that doesn't necessarily mean the love itself isn't there.


That's exactly my point. I don't buy this idea of "unstable love" anymore. In fact, I think only truly stable people are actually capable of real love... everyone else is just filling holes and chasing needs. Every time I walked away from a toxic relationship, it felt like coming off hard drugs. Pure addiction.
Gerald Thompson62 Gerald Thompson62 Member
25 messages
joined Jul 2018
#37 ·
Why does everyone assume love has to be a two-way street between two people?

Love is straightforward—it’s purely one person’s perception. You can call it an emotion or a state of being if you want, but at the end of the day, it’s just a single person's point of view.

I've seen this play out plenty of times. Believers love God—that’s a one-way street. Parents love their kids, yet those kids might struggle with hating their parents during certain phases of life, or vice versa. It's a one-way street.

When you love, *you* love. That is what love is. It doesn't mean your affection inherently requires someone else to love you back. Similarly, someone can love YOU without you necessarily feeling the same way about them. That doesn't make their love any less real.

You can't define, measure, or compare love because you can't get inside someone else's head to figure out what "love" actually means to them.

So, for the person doing the loving, love can feel like either a burden or a blessing—it all depends on whether they *feel* like the sentiment is being returned.

I see couples all the time who think they're in love, when really, they just have "reasons" to stay together. They aren't actually loving; they're just making excuses to stay in the relationship or justifying why they should break up because they don't feel "loved."

What does it actually mean to love?

I love, therefore I am—or I am loved, therefore I am!
ironrider11 ironrider11 Regular
391 messages
joined Oct 2020
#38 ·
Gerald Thompson62 said:Why does everyone assume love has to be a two-way street between two people?

Love is straightforward—it’s purely one person’s perception. You can call it an emotion or a state of being if you want, but at the end of the day, it’s just a single person's point of view.

I've seen this play out plenty of times. Believers love God—that’s a one-way street. Parents love their kids, yet those kids might struggle with hating their parents during certain phases of life, or vice versa. It's a one-way street.

When you love, *you* love. That is what love is. It doesn't mean your affection inherently requires someone else to love you back. Similarly, someone can love YOU without you necessarily feeling the same way about them. That doesn't make their love any less real.

You can't define, measure, or compare love because you can't get inside someone else's head to figure out what "love" actually means to them.

So, for the person doing the loving, love can feel like either a burden or a blessing—it all depends on whether they *feel* like the sentiment is being returned.

I see couples all the time who think they're in love, when really, they just have "reasons" to stay together. They aren't actually loving; they're just making excuses to stay in the relationship or justifying why they should break up because they don't feel "loved."

What does it actually mean to love?

I love, therefore I am—or I am loved, therefore I am!

So, how do you even define your own version of "one-way"...?
Gerald Thompson62 said:Why does everyone assume love has to be a two-way street between two people?

Love is straightforward—it’s purely one person’s perception. You can call it an emotion or a state of being if you want, but at the end of the day, it’s just a single person's point of view.

I've seen this play out plenty of times. Believers love God—that’s a one-way street. Parents love their kids, yet those kids might struggle with hating their parents during certain phases of life, or vice versa. It's a one-way street.

When you love, *you* love. That is what love is. It doesn't mean your affection inherently requires someone else to love you back. Similarly, someone can love YOU without you necessarily feeling the same way about them. That doesn't make their love any less real.

You can't define, measure, or compare love because you can't get inside someone else's head to figure out what "love" actually means to them.

So, for the person doing the loving, love can feel like either a burden or a blessing—it all depends on whether they *feel* like the sentiment is being returned.

I see couples all the time who think they're in love, when really, they just have "reasons" to stay together. They aren't actually loving; they're just making excuses to stay in the relationship or justifying why they should break up because they don't feel "loved."

What does it actually mean to love?

I love, therefore I am—or I am loved, therefore I am!

How is it even possible to define someone else's "one-sidedness," let alone your own? It’s probably just some deep-seated ambivalence... maybe a reactive formation where you overcompensate with this intense "one-sided love." Honestly, it makes me wonder if you even exist at all...
darkjackal7 darkjackal7 Member
38 messages
joined Jun 2011
#39 ·
Betty Fowler said:😠

Alright, since you’re asking for a full breakdown.

Tvoj upis:

Why do we avoid food just because it smells off? It’s simple: that scent is a built-in warning system telling you something isn't safe to eat. It's nature's way of protecting your health. I suppose suffering works the same way—it's a necessary part of survival.

First.
You’re comparing something you claim is a health hazard to something you argue is absolutely essential for survival. Is that really a fair comparison?

Another one.There isn’t a single shred of evidence to suggest that suffering is actually necessary for survival.

Third.Just because something smells bad doesn't mean it's actually a health hazard. Take roasted red pepper spread, for example—to me, that stuff smells absolutely terrible.

EDIT: Physical pain serves as a vital warning system; it’s absolutely necessary for survival. Emotional pain, on the other hand, is more of a side effect—a byproduct of our capacity for empathy, connection, and love. It's what allows us to function within a family or a community and ensures we continue to thrive as a species. But is it strictly necessary? Not really.
Psychopaths seem to navigate life quite easily without ever feeling emotional pain.

Sure, they "survive," but they’re essentially stunted. They hit a developmental dead end because they lack the very thing that drives growth: experience. And true experience requires navigating the full spectrum of human emotion. Without that friction—that sting of emotional pain—there is no catalyst for self-improvement or reaching a higher state of being. You can't climb the ladder if you refuse to feel the steps. It’s simple logic: you cannot truly grasp the concept of good without first understanding the reality of evil.
Jeremy Thomas8 Jeremy Thomas8 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Jul 2018
#40 ·
Nicholas Lee41 said:Love as an emotion, in every sense of the word.

To me, it’s a double-edged sword, though one side usually carries more weight—and honestly, most of the time, it feels like a curse. It’s the root of weakness, fear, sadness, and suffering; I can't help but feel all of that is just a byproduct of love. But then again, would it actually be better if I swapped it out for its total opposite? You know, hate? Or maybe just complete apathy?
I suppose it wouldn't, though. Even as much as it indirectly throws us curveballs, it seems to be the one thing that actually gives some color to an otherwise gray existence. You're stuck with it, with or without it, so I guess there's not much to be done about it.

I'm curious to hear what you guys think about this emotion—it's something that was glorified and mystified way too much in the past, and now, in the present day, it's constantly being oversimplified by laypeople using pseudo-evolutionary explanations.


Love is a feeling, a force, and because of that, it can act as both a curse and a blessing depending entirely on how you choose to channel it...

If you pour all that love into hatred, then you're going to end up with nothing but hate.
If you funnel all that love into suffering, then you'll just find yourself in pain.
But if you direct all that love toward kindness, that's when it truly becomes love.

Love is basically the engine that drives the state of being we want to inhabit....

TRUE LOVE ISN'T JUST A FEELING; IT'S A STATE OF BEING.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads