Did Your True Love Get Away?

  • 154 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Avatar image for mikethekiller
mikethekiller

9915

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#101  Edited By mikethekiller

I have yet to encounter true love.

Avatar image for tomlikesfries
tomlikesfries

5341

Forum Posts

3102

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 106

User Lists: 3

#102  Edited By tomlikesfries

@Sexy Merc said:

Long story but I'll keep it short. There was this girl who I knew since we were kids. I never thought of her as any more than a friend up until high school. We started spending a lot of time together during our sophomore year; we had our first session together in my garage, she never blazed before. I still remember that day like it was last week. Anyway, we pretty much spent a lot of the year together (especially summer) which was pretty difficult to do in high school. I was on the basketball team all 4 years and she was just that really cute/pretty, well dressed, smart girl. A lot of the girls in our school were jealous of her, you know how some HS chicks get ... But anyway everything was going well, I was her first - we had a lot of first times that year - thought this was really going somewhere, but there was some conflict (not going to get into specifics) we had and we broke up near October of our 3rd year. I was really young, dumb, and reckless back then. I cared about her a lot, but just the life and mindset I was living at the time, I didn't care about many other people aside from my closest friends. We graduated and everything and went to different universities. We talked occasionally, my mom always liked her and wanted me to work things out with her, but I just didn't really care much in my first year of uni. A lot of women there, big step up from HS, had the same level of popularity as in HS and was well-known around, but I made some bad decisions. I just wasn't satisfied with any of the women there, they were all different but all the same ... they just weren't her. Fast forward a year later and we talked again heart to heart at a place we both remembered very well. I brought some of her favourite stuff too, and just had this whole thing planned. We got back together and everything was going fine. This was the woman I wanted to spend the rest of my life with; I knew it for sure. No other person made me feel the same way I did when I was with her. She was in a program that would take her into med school, but for her last 2 years she needed to leave the country and study abroad to finish her program. I was heartbroken, didn't know what was going to happen. The place she was going to had two of the most prestigious med schools as well, and I was sure she was planning on just staying there. I wasn't ready to put any sort of commitment into moving with her, leaving my family and friends for that ch~t, and not being able to physically see her for that long, it would just be unbearable, so I broke it off. She stayed their for one year and we barely talked for that whole span. I hated it, I don't like having to talk to her like nothing happened. I don't like having to send something by her and pretend like we don't know each other. You know, that's just not the way it should be. I really felt like I lost her at that point, but the difference since I was in high school is that I knew what I wanted, and I knew what was important/real to me. So one reading week I had, I visited her without her knowing. Her friends kept her updated sort of with how I was doing, she just never really straight up asked much about it. It was hard times, you know, when she opened that door ... It was just a really emotional day, and following days. We worked through A LOT of stuff, we worked hard on future plans, past mistakes, we literally talked for like 15 hours straight one day, just her and I. We had everything planned out, and were both committed. She finished one year there, and managed to finish her last year through a uni linked to one of the better med schools we have here. She got accepted, I graduated, and we're both living together in a very nice home my parents used to own. A lot of the mortgage, loans, and other financial aspects of it were given to us at very reasonable rates with a lot of it already paid off. Present time now, and I'm going to ask her to marry me next year. That was lengthier than I thought it was going to be ... oh well. Cliffs: Don't be that little b~tch, the weak/whiny one, who loses his/her opportunity for a person they care about due to your own problems. Don't break mentally at those points when you think it's getting too tough. You really don't know how special what you got is until it's too late sometimes. Don't be that passive person who always feels sorry for themselves or prays one day to find that special someone. There are people who wish for things to happen, dream of those special romantic moments and lovers, those who want those things to happen or feel they will happen ... that's all bullsh~t. I've never been one to believe in the whole soul mate thing, even though she's making me really wonder. What we got was through hard work mentally, emotionally, just some of the hardest times in my life. Always be genuine, don't be a coward. Be one of the people who actually go out there make them happen, don't let is pass you by so easily.

Mother of God... is that what you call short lol?

