Is Love Truly Real? Perspectives from Science and Society

[franznietzsche]

One of the women I dated during my early years in university went on to pose for Playboy, after she and I had gone separate ways. She was feeling 'rebellious' and just did it. She then married one of the 'popular' guys from the university. I and others thought it was a big mistake.

Down the road, I ran into her at a university function after both of us had been married about one year. She was carrying her months old son with her, while her husband was off somewhere with his buddies. When I mentioned how great it was to be married, she responded "well for some people". After further brief disucssion, it was clear she was miserable. When I had dated her, she was studying Italian (already fluent in English and German), economics and international relations. She had planned a career in international business and finance. When I saw her years later, she had sacrificed all of her dreams for a man who didn't care or had no clue.

This is exactly what i don't want. What's the point of a "penthouse amazon" if she loses her independence? She then ceases to be who she is. I've never met a woman for whom this hasn't been a problem though--its one of the classical problems in feminist literature--how does a woman define herself? As a mother, a wife, a girlfriend, but does a woman ever define herself simply as 'Me'?

Any woman who does not define herself simply as 'me' and isntead defines herself in terms of her realtion to others fails to be a 'penthouse amazon', and is patently unattractive, IMO.

Love is based on mutual respect, honesty/truthfulness, loyalty. Without those attributes, Love does not exist.

By definition.

Also, mutual respect is only possible when a person has self-respect. From self-respect arises "do unto others, as you would others do unto you."

I disagree. In fact, i don't see any of the logic behind that.

I can't respect a person who isn't independent, who doesn't exist on her own. It just doesn't work.

A person who does not define themselves independent of those around them, particularly independent of myself, cannot be challenging or interesting. It just doesn't work. That woman you mentioned that you knew, she failed to define herself independently, and isntead defined herself in terms of her realtionship to her husband--her husband defined himself as independent of her--so of course she was going to be miserable.

BTW- lose the egotism

Again, i define myself as independent of others. I exist, whether or not people recognize it, i am who i am regardless of them. If everyone else died tomorrow, and i was the last human being, i would still be exactly who i am today.

To lose the egotism would be to lose that fundamental independence.

 

[The_Professional]

I have known quite several attractive women who would qualify as Penthouse Amazons, and all of them seem to have attracted the 'wrong' kind of men. Most have married and divorced at least once. Several now live alone.

Because most of these genetic celebrities have low self-esteem. And depending on how she was raise and her relationship with her dad, being involve with a bad boy is an unconscious way of giving the finger to her father.

 

[Astronuc]

To lose the egotism would be to lose that fundamental independence.

Actually, I am wondering whether or not you mean 'egoism' or 'egocentrism' as opposed to 'egotism'. The former being more self-centered as opposed to simply conceited.

Actually, in either case, the egoistic and egotistic persons are by definition 'dependent' on others to 'feed' their egos, i.e. egoists/egotists 'need' an audience.

To lose 'egoism' or 'egotism' is the true path to independence.

As for independence - successful relationships are based on "inter-dependence". My career is quite independent of my wife and family, however, my career enables me to support my family. My wife's work is independent of the family, but she uses her job to enhance the standard of living of the family. In other words, we both contribute to something in which we both share (example of mutuality).

As for "Penthouse amazons", I really dislike that term. The attractive women I knew did not go as far as exposing their most intimate anatomy to the world as do the women in magazines like Penthouse and Playboy. In fact, all the women I dated or new as friends were, and probably still are, quite modest. They just seem to have met the wrong men.

 

[JasonRox]

In fact, all the women I dated or new as friends were, and probably still are, quite modest. They just seem to have met the wrong men.

So you admit to being one of the "wrong men"?

 

[Astronuc]

So you admit to being one of the "wrong men"?

Actually, no.

I am on good terms with all the women I dated or knew as friends. I was honest and respectful, and perhaps too reserved.

As I was a university student, then graduate student, my future was uncertain, especially when I changed academic paths from physics to nuclear engineering. Accordingly, my relationships with my girlfriends were all on a friendly (platonic) basis.

In a couple of cases, I declined a level of intimacy for which I was simply not ready, because there was no commitment of marriage. What can I say, I am simply 'old-fashioned'. The women then broke the relationships at that point.

