CheckEmoji Community Β· the emoji forum
🏠 Home πŸ†• What's new ❓ Unanswered πŸ”₯ Popular πŸ“‘ RSS Members πŸ‘₯ 0 online log in Β· register
Home › Society › Philosophy › Love and Loving

Love and Loving

Started by Jack Wood43 · · πŸ‘ 7 views · 45 replies

πŸ“‘ Subscribe to replies

Participants Jack Wood43Chris Peterson53velvetbadger59AJonathan Brooks8Brenda Thomas2Hannah Thomas13steeleagle2swiftcobra15briskgull27mistyscout2Douglas Hernandez3silentsailor63Michelle Lewis2Harold James9Elizabeth Ruiz65William Gonzalez3Sean Harris3silverhawk11Mark Howard11Charles Anderson7Amanda Jackson6Tyler Evans4
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#21 ·
insaninside said:It honestly baffles me that we aren't seeing more takes on love. Haven't philosophers tackled this enough already?πŸ˜•

What really gets me, though, is that the person who started this thread hasn't actually contributed anything meaningful about love in response to all these posts. And then, they have the nerve to wonder if there isn't anyone "intellectual" around to lend a handβ€”and then they expect us to forgive them for it... It’s pretty bold to keep acting surprised that there aren't more discussions on love.πŸ™‚
Jonathan Brooks8 Jonathan Brooks8 Active Member
233 messages
joined Feb 2007
#22 ·
Anonymous said:What really gets me, though, is that the person who started this thread hasn't actually contributed anything meaningful about love in response to all these posts. And then, they have the nerve to wonder if there isn't anyone "intellectual" around to lend a handβ€”and then they expect us to forgive them for it... It’s pretty bold to keep acting surprised that there aren't more discussions on love.πŸ™‚

A true passion for replies, I suppose...😁
Harold James9 Harold James9 Active Member
76 messages
joined Mar 2008
#23 ·
Jack Wood43 said:Does love come before the act of loving?

Or what exactly is the origin pointπŸ˜•?

Love is when you:
- find yourself mesmerized by wild mushrooms on the edge of an Oregon forest πŸ™‚ ,
- enjoy a bright, sunny day while out clay pigeon shooting πŸ™‚ ,
- your family snuggles under blankets watching TV just so you can sit at your computer with the balcony door open for a smoke πŸ™‚ ,
- embrace laughter and feel grief during tears. πŸ™‚

Simply put, love is connecting with everything and everyone.πŸ™‚

And loving?

I love many things, especially: osso buco topped with orange zest and shredded carrots, paired with a glass of Dingač. πŸ™‚

πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚
steeleagle2 steeleagle2 Member
37 messages
joined Dec 2006
#24 ·
Anonymous said:What really gets me, though, is that the person who started this thread hasn't actually contributed anything meaningful about love in response to all these posts. And then, they have the nerve to wonder if there isn't anyone "intellectual" around to lend a handβ€”and then they expect us to forgive them for it... It’s pretty bold to keep acting surprised that there aren't more discussions on love.πŸ™‚

πŸ‘ Jack Wood43, look at what you're doing. You're one of mine and I'm not letting you go. But viviana makes a fair point. Sorry.

When someone starts a thread, they have an obligation to nurture it, to tend to it, to baby itβ€”as if it were love itself. Or perhaps, just affection?πŸ™„ πŸ™‚ 😘
briskgull27 briskgull27 Regular
712 messages
joined Jan 2007
#25 ·
Is love just a temporary illusion we cling to to ensure the survival of our species? And if you aren't sleeping with someone, does that mean they don't really count as part of your life either?
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#26 ·
Harold James9 said:πŸ™‚

πŸ™‚πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚

πŸ™‚ Sorry if this is a bit off-topic, I just have to sayβ€”I’m definitely the one who'd fall for this. πŸ™‚

Thanks. πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚

@briskgull27, honestly, beautiful kids are born all the time without love being part of the equation. If the survival of the human race actually depended on love (or "loving," as Jack Wood43 put it), our planet would be a whole lot emptier than it is right now.
Harold James9 Harold James9 Active Member
76 messages
joined Mar 2008
#27 ·
Anonymous said:πŸ™‚ Sorry if this is a bit off-topic, I just have to sayβ€”I’m definitely the one who'd fall for this. πŸ™‚

Thanks. πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚

@briskgull27, honestly, beautiful kids are born all the time without love being part of the equation. If the survival of the human race actually depended on love (or "loving," as Jack Wood43 put it), our planet would be a whole lot emptier than it is right now.

True, but they have a much easier time becoming great people when they grow up surrounded by love.

πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#28 ·
Harold James9 said:True, but they have a much easier time becoming great people when they grow up surrounded by love.

πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚

I honestly don't have anything else to addβ€”it’s just the truth. πŸ™‚

My point was actually responding to briskgull27's idea that love is just a temporary illusion designed to keep the species going. After all, a species can propagate without love, provided we don't view the act of love and the biological drive to reproduce as one and the same (unless, of course, they happen to be).

To me, I believe love has a much deeper, more demanding purpose: its calling is to teach us how to truly live, a lesson we continue to learn as long as we're breathing.
Elizabeth Ruiz65 Elizabeth Ruiz65 Active Member
66 messages
joined Jan 2008
#29 ·
Anonymous said:I honestly don't have anything else to addβ€”it’s just the truth. πŸ™‚

My point was actually responding to briskgull27's idea that love is just a temporary illusion designed to keep the species going. After all, a species can propagate without love, provided we don't view the act of love and the biological drive to reproduce as one and the same (unless, of course, they happen to be).

To me, I believe love has a much deeper, more demanding purpose: its calling is to teach us how to truly live, a lesson we continue to learn as long as we're breathing.


If the primitive ancestor of man hadn't harbored a sense of compassion for every single one of those millions of beasts
that were actively trying to kill him, would we even be standing here today? Even if it doesn't fit the typical
romanticized mold, it wasn't just affection that brought humanity to this point. It’s more
about an inherent love for existence itself and a fundamental hatred for anyone attempting to extinguish that life.
Harold James9 Harold James9 Active Member
76 messages
joined Mar 2008
#30 ·
Elizabeth Ruiz65 said:If the primitive ancestor of man hadn't harbored a sense of compassion for every single one of those millions of beasts
that were actively trying to kill him, would we even be standing here today? Even if it doesn't fit the typical
romanticized mold, it wasn't just affection that brought humanity to this point. It’s more
about an inherent love for existence itself and a fundamental hatred for anyone attempting to extinguish that life.

Where exactly did you get this hatred for creatures trying to survive?πŸ˜•
image
As history shows, individual agency has always been the true engine of progress.πŸ™‚

Humanity only truly accelerated once we realized that hatred is a dead end.

I'm not saying hate doesn't exist, but it's nothing more than a primitive defense mechanism for the weak. There is no room for hate in true advancement and power.

πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚
Elizabeth Ruiz65 Elizabeth Ruiz65 Active Member
66 messages
joined Jan 2008
#31 ·
Harold James9 said:Where exactly did you get this hatred for creatures trying to survive?πŸ˜•
image
As history shows, individual agency has always been the true engine of progress.πŸ™‚

Humanity only truly accelerated once we realized that hatred is a dead end.

I'm not saying hate doesn't exist, but it's nothing more than a primitive defense mechanism for the weak. There is no room for hate in true advancement and power.

πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚

Sure, you can interpret that image through your lens, but isn't it also possible it served
as a warning to cave dwellers about which predator was hunting them, so they knew
what to watch out for while foraging? It's basically the prehistoric version of a modern-day
"Wanted" poster taped to a telephone pole featuring some thief or serial killer.

Actually, I’d argue humanity only reached its current stage
after systematically crushing anyone who dared to get in its way.

😁
Jack Wood43 Jack Wood43 MemberOP
10 messages
joined Nov 2006
#32 ·
Anonymous said:What really gets me, though, is that the person who started this thread hasn't actually contributed anything meaningful about love in response to all these posts. And then, they have the nerve to wonder if there isn't anyone "intellectual" around to lend a handβ€”and then they expect us to forgive them for it... It’s pretty bold to keep acting surprised that there aren't more discussions on love.πŸ™‚

Look, I’ve seen some high-level debates on other topics in this sub, maybe something about mythology or history, where people actually know how to carry a conversation.

That’s why it’s so jarring that such a seemingly trivial question hasn't sparked a response that would satisfy anyone looking for quality.

Everyone is busy venting, but I'm starting to notice a pattern: it seems like any positive take on love is negatively correlated with having an education or academic intelligence.

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the impression I'm getting.πŸ˜• πŸ˜•

.
swiftcobra15 swiftcobra15 Regular
305 messages
joined Dec 2002
#33 ·

I’m a big fan of sautΓ©ed kale, sci-fi, swimming, deep conversations, playing pinball, haiku, and even mushrooms...
Liking something is a positiveβ€”and quite often possessiveβ€”connection to a person or an object.



Love, on the other hand, is an orientation toward the world itself, rooted in unconditional acceptance and total devotion.
It can be centered on one specific person or phenomenon without shutting out the rest of existence, but we shouldn't mistake it for mere infatuation or simple passion.