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#103  Edited By minigunman123

@tomlikesfries said:

@Sexy Merc said:

Long story but I'll keep it short. There was this girl who I knew since we were kids. I never thought of her as any more than a friend up until high school. We started spending a lot of time together during our sophomore year; we had our first session together in my garage, she never blazed before. I still remember that day like it was last week. Anyway, we pretty much spent a lot of the year together (especially summer) which was pretty difficult to do in high school. I was on the basketball team all 4 years and she was just that really cute/pretty, well dressed, smart girl. A lot of the girls in our school were jealous of her, you know how some HS chicks get ... But anyway everything was going well, I was her first - we had a lot of first times that year - thought this was really going somewhere, but there was some conflict (not going to get into specifics) we had and we broke up near October of our 3rd year. I was really young, dumb, and reckless back then. I cared about her a lot, but just the life and mindset I was living at the time, I didn't care about many other people aside from my closest friends. We graduated and everything and went to different universities. We talked occasionally, my mom always liked her and wanted me to work things out with her, but I just didn't really care much in my first year of uni. A lot of women there, big step up from HS, had the same level of popularity as in HS and was well-known around, but I made some bad decisions. I just wasn't satisfied with any of the women there, they were all different but all the same ... they just weren't her. Fast forward a year later and we talked again heart to heart at a place we both remembered very well. I brought some of her favourite stuff too, and just had this whole thing planned. We got back together and everything was going fine. This was the woman I wanted to spend the rest of my life with; I knew it for sure. No other person made me feel the same way I did when I was with her. She was in a program that would take her into med school, but for her last 2 years she needed to leave the country and study abroad to finish her program. I was heartbroken, didn't know what was going to happen. The place she was going to had two of the most prestigious med schools as well, and I was sure she was planning on just staying there. I wasn't ready to put any sort of commitment into moving with her, leaving my family and friends for that ch~t, and not being able to physically see her for that long, it would just be unbearable, so I broke it off. She stayed their for one year and we barely talked for that whole span. I hated it, I don't like having to talk to her like nothing happened. I don't like having to send something by her and pretend like we don't know each other. You know, that's just not the way it should be. I really felt like I lost her at that point, but the difference since I was in high school is that I knew what I wanted, and I knew what was important/real to me. So one reading week I had, I visited her without her knowing. Her friends kept her updated sort of with how I was doing, she just never really straight up asked much about it. It was hard times, you know, when she opened that door ... It was just a really emotional day, and following days. We worked through A LOT of stuff, we worked hard on future plans, past mistakes, we literally talked for like 15 hours straight one day, just her and I. We had everything planned out, and were both committed. She finished one year there, and managed to finish her last year through a uni linked to one of the better med schools we have here. She got accepted, I graduated, and we're both living together in a very nice home my parents used to own. A lot of the mortgage, loans, and other financial aspects of it were given to us at very reasonable rates with a lot of it already paid off. Present time now, and I'm going to ask her to marry me next year. That was lengthier than I thought it was going to be ... oh well. Cliffs: Don't be that little b~tch, the weak/whiny one, who loses his/her opportunity for a person they care about due to your own problems. Don't break mentally at those points when you think it's getting too tough. You really don't know how special what you got is until it's too late sometimes. Don't be that passive person who always feels sorry for themselves or prays one day to find that special someone. There are people who wish for things to happen, dream of those special romantic moments and lovers, those who want those things to happen or feel they will happen ... that's all bullsh~t. I've never been one to believe in the whole soul mate thing, even though she's making me really wonder. What we got was through hard work mentally, emotionally, just some of the hardest times in my life. Always be genuine, don't be a coward. Be one of the people who actually go out there make them happen, don't let is pass you by so easily.

Mother of God... is that what you call short lol?

Dafuq are you guys doing, posting thoughtful responses on the internet? *Goes back to being a nub at HALO for the PC, like all good internet dwellers do.*

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123: Mine are better. That guy's chest suck. Teehee

Anyway, in all seriousness "Love" is such a profound and impacting feeling that for centuries people have been trying to understand it and there are hundreds of theories explaining it. But it's still topping the list of psychological pains the mankind suffers. Here I want to explain my idea of love.

Simply put, love is nothing but a liking beyond limit.

When you don't just like something, but like it “very much”, you say you “love” it. Love is the heightened state of liking. Nothing else. In case of interpersonal love, there are numerous reasons why you may feel love for someone. Note that there's no difference between “love” and “attraction”. You are attracted to the person you love. Few of the reasons for being attracted to someone are beauty, body language, sex appeal, nature, intelligence etc. Because of these or any of the countless other reasons you may develop an intense liking for some person. Whatever the reason be, nothing is wrong about it. Liking something is a pleasure. Like watching a flower is a pleasure. Or facing cool breeze on a mountain-top is a pleasurable experience. Love, too, is a pleasurable experience. The very natural characteristics of love are a feeling of compassion and care. That naturally comes because, of course, you would not like offending and thereby risk losing someone who gives you that pleasurable experience. It's like when you hold a delicate flower how it naturally occurs to you to hold it with care. That's because of love.