 

[The_Professional]

In a couple of cases, I declined a level of intimacy for which I was simply not ready, because there was no commitment of marriage. What can I say, I am simply 'old-fashioned'. The women then broke the relationships at that point.

This is a first in the history of mankind: A guy turning down playboy playmates! my hats off to you

Girls just want to have fun

 

[franznietzsche]

Actually, in either case, the egoistic and egotistic persons are by definition 'dependent' on others to 'feed' their egos, i.e. egoists/egotists 'need' an audience.

Thats narcissism. I don't need any one's approval to fuel my ego, i do that just fine on my own. I could be the only one left alive, i would still have the same mount everest sized ego.

As for independence - successful relationships are based on "inter-dependence".

I disagree. Interdependenc will tend towards co-dependence, especially with weak-willed people, and i ahve absolutely no interest in anyone who becomes co-dependent in a relationship, it kills any sort of attraction. If the relationship were to end right there, and who she is would change, because she chooses to define herself by her relationships to others, that is too dependent. It is a very fine line between inter-dependent and co-dependent, and one i would prefer to stay away from.

I thought of a better way to describe my opinion, and situation in this matter. Seen the movie Intolerable Cruelty?

Let's just say i feel like miles massey.

 

[the number 42]

i define myself as independent of others. I exist, whether or not people recognize it, i am who i am regardless of them. If everyone else died tomorrow, and i was the last human being, i would still be exactly who i am today.

To lose the egotism would be to lose that fundamental independence.

Keep the egotism/egoism/ergoschism or whatever, dude. If I was half as cool as you at 17 years old, I'd be several times the geezer I am today. Just keep being yourself.

 

[Polly]

Franz I'd clap my hands for everything you say on this post, but I can also cry for you for thinking that way, you will be a misfit and you will find that life and people can be very hard to anyone not willing to conform. Some people will try to crush you for the sheer reason that you by trying to be youself, makes them look bad. I know for I have been there. It's a sad sad world and I can cry a river. Nonetheless, we must have courage to do what we believe in and the wisdom to review and adjust. I'd say also, keep being you.

 

[franznietzsche]

Keep the egotism/egoism/ergoschism or whatever, dude. If I was half as cool as you at 17 years old, I'd be several times the geezer I am today. Just keep being yourself.

Why do i sense thinly veiled sarcasm?

 

[Monique]

I think that at the age of 17 one is hardly in a position to talk about love: these are feelings that develop over time and depend on other things besides infatuation. I do believe that some people will never experience true love, you've got to meet the right person and invest the right kind of energy.

Stress is stress, love is nothing special.

My conclusion? "Love" is cheap, and nothing special. It is as easily gotten as it is lost.

The fact that you've never experienced love, says that in fact love is hard to acquire. You're confusing love with infatuation. In my book, caring about someone is not cheap, truly bonding with someone is not easily gotten and won't be easily lost.

 

[franznietzsche]

The fact that you've never experienced love, says that in fact love is hard to acquire. You're confusing love with infatuation. In my book, caring about someone is not cheap, truly bonding with someone is not easily gotten and won't be easily lost.

Yes my statements are based on what i see in everyone else. The only way to make objective observations. I'm not going to base my understanding of an emotion on how i feel that emotion--that is subjective. I'm only interested in objective understandings of anything--the obvious universal that an outsider can see by watching someone else experience that emotion. And i know what i have seen.

Since all of you insist on bringing in whether or not I've ever felt love, i will say that once i felt what i would have qualified as love. It certainly wasn't lust, and you can call it infatuation, but i don't think so. Let's just say she was the only girl that ever met my criteria of being an equal and a challenge. Things just didn't work out unfortunately, despite my best efforts.

 

[Monique]

Yes my statements are based on what i see in everyone else. The only way to make objective observations.

Well, how do you evaluate the emotions of other people, and which group of people did you observe? True love is not ubiquitous.

 

[the number 42]

Why do i sense thinly veiled sarcasm?

Because you are a dipstick.

 

[franznietzsche]

Because you are a dipstick.

I <3 you too?

 

[the number 42]

I <3 you too?

Well it is Valentine's Day

 

[franznietzsche]

Well it is Valentine's Day

Will you be my valentine?