πŸ™‚
William Gonzalez3 William Gonzalez3 Regular
276 messages
joined May 2009
#34 ·
possessiveness isn't really about the relationship itselfβ€”it’s about the individual.

In other words, I suppose possessiveness isn't an inherent quality of love, but rather a trait of the person involved.
Selfless people are capable of loving without being possessive.
Though, honestly, those kinds of couples are incredibly rareβ€”and frankly, most people don't even gravitate toward them because they can seem a bit too perfect compared to the rest of us.
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#35 ·
swiftcobra15 said:

...but that relationship involves a not-so-easy road to actually reaching that state of unconditional acceptance and devotion. It isn't easy; much like any other discipline, we have to keep learning, over and over again... πŸ™‚ personally, I think the most beautiful way to describe this connection to the world is through that one post of yours where you shared those lines from "White Tower." I'm going to share them here again, because repetition is the mother of all learning...

Count the pebbles of your fears and desires at the bottom of your pocket.
Then call Me to a game where you dare to lose,
just so you might win in My name.
Cast the first stone, and do not flinch if it slips through your fingers:
For that is the stone of the fear of death. Let it fall to the earth; she is death-hungry,
her very life hangs upon it.
Cast the second stone, and do not try to catch it mid-air: for that is the stone
of the fear of loneliness. Let the chariots of space grind it into dust beneath their wheels.
Cast the third stone, and do not care if you miss: for it is the desire
for comfort, which the body craves.
Cast the fourth, and rejoice if it does not land in your palm, for it is the
desire for significance.
Cast the fifth pebble and feel like a winner when you lose it.
For that is the fear of loss.
Remain for a moment with an empty hand, wondering as you see
its lines clearly for the very first time.
"White Tower," Book 57
Sean Harris3 Sean Harris3 Newcomer
1 message
joined Feb 2007
#36 ·
Harold James9 said:Where exactly did you get this hatred for creatures trying to survive?πŸ˜•
image
As history shows, individual agency has always been the true engine of progress.πŸ™‚

Humanity only truly accelerated once we realized that hatred is a dead end.

I'm not saying hate doesn't exist, but it's nothing more than a primitive defense mechanism for the weak. There is no room for hate in true advancement and power.

πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚

I'm with you on that. But at the same time, when hate does bubble up, we have to face it head-onβ€”try to channel it, let it out...
Because if you just bottle it up inside, it's eventually going to destroy you.
silverhawk11 silverhawk11 Newcomer
6 messages
joined Feb 2007
#37 ·
Here’s how I see the whole thing.
To me, loving someone and being affectionate are basically the same thing... just different ways of saying it.
I tend to break love down into different buckets... like parental, friendship, romantic, sibling stuff... you know what I mean...
Plus, everyone loves differently. I don't think there's any kind of universal scale for it since we aren't all wired the same way.
I also feel like love just shifts shapes over time... Like, if you fall for someone at first sight and actually stick it out, that initial spark eventually turns into deep respect, trust, and friendship... it’s still love, just much deeper than the physical stuff.
Though... in some cases, it can turn into pure resentment over the years.
As for hating someone... I can't go there. To me, hating is just the absence of love, which brings us right back to where we started... loving...
Mark Howard11 Mark Howard11 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Feb 2007
#38 ·
Love and loving... hmm... honestly? It’s just another linguistic trick... we're basically using two different words to describe the exact same thingβ€”they're synonyms, plain and simple... I mean, saying you love someone versus actually being in loveβ€”unless we're talking about physical stuff, which, let's be real, isn't really what's being discussed hereβ€”it all boils down to the same core idea...

And that brings us right back to the big question: what even is love?
swiftcobra15 swiftcobra15 Regular
305 messages
joined Dec 2002
#39 ·

I’ve always felt that synonyms don't really need to exist, simply because reality offers an endless variety of relationships while our vocabulary remains so limited.


As I mentioned before, when I care about something, I have this deep-seated urge to own it, master it, and truly make use of it.

When it comes to love, my instinct is to serve and bring joy to the other person, rather than focusing on myself.

Mark Howard11 Mark Howard11 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Feb 2007
#40 ·
swiftcobra15 said:


Like I was saying before, when I care about something, I want to own it, manage it, really get my hands on it.

If I'm being affectionate, I just want to be there for the other person, you know? To make them happy, rather than focusing on myself.


You're totally right... honestly, you've got a point there... I guess I was just treating those two ideas as the exact same thing, but it never even crossed my mind that being affectionate is way closer to the concept of love than just "loving" someone... I wasn't really paying attention, I guess. Yeah, I see what you mean now...

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

πŸ”— Similar threads