That's love. Love is a pleasurable experience of being in admiration of something or someone. The important thing to understand here is that it's those abstract things – beauty, body language, sex appeal, nature, intelligence etc – which are giving you this experience, and the object in concern (the person) is just a medium. You know that you can fall in love more than once. You have probably experienced this yourself. This very well proves that it's not the object but the qualities carried by the object which inspire love. It's a fallacy of human mind, or rather a weakness, that every time one is in love with someone one believes that this person is the best one could have and that this love was “meant to be” and the things like that.

Love is a magic in itself. This magic has nothing to do with the object of love. When you become obsessed with the object, love is no more love but a disease.

When I say “love is a magic in itself, and this magic has nothing to do with the object of love”, what I mean is that all the pleasure you derive out of love is in the act of loving itself. You love a flower because of its beauty and fragrance. They are not the object (which is the flower) but the qualities carried by the object. But in expression you say you love the flower. Then I have said “when you become obsessed with the object, love is no more love but a disease.” You love the flower. Now you become obsessed with it. But flower is a mortal thing. Prone to change. After a couple of days it's ugly. Now you grieve over it. No. Don't. Look there in the garden outside there are thousands of flowers spreading their beauty and fragrance. Once you see it you will again fall in love with some other flower. Because it was not the flower but the beauty of it which was captivating. It's the beauty which is eternal and everlasting and not the object.

An aware person would know this fact. Understand why you love. Identify the qualities in the object because of which your love for it is. And know that the object is just a medium. Don't be obsessed with the object, because it will not remain. Just like the flower does not remain. If you cling to the object there will be pain. Hence I call this sort of love, obsessive love, a disease.

There's nothing wrong if the flower remains for life. But the awareness of the essence of love is necessary. I would say ninety-nine percent of the people are ignorant. They get committed to the person they love. Then gradually as the flower loses its fragrance, the person loses those qualities, but still they cling to each other, only because they have lost the strength to be on their own again. Love is impossible in such a case. Then the only resort to keep from going mad is creating illusions. People then form illusions that love still is. But such love of illusion is not beautiful.

Romance is sorta of a joke of nature. By "'joke" I did not mean Nature's mechanism of ensuring the offspring's survival chances. That's indeed very sensible. What I referred to is what people unaware of this mechanism feel about romantic love. Things like, meant-to-be partners, forever-together, soul-mates etc etc and the unrealistic expectations thereof.

They don't even know that their love isn't based on reason, but is the outcome of "brain chemistry" (that's why the saying, love knows no reasons). People fall in romantic love even with those who don't possess likable qualities otherwise (and even with those they don't know!). And when the effect of romantic love wanes, they wonder what went wrong!

Romantic love is like strong intoxication. In the peak of the experience, it gives immense pleasure and happiness but stagnates one's development in every way. Like the whole purpose of life was to feel just this. Every other thing creases to matter. Life comes to a standstill. A string of monotonous, though euphoric, moments passing one after another. Same thoughts. Same images. Nothing else is visible to the mind but the object of fixation...

And towards what end? Whatever the "victim" is deluded with, the only purpose behind romantic love is mating and reproduction. NOTHING ELSE. It's Nature's requirement and we are used to carry it out. With such cruelty! How magnificent the trap! And who says Nature isn't marvelous!

People write poems, sing songs, create all sorts of art around love. They say love is sacred, love is God, love is this, love is that... Pity! Love, romantic love, is the most outrageous joke Nature plays with humans.

Do I sound like I am against romantic love? Actually, no. I am against no indulgence as such; for there's no point in fighting Nature. It's just about being aware of the truth. Only when you know the truth of any suffering, you get the power to choose not to suffer, to an extent.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#105  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123: Mine are better. That guy's chest suck. Teehee

Anyway, in all seriousness "Love" is such a profound and impacting feeling that for centuries people have been trying to understand it and there are hundreds of theories explaining it. But it's still topping the list of psychological pains the mankind suffers. Here I want to explain my idea of love.