 

[the number 42]

Only if you have good taste in blokes

 

[the number 42]

Is it too late to rephrase that?

 

[the number 42]

Since all of you insist on bringing in whether or not I've ever felt love, i will say that once i felt what i would have qualified as love. It certainly wasn't lust, and you can call it infatuation, but i don't think so. Let's just say she was the only girl that ever met my criteria of being an equal and a challenge. Things just didn't work out unfortunately, despite my best efforts.

So which bit of love isn't real then? The bit where you don't both live happily ever after together, & have 2.4 kids? Love may not work out, but it doesn't mean its not real. It can be a real pain.

 

[Polly]

Don't think many of us have had the experience of being in love and in a depression at the same time, most of the time it felt like a joy secretly and slowly seeping through a thick layer of numb pain. Now that the depression is dissipating, I am starting to feel a die-hard anxiety wrestling with gentle euphoria, and I am but a stranger in my own world...love is real-ly unreal.

 

[the number 42]

...the Golden Rule - Do unto others as one would have done unto onself. (This does not apply to masochists).

If you make the assumption that what you like (e.g. Mozart) is what others will like (e.g. heavy metal fans) you'll soon find that 'doing unto others' can backfire more times than not. I was told the Golden Rule is 'see things from the other person's perspective'. If you try to find out what others like, and do that unto them, they'll be a lot happier about it.

Anyway, what have you got against masochists?

 

[Astronuc]

If you make the assumption that what you like (e.g. Mozart) is what others will like (e.g. heavy metal fans) you'll soon find that 'doing unto others' can backfire more times than not.

That is an misinterpretation of the rule. If one would not wish anyone to 'impose/force' their views/likes/dislikes/rules upon one, then do not do that to others.

I was told the Golden Rule is 'see things from the other person's perspective'.

Or, 'walk in the other's shoes.' Good perspective.

Anyway, what have you got against masochists?

Nothing, as long as they do not harm others.

 

[the number 42]

That is an misinterpretation of the rule. If one would not wish anyone to 'impose/force' their views/likes/dislikes/rules upon one, then do not do that to others.

So 'don't do unto others as you would not have them do unto you'. This is logical, but has the same problems e.g. if you made a living will stating that you didn't want to be resusitated in the event of certain conditions, then you wouldn't last long as a paramedic if you applied this rule to others. Unless I'm misinterpreting the rule again?

 

[franznietzsche]

So 'don't do unto others as you would not have them do unto you'. This is logical, but has the same problems e.g. if you made a living will stating that you didn't want to be resusitated in the event of certain conditions, then you wouldn't last long as a paramedic if you applied this rule to others. Unless I'm misinterpreting the rule again?

Its more misapplication than misinterpretation. your looking too much at the details. A person with a living will has one because they don't want to suffer. So being a paramedic making sure your patients don't suffer is a good thing.

 

[the number 42]

Its more misapplication than misinterpretation. your looking too much at the details. A person with a living will has one because they don't want to suffer. So being a paramedic making sure your patients don't suffer is a good thing.

Yeah, but isn't it just way too easy to come up with these 'misapplications'? If a rule is something that is expected to be broadly generalisable, then the 'do unto others' rule just has too many exceptions to be a proper rule. Its more of an advertising jingle, something that we learned as kids that sticks in our heads and we don't really question.

 

[Moonbear]

Yeah, but isn't it just way too easy to come up with these 'misapplications'? If a rule is something that is expected to be broadly generalisable, then the 'do unto others' rule just has too many exceptions to be a proper rule. Its more of an advertising jingle, something that we learned as kids that sticks in our heads and we don't really question.

You're actually arguing semantics of the "do unto others" rule? How about instead of arguing the semantics, embrace the actual intent of it. It doesn't mean to force your ways upon them (because you wouldn't want them to force their ways upon you), it means to respect them and their wishes the same way you'd want others to respect you and your wishes.

 

[the number 42]

You're actually arguing semantics of the "do unto others" rule? How about instead of arguing the semantics, embrace the actual intent of it. It doesn't mean to force your ways upon them (because you wouldn't want them to force their ways upon you), it means to respect them and their wishes the same way you'd want others to respect you and your wishes.

