Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Defining love

  1. Apr 21, 2006 #1
    The human concept of love has been something that has puzzled me for some time now, but I must admit I've many a time used those three words that by observation of the world around me seem meaningless ("I love you")

    I claim that words are a means of expressing thoughts, feelings, emotions, etc. to another person/people and without a proper agreement on the meaning of words, then the intended message cannot be conveyed. I also claim that if a common word such as "love" carries multiple ambiguous meanings, then it cannot convey an intended message to another person unless it is rigorously defined.

    What I would like to discuss is - 1)Should love be defined between two people? 2)Should this definition be more attributed to feelings/emotions or actions? 3)Does defining love lessen the meaning of it?

    I have opinions on all three of these and am excited to read all those who might reply. Thanks. :biggrin:

    Jameson
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 21, 2006 #2
    This is what i claim: Love in the meaning of -love for a woman- is a large flux of hormones in your brain.
    the other type of love, love for the others, poor, illed, nerd etc. is another thing, it's derivated from compassion and our unstoppable needing to make the others happy.
    however i think that a psychologist would answer better than anyone
     
  4. Apr 21, 2006 #3
    If love is simply a hormonal response to a member of the opposite sex than isn't that nothing more than an infatuation or a sexual drive? This is how I think most people consider love and why it isn't something that can help sustain long relationships.
     
  5. Apr 21, 2006 #4
    To say, "I love this or that", one must first understand the "I". To love is to value. It is the greatest tribute that the "I" pays to the "other".
     
  6. Apr 21, 2006 #5
    There is the love of hate. The love of no love. The love of self. The love of not loving the self. And so on.

    Love is synomonous with survival.
    If you didn't love yourself you'd be dead.
    So many people expend so much energy hating themselves, yet, they are living large and complex lives.
    This can only mean they are in love with life and with their ability to choose to hate, love, be indifferent etc.....

    Love is all you need.... and.... love is all you've got.

    Its a very twisted and contradictory view... but, when you boil it down... every thing is a result of love.

    How about Fear?

    Do we love fear? Do we love fear enough to contemplate it? Yes. Fear is an intense energy expenditure as well. Fear will get you out of a jam... keep you out of a jam.... and even get you through a jam. That's something to love about fear.

    Loving fear is paramount to survival.

    So... love, again... is the common denominator.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Defining love
  1. Love? (Replies: 5)

  2. Love (Replies: 33)

  3. Love (Replies: 3)

  4. Love (Replies: 40)

  5. For the love of! (Replies: 4)

Loading...