Simply put, love is nothing but a liking beyond limit.

When you don't just like something, but like it “very much”, you say you “love” it. Love is the heightened state of liking. Nothing else. In case of interpersonal love, there are numerous reasons why you may feel love for someone. Note that there's no difference between “love” and “attraction”. You are attracted to the person you love. Few of the reasons for being attracted to someone are beauty, body language, sex appeal, nature, intelligence etc. Because of these or any of the countless other reasons you may develop an intense liking for some person. Whatever the reason be, nothing is wrong about it. Liking something is a pleasure. Like watching a flower is a pleasure. Or facing cool breeze on a mountain-top is a pleasurable experience. Love, too, is a pleasurable experience. The very natural characteristics of love are a feeling of compassion and care. That naturally comes because, of course, you would not like offending and thereby risk losing someone who gives you that pleasurable experience. It's like when you hold a delicate flower how it naturally occurs to you to hold it with care. That's because of love.

That's love. Love is a pleasurable experience of being in admiration of something or someone. The important thing to understand here is that it's those abstract things – beauty, body language, sex appeal, nature, intelligence etc – which are giving you this experience, and the object in concern (the person) is just a medium. You know that you can fall in love more than once. You have probably experienced this yourself. This very well proves that it's not the object but the qualities carried by the object which inspire love. It's a fallacy of human mind, or rather a weakness, that every time one is in love with someone one believes that this person is the best one could have and that this love was “meant to be” and the things like that.

Love is a magic in itself. This magic has nothing to do with the object of love. When you become obsessed with the object, love is no more love but a disease.

When I say “love is a magic in itself, and this magic has nothing to do with the object of love”, what I mean is that all the pleasure you derive out of love is in the act of loving itself. You love a flower because of its beauty and fragrance. They are not the object (which is the flower) but the qualities carried by the object. But in expression you say you love the flower. Then I have said “when you become obsessed with the object, love is no more love but a disease.” You love the flower. Now you become obsessed with it. But flower is a mortal thing. Prone to change. After a couple of days it's ugly. Now you grieve over it. No. Don't. Look there in the garden outside there are thousands of flowers spreading their beauty and fragrance. Once you see it you will again fall in love with some other flower. Because it was not the flower but the beauty of it which was captivating. It's the beauty which is eternal and everlasting and not the object.

An aware person would know this fact. Understand why you love. Identify the qualities in the object because of which your love for it is. And know that the object is just a medium. Don't be obsessed with the object, because it will not remain. Just like the flower does not remain. If you cling to the object there will be pain. Hence I call this sort of love, obsessive love, a disease.

There's nothing wrong if the flower remains for life. But the awareness of the essence of love is necessary. I would say ninety-nine percent of the people are ignorant. They get committed to the person they love. Then gradually as the flower loses its fragrance, the person loses those qualities, but still they cling to each other, only because they have lost the strength to be on their own again. Love is impossible in such a case. Then the only resort to keep from going mad is creating illusions. People then form illusions that love still is. But such love of illusion is not beautiful.

Romance is sorta of a joke of nature. By "'joke" I did not mean Nature's mechanism of ensuring the offspring's survival chances. That's indeed very sensible. What I referred to is what people unaware of this mechanism feel about romantic love. Things like, meant-to-be partners, forever-together, soul-mates etc etc and the unrealistic expectations thereof.

They don't even know that their love isn't based on reason, but is the outcome of "brain chemistry" (that's why the saying, love knows no reasons). People fall in romantic love even with those who don't possess likable qualities otherwise (and even with those they don't know!). And when the effect of romantic love wanes, they wonder what went wrong!

Romantic love is like strong intoxication. In the peak of the experience, it gives immense pleasure and happiness but stagnates one's development in every way. Like the whole purpose of life was to feel just this. Every other thing creases to matter. Life comes to a standstill. A string of monotonous, though euphoric, moments passing one after another. Same thoughts. Same images. Nothing else is visible to the mind but the object of fixation...

And towards what end? Whatever the "victim" is deluded with, the only purpose behind romantic love is mating and reproduction. NOTHING ELSE. It's Nature's requirement and we are used to carry it out. With such cruelty! How magnificent the trap! And who says Nature isn't marvelous!

People write poems, sing songs, create all sorts of art around love. They say love is sacred, love is God, love is this, love is that... Pity! Love, romantic love, is the most outrageous joke Nature plays with humans.