The "do unto" part suggests an action rather than an attitude, which colours the entire spirit of the saying. "Respect others and their wishes the same way you'd want others to respect you and your wishes" is much less prone to misinterpretation, but I prefer the more proactive "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them".

 

[franznietzsche]

Yeah, but isn't it just way too easy to come up with these 'misapplications'?

ONly because whoever worded it assumed people were obviously smarter than that.

If a rule is something that is expected to be broadly generalisable, then the 'do unto others' rule just has too many exceptions to be a proper rule. Its more of an advertising jingle, something that we learned as kids that sticks in our heads and we don't really question.

It wasn't an exception. It was a stupid interpretation of what a person wanted.

 

[the number 42]

ONly because whoever worded it assumed people were obviously smarter than that.

It wasn't an exception. It was a stupid interpretation of what a person wanted.

Ooh Nitchy, you are in a bad mood

 

[franznietzsche]

Ooh Nitchy, you are in a bad mood

When am i ever in a good mood?

 

[the number 42]

When am i ever in a good mood?

I can't argue with that. Nitchy, you need the love of a good woman. Or at least hmup a bad one.

 

[the number 42]

(PS Sorry - were you trying to kill this thread?)

 

[tribdog]

(PS Sorry - were you trying to kill this thread?)

lol, that's funny

 

[franznietzsche]

I can't argue with that. Nitchy, you need the love of a good woman. Or at least hmup a bad one.

I've *had* more than a few bad ones.

The good ones are no where to be found.

 

[the number 42]

I've *had* more than a few bad ones.

The good ones are no where to be found.

Have you considered the ancient practice on onanism, as a temporary measure of course.

 

[Polly]

The good ones are no where to be found.

A good woman with a fine mind, that's tough tough tough Franz. So far in my life I have only met one who measures up - a Taiwanese history major, sweet natured and highly evolved. Unfortunately for you she is married with two kids.

Ever considered learning Chinese and coming to China/Taiwan to explore? Most of us in Hong Kong though are superficial and frivolous/strong, cold and hard.

In the affairs of the heart, one does need tonnes and tonnes of luck.

 

[franznietzsche]

A good woman with a fine mind, that's tough tough tough Franz. So far in my life I have only met one who measures up - a Taiwanese history major, sweet natured and highly evolved. Unfortunately for you she is married with two kids.

I've met one. She's a psych major down at UCLA. Absolutely fascinating person she is. I love debating and arguing with her, because whenever we discuss philosophy, we always start from certain assumptions (everyone does), our world view. She's the only liberal I've ever met, who, if i accept her world view as a starting point, i will in fact arrive at the same conclusions as her. Of course, i don't accept her world view as correct, but that's a matter of opinion, world views are inherently a priori.

Furthermore, she's one of very few people I've ever met smart to actually understand that people having a different world view does not make them 'stupid' or 'morons', because world views are not something determined rationally--they are inherently assumed, on the basis of a value judgement, and all value judgements are a priori. There is no way to prove something is better than anything else (morally, ethically, etc.) without making an assumption. (a fundamental premise of Nietzsche's rejection of the concepts of good and evil as polar opposites).

Dear god. Look at this, just thinking about her gets me into a discourse on philosophy.

Problem with most women (most people to be fair, but I'm not interested in guys, so they're not an issue) is that they have nothing interesting to say or on their minds. She always does. WE can talk literature, philosophy, science, religion (i'm an atheist, she's a fairly devout christian) and its always interesting and captivating.

Ever considered learning Chinese and coming to China/Taiwan to explore? Most of us in Hong Kong though are superficial and frivolous/strong, cold and hard.

In the affairs of the heart, one does need tonnes and tonnes of luck.

Thailand maybe

Unfortunately luck is a rather scarce quantity, its like a zero sum game, for every person with x amount of good luck, there's a guy with x amount of bad luck (or a group of people with bad luck totaling x, but you get the idea).

 

[scarecrow]

Love is definitely an attraction of forces. I like to say that love is when you can feel the other person's heart pumping your own blood.

 

[The_Professional]

the right skill and some luck...

