Love? What does it mean to you?

Post Reply New Topic

I know I'm posting a question that is extremely broad and general, the abstract term of love can not be simply defined in black and white, it is an idea that has different meanings to different people.

Personally, I do believe in the idea of "love", that it does exist and that if it wasn't for "love", I wouldn't have been created. This being said, I can't even come close to understanding what this feeling that makes people feel overly happy and content (I am speaking in the sense of romantic love, not brotherly love/family love/friend love). I often feel like a scientist trying to understand the grunts and moans of gorillas.

I also believe that although love does exist, I consider it as a "joke" when it pertains to me because I've been single 21 years now. If you've been single as long as I have, you can fully understand what loneliness is, and after a while you ask yourself "Why do I even bother " Yet I am fascinated by the idea of love because people seem to understand it in ways I never thought before. Sure, I might be able to explain psychological aspects of it (like Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love), but theory is useless without a practical application.

So, I'd like to know what you deem as "love" and also if you've ever been in a romantic relationship, despite being autistic. Perhaps you can answer my question Thanks!

"Love, n. A temporary insanity curable by marriage or by removal of the patient from the influences under which he incurred the disorder. This disease is prevalent only among civilized races living under artificial conditions; barbarous nations breathing pure air and eating simple food enjoy immunity from its ravages. It is sometimes fatal, but more frequently to the physician than to the patient."

- Ambrose Bierce

Amusing, I'll give you points for cleverness. And even those "barbarous nations" engage in some form of love/expression of love, even if it as simplistic and primitive as sex. Unrequited love might be deadly if it makes one wish for death or release. Ambrose Pierce is more amusing than I previously thought.

This is going to sound a little aloof, by my definition of love is "to know".

That is to say, that everyone has worth, and if you just KNEW that, you would love them, by definition.

A little baby, for instance, is easy to love, because it is easy to know how valuable and precious they are. Only NT society complicates this.

Likewise, you cannot love someone you don't know, or misjudge.

[nitpick]

>> I have been single for 21 years

I am 40 years old, and was single from age 15 to today. From 15
or below I could not have dated anyway. Or so my parents said...

[/nitpick]

As long as we're making wise-ass love quotes...

Definition: 'Love' is making a shot to the knees of a target 120 kilometers away using an Aratech sniper rifle with a tri-light scope... Love is knowing your target, putting them in your targeting reticule, and together, achieving a singular purpose against statistically long odds. ~HK-47

I'm not really experienced enough to make this judgment, but I think love is an indulgence in raw chemical and neural stimulation, by extension of which an individual ultimately cares more about someone else than himself.

I (NT) recently asked my boyfriend (AS) why he rarely initiates an "I love you". He asked what I meant when I said it, which came as a surprise, though it was a perfectly valid question. Still, I needed a few minutes to think it over in order to put it into words. While I was trying to do that, he continued, "My definition: I care for you, I want good things for you, when you are happy it's the best thing in the world to see, I want you to be safe, I want to be with you. That's as simple as I can make it, there is more though, it is difficult to express." That was exactly what I wanted to say. He put it perfectly.

I've been pondering this question lately, so I read this article:

http://www.in-mind.org/issue-6/the-anatomy-of-love.html

and I found the glossary at the end to be entertaining and informative.

"I can't tell you what it is but I know it when I see it."

I say it when, and only when, I mean it.

well, it doesnt seem like the answer to your question. anyway, i can want all those things too, i can care and want to be with that person who i admire and revere so much, but there is something else, i saw an NT guy being very sad almost crying for not being able to be with his love, he bought an air ticket and flew after her to ask her in front of her parents to mary him so she would go back with him. i mean the connection to her was so strong there was nothing else in the world for them. it was like in one moment his entire world reduced to one person. i will never experience that.

Oh. It didn't seem relevant, but the answer to what I'd asked was that he was afraid I'd ask for a definition of it, and that it might not be the right one. Of course, there isn't a "right" one, but he phrases things like that quite often. Once we established that we did have the same idea, he began using it quite frequently.

I think I understand what you mean about watching someone who appears to be vastly more "in love"... almost like a scene from a movie, except that it's real life. However, I'm not sure that's the case. The guy who got on a plane to be with his girl clearly felt overwhelmed with love and the desire to be with her. He reacted spontaneously, which is, of course, very romantic. But does spontaneity necessarily make love more meaningful? What if (pre-flight-booking) the same guy was at home, desperately wanting to be with her (just as much as in the other scenario), but took a minute to think about what would be the best solution to the problem, and decided against getting on that plane for X reason. Maybe because he hadn't finished school and knew that it would be beneficial to her to finish his degree first for the sake of their future [insert anything else that's plausible]. Does the fact that he applied logic to being with his love in this instance mean his feelings aren't as strong? After all, he'd be sacrificing what he wants more than anything in order to make a better life for her later. My point is, if you tend to be more logical, you're less likely to do something spontaneous/reckless/romanticinthewayweseeitonscreen. It might not mean that you love any less, though. Just that you're able to see the big picture, and act accordingly.

I'll give the definition I've given in other threads:

Love is putting someone else before yourself.

Love to me is happiness. Love is taking a bullet for someone and
being ok with it, you want to take that bullet, better you then her.
Love is that feeling that makes me smile when i look into my girls
eyes and she says "i love you". Love is a many-splendored thing
Love is what makes me run out in the middle of the night in the rain
to get a hamburger, because my girl wants one - love is what makes
me act like a fool and love is also my fuel - love gives me ideas and
makes me create - its glorius - How i know i love someone? Easy,
if i care more about them as time passes, to me its love. It gets
stronger and deeper insted of fading away. I fall more and more
in love

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhzzpfN01sU

..and i love my mom and sister, but thats another story

edit----

Copyrights killed the vid i posted above
..so i`ll try with this, better then nothing, same tune
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jBsuN1w_ck[/youtube]

Last edited by ImTheGuyThatDidThat on 29 Aug 2008, 4:16 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Interesting answer and an amusing video from Moulin Rogue. True, I won't argue that love does bring happiness and an elevated feeling of euphoria, mainly because you know someone cares about you just as much as you care about them. However I pose the question "What is the defining line between love and mere infatuation?" I think many people are carried away by the intensity and desire of passion, or commonly referred to as infatuation, but concerning "love" it seems to be little more the emotional stimulation of excitement and impulsiveness. Robert Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love states that consummate/perfect love is commitment, passion, and intimacy combined. Without the stability of commitment, which leaves intimacy and passion, that kind of love = romantic love. Similarly just passion and no intimacy or commitment = infatuous love. I wonder if true love is for the older and more mature adults because they understand commitment, passion, and intimacy to a larger degree, and if love is just a delusion of infatuation among the young and impulsive?

Love is patient, curious, kind, supportive, passionate, demonstrative, quiet, embracing, evolving, alive, curative, powerful, subtle, does not judge, and does not demand. Love discovers new parts of the self, and of other; it is an experience. It is found in a touch, an inflection, a word, a glance. There is no form for love, lest it find itself limited. It is acceptance with desire, intimacy infused with thrall, profoundly different than anything else.


M.

It is a word like any other. And so is "destruction," which is what we're going to do to your planet.











(Sorry, couldn't resist... )