Do I sound like I am against romantic love? Actually, no. I am against no indulgence as such; for there's no point in fighting Nature. It's just about being aware of the truth. Only when you know the truth of any suffering, you get the power to choose not to suffer, to an extent.

I reject your entire premise on the fact that I can love someone without liking them a drop. Attraction and infatuation are not love.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123: correction you do like something related to them in order to love them in order to love them. There are many different ways to deal with what you just said. Give me an example so I can disprove it(like an annoying nephew that you would protect at any cost or something). I need an example.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#107  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123: correction you do like something related to them in order to love them in order to love them. There are many different ways to deal with what you just said. Give me an example so I can disprove it(like an annoying nephew that you would protect at any cost or something). I need an example.

That sounds odd. "Give me an example of what you think, so I can disprove it!"

I don't even know what it is about that, I don't know how to describe it, but that sounds rather unpleasantly worded.

Anyway.

I'd sacrifice my life for anyone on ComicVine. Anyone at all. Pick one. Anyone. I'd do it, and I'd do it every single time I'm given the choice between me and them. However, there are some users I really dislike, and don't have much good to say about them. Yet I'd still do it.

Or, an Arabic terrorist, for one of the worst possible examples in today's society. Let's say that he's been captured, and some angry person is about to shoot him out of spite. I'd sacrifice my life for him. Why? Because he's already captured, he's already in trouble, he's no longer an immediate threat; people can't take the law into their own hands. I love everyone. People do shitty things, we all do, but at the end of the day, it really matters very little, in any religion or non-religion, including atheism, who dies and who lives, because according to any religion involving belief, they'll end up where they deserve/decide to end up; it's not my job to decide for them based on what they do on Earth. I'd sacrifice my life for virtually anyone else's.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123: I highly doubt you are referring to love now. This is not love, this is just you being sympathetic. I mean, come on, just because you are willing to help a random stranger and take a pistol whips for him, doesn't mean you love him. That should be clear enough. One might say you're a very "love-ly" person.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#109  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123: I highly doubt you are referring to love now. This is not love, this is just you being sympathetic. I mean, come on, just because you are willing to help a random stranger and take a pistol whips for him, doesn't mean you love him. That should be clear enough. One might say you're a very "love-ly" person.

Actually, it does. Philosophy and thousands of years of religion and human development is on my side, when I say that I love, or try to love but probably all too often fail, everyone, and that is why I would take a bullet or a bomb or a harpoon in the lung for them. You honestly don't have the correct definitions here, my friend.

Let me give you another example.

I love people so much, I don't push my religion on them because it will likely annoy them and turn them away from the religion overall, even though it's what I'm inclined to do at first, because I believe in Christianity firmly, and want everyone to be saved.

Another one.

God defines love quite clearly and as I've said before a few times, many philosophers that aren't even Christian, agree with how love is deeper than merely liking, approving or seducing someone or something.

Now, for the logical, religion-free portion of the post:

You say that love can be anyone's definition, yet you think I'm not talking about love because you don't think it sounds like love. You've changed your argument around a bit, from what I can tell. Correct?

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123: I knew something was off. Something tells me you aren't basing your argument on philosophy but on verses like these: "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13 I could be wrong, I barely know enough about christianity to say so.

but that's O.K too.

Oh, and I have not changed my argument. I just wanted to dig deeper in your thoughts so I can understand your perspective more.

The philosophical treatment of love transcends a variety of sub-disciplines including epistemology, metaphysics, religion, human nature, politics and ethics. Often statements or arguments concerning love, its nature and role in human life for example, connect to one or all the central theories of philosophy, and is often compared with, or examined in the context of, the philosophies of sex and gender. The task of a philosophy of love is to present the appropriate issues in a cogent manner, drawing on relevant theories of human nature, desire, ethics, and so on.

I really don't know what is this thousands of years thing you keep pulling out. Can you just cite something.

Does love mean self sacrifice? Yes and no.

Unconditional love means the nullification of the Ego, but in that state we also realize that our "self" does not mean our Ego.

At this stage our "self" is immersed, drowned in our Ego, but when we start adjusting ourselves, aspiring to be capable of unconditional love, we can put our "head above the water" and set up an independent observer, our true "self" above, outside of the Ego.