 

[Danger]

I was wondering how the hell this thread got so big, so fast, until I thought to look at the posting dates. I don't have time to read it, but if I may quote Harlan Ellison: "Love Ain't Nothin' But Sex Misspelled" (capitalized because it was a title). I don't actually believe that, but it makes as much sense as anything else.

 

[hypatia]

"Do you feel the wuv tonigh" William Hung

 

[Danger]

"Do you feel the wuv tonigh" William Hung

I did, until you went to sleep on me.
What are you doing up again so soon?

 

[motai]

Problem with most women (most people to be fair, but I'm not interested in guys, so they're not an issue) is that they have nothing interesting to say or on their minds. She always does. WE can talk literature, philosophy, science, religion (i'm an atheist, she's a fairly devout christian) and its always interesting and captivating.

franznietzsche, from my past experiences those qualities are extremely rare in people nowadays. I can't talk to girls for less than a minute without losing their attention. Most of the time, they are the extremely superficial type "Oh my GOD! Did you see what she wore today??!" that I don't get along with very well. Everything else glazes over their heads and its difficult to maintain conversation. I am just looking for someone who would actually care about me, without ulterior agendas, without monetary interference, and someone who I can talk without about anything, anytime. Its not much, but so far it has been extremely difficult.

Oh, and adding to my bad luck, I have only personally met two girls who fit your descriptions, and both have boyfriends . Erggghhhh. Life sucks like that. Further compounded by the fact that I have a lot of pent up compassion that I want to express, but have not the means to do so.

 

[franznietzsche]

franznietzsche, from my past experiences those qualities are extremely rare in people nowadays. I can't talk to girls for less than a minute without losing their attention. Most of the time, they are the extremely superficial type "Oh my GOD! Did you see what she wore today??!" that I don't get along with very well. Everything else glazes over their heads and its difficult to maintain conversation. I am just looking for someone who would actually care about me, without ulterior agendas, without monetary interference, and someone who I can talk without about anything, anytime. Its not much, but so far it has been extremely difficult.

Oh, and adding to my bad luck, I have only personally met two girls who fit your descriptions, and both have boyfriends . Erggghhhh. Life sucks like that. Further compounded by the fact that I have a lot of pent up compassion that I want to express, but have not the means to do so.

WEll she's the only one I've met so far, and she had a boyfriend when i met her, though that certainly didn't stop me from trying. A year and a half later, it looks like things are finally starting to work out--well, as much as they ever have. WE're still some 250 miles apart, but things are looking much better right now than at any point before.

And as for the superficial types, i know what you mean. I've basically come up with a number of subtle jokes and allusions i always use on first dates--if she doesn;t get them, I'm not wasting my time with a second date. Needless to say, i haven't had a second date since going away to college.

 

[faust9]

"Do you feel the wuv tonigh" William Hung

"This concept of 'wuv' confuses and infuriates us!" Lur, Ruler of the planet
Omicron Persei 8

 

[motai]

WEll she's the only one I've met so far, and she had a boyfriend when i met her, though that certainly didn't stop me from trying. A year and a half later, it looks like things are finally starting to work out--well, as much as they ever have. WE're still some 250 miles apart, but things are looking much better right now than at any point before.

In my case its more like 1500 miles...

And as for the superficial types, i know what you mean. I've basically come up with a number of subtle jokes and allusions i always use on first dates--if she doesn;t get them, I'm not wasting my time with a second date. Needless to say, i haven't had a second date since going away to college.

I tend to do that when I first meet people just to see who they are like, its pretty much the only way I am able to find friends anymore.

 

[hypatia]

wuv is a many splendor thing faust9

 

[Monique]

people having a different world view does not make them 'stupid' or 'morons', because world views are not something determined rationally [..] There is no way to prove something is better than anything else (morally, ethically, etc.)
[..]
Problem with most women is that they have nothing interesting to say or on their minds.

That is some superficiality on your side. They have nothing interesting to say, since you are not interested in them. When I talk to other people, I notice that they've got a lot of interesting things to say (ask the right questions and listen). Being big-headed and a know-it-all really puts off people to share their views.

Notice in your quote how you look down on women, while you just stated that you shouldn't judge.

 

[Danger]

wuv is a many splendor thing faust9

Wuv is nice, but thex doesn't cost as much.

Incidentally, git thee down to "Old TV Shows" #27.