Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Moonduck · 12-08-2003, 07:55 AM

>> With each case one’s experience of love seems became more real. While from aside I can say that with each step the love became more instinctive.

I can see this, to an extent. I don't really see how it is relevant to the discussion at hand though, no offese intended. So love is instinctual *shrug*. Does that somehow lessen its' 'reality', or it's significance? Love is probably the single most powerful emotion we feel, and is frequently cited as reasoning behind some entirely bizarre and contra-instinctual acts. If it is instinctual, a concept that I do not doubt, then that provides better explanation for the facility with which it wreaks havoc upon higher reason.

We, or at least I, pride ourselves on being rational creatures. Yet even the most rational among us acts like a loon when falling in love. It is as if we are hard-wired to apprent lunacy when love walks in the room.

And why is it that I keeping seeing lyrics from love songs in this thread, my own posts even? ("when love walks in the room", in this very post)

>> - Relationship love is simply basic bonding that happens between sexual partners.

Agreed. In retrospect, and as I alluded to above, it is a pale shadow of more advanced stages of love.

>> - Love of one’s wife is the lust and infatuation we experience when we meet a potential mate.

More than that. It is the realization that this is the person that you should be spending the rest of your life with. It transcends lust in that, if it is truly the emotional level I am referring to (though explaining poorly), it will still be going strong far beyond the capacity for lust. In other words, she looks great now, but in 20 years, she'll look like her mother does now. If you're cool with that idea, your in love, or she has a really hot Mother.

>> - Love of one’s children is the paternal instinct to protect your genetic investment.

Only to an extent. There are far too many people that fail utterly to manifest this level of supposedly instinctual emotion. Yes, it is possible that they are as defective as my earlier post implied them to be, but the lack of sympathy for one's own offspring has become prevalent enough that I begin to wonder if the instinct is properly in place or if it has atrophied in our increasingly me-centered culture.

>> I am theorizing greatly of course. Nor am I denying that true love exists, simply trying to understand it.

I personally consider love to be, experientially, so contra-rational that it is almost impossible to thoroughly understand it. The quest is laudable of course, but I think doomed to failure. Love is so tightly wound with sentimentality and emotion that it would be virtually impossible to get good subjective rational impressions should you chose to research it via interview, and most of the treatises on love are written as art, muddying the waters there. Love is just not rational.

12-08-2003, 07:55 AM	#35 (permalink)
Moonduck Junkie Location: SE USA	>> With each case one’s experience of love seems became more real. While from aside I can say that with each step the love became more instinctive. I can see this, to an extent. I don't really see how it is relevant to the discussion at hand though, no offese intended. So love is instinctual shrug. Does that somehow lessen its' 'reality', or it's significance? Love is probably the single most powerful emotion we feel, and is frequently cited as reasoning behind some entirely bizarre and contra-instinctual acts. If it is instinctual, a concept that I do not doubt, then that provides better explanation for the facility with which it wreaks havoc upon higher reason. We, or at least I, pride ourselves on being rational creatures. Yet even the most rational among us acts like a loon when falling in love. It is as if we are hard-wired to apprent lunacy when love walks in the room. And why is it that I keeping seeing lyrics from love songs in this thread, my own posts even? ("when love walks in the room", in this very post) >> - Relationship love is simply basic bonding that happens between sexual partners. Agreed. In retrospect, and as I alluded to above, it is a pale shadow of more advanced stages of love. >> - Love of one’s wife is the lust and infatuation we experience when we meet a potential mate. More than that. It is the realization that this is the person that you should be spending the rest of your life with. It transcends lust in that, if it is truly the emotional level I am referring to (though explaining poorly), it will still be going strong far beyond the capacity for lust. In other words, she looks great now, but in 20 years, she'll look like her mother does now. If you're cool with that idea, your in love, or she has a really hot Mother. >> - Love of one’s children is the paternal instinct to protect your genetic investment. Only to an extent. There are far too many people that fail utterly to manifest this level of supposedly instinctual emotion. Yes, it is possible that they are as defective as my earlier post implied them to be, but the lack of sympathy for one's own offspring has become prevalent enough that I begin to wonder if the instinct is properly in place or if it has atrophied in our increasingly me-centered culture. >> I am theorizing greatly of course. Nor am I denying that true love exists, simply trying to understand it. I personally consider love to be, experientially, so contra-rational that it is almost impossible to thoroughly understand it. The quest is laudable of course, but I think doomed to failure. Love is so tightly wound with sentimentality and emotion that it would be virtually impossible to get good subjective rational impressions should you chose to research it via interview, and most of the treatises on love are written as art, muddying the waters there. Love is just not rational.