This observing point can then start performing actions of unconditional love after is has broken free from the enslavement of the Ego.

So the first step is to become capable of looking at ourselves and the whole reality from the "outside", only this free point can perform true giving, loving action.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#111  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123: I knew something was off. Something tells me you aren't basing your argument on philosophy but on verses like these: "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13 I could be wrong, I barely know enough about christianity to say so.

but that's O.K too.

Oh, and I have not changed my argument. I just wanted to dig deeper in your thoughts so I can understand your perspective more.

The philosophical treatment of love transcends a variety of sub-disciplines including epistemology, metaphysics, religion, human nature, politics and ethics. Often statements or arguments concerning love, its nature and role in human life for example, connect to one or all the central theories of philosophy, and is often compared with, or examined in the context of, the philosophies of sex and gender. The task of a philosophy of love is to present the appropriate issues in a cogent manner, drawing on relevant theories of human nature, desire, ethics, and so on.

I really don't know what is this thousands of years thing you keep pulling out. Can you just cite something.

Does love mean self sacrifice? Yes and no.

Unconditional love means the nullification of the Ego, but in that state we also realize that our "self" does not mean our Ego.

At this stage our "self" is immersed, drowned in our Ego, but when we start adjusting ourselves, aspiring to be capable of unconditional love, we can put our "head above the water" and set up an independent observer, our true "self" above, outside of the Ego.

This observing point can then start performing actions of unconditional love after is has broken free from the enslavement of the Ego.

So the first step is to become capable of looking at ourselves and the whole reality from the "outside", only this free point can perform true giving, loving action.

Oh, I'm totally basing it on philosophy just as much as religion. I actually didn't even know about that verse, I was thinking more broadly, that we should love our enemies just as we love ourselves and friends, and I feel it's important we realize that stance.

The "thousands of years of philosophy" thing is due to the fact that many ancient philosophers supported what I'm saying now, such as Socrates saying "A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true".

The last portion of your post, about ego, is merely double talk, it basically says, to love others, we have to love ourselves, become immersed in ourselves, and recognize and inspect ourselves. I'd tell you that we don't have to love ourselves, but rather put others before ourselves, and love others more than we do ourselves, to show them how important they are to us, which is that others are everything. That is the basis for actual love. The whole notion and idea is that, your true love, that you treat this way, will treat you the same, and you will help define each other and you are one unit. That was one reason why people did not divorce very often even just a century ago, even if they were capable. Divorce is incredulously high now because I think people have forgotten what love is.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#112  Edited By minigunman123

I updated my post in the "true love" thread. Re-read before replying pl0x.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123:

that we should love our enemies just as we love ourselves and friends, and I feel it's important we realize that stance.

hmm, we had a sermon this friday about the same thing.

Socrates saying "A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true".

Hate to break it to ya, but all the info in that qoute was mentioned and expanded in my post above the vid. You kinda weren't paying attention, huh? and guess what, it contrudicts your self-sacrifice thing too, you know morals cause by emotions are illusions.

The last portion of your post, about ego, is merely double talk, it basically says, to love others, we have to love ourselves. I'd tell you that we don't have to love ourselves, but rather put others before ourselves, and love others more than we do ourselves, to show them how important they are to us, which is that others are everything. That is the basis for actual love.

Not double talk, but basic psychology. I said nothing of self-love, and yet again you prove you didn't understand what I said, because you understood the exact apposite. You can't love yourself out-side Ego(self satisfy more accuratly. You need the ID for that which tap to the Ego. The super-ego is the one with the ideals and that works in the "making other people happy for there happiness" of the "self sacrifice for others and not the self". Either way, you still do it because you want to, therefore it's impossible to rise above the ego because your goal are for yourself, as in you'd logically be satisfied for the others satisfaction.

I repeat again. There is nothing to argue here. Love is subjective, that is actually a conclusion of many philosopher, psychologists, psycho-analyticalists, anthropologist, sociologists. Nonetheless, I highly doup as you say that for thousands of years philosiphers have agreed on such a narrow thought(that love = self-sacrifice), Philosophers don't usually agree like that, and if some did I doubt history would care mention them for repeating something like that in such a simple manner.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123 said:

I updated my post in the "true love" thread. Re-read before replying pl0x.

sorry, didn't notice this reply, cause inbox only shows letters when you leave the tab. anyway, that stuff you edited/added there I also mentioned earlier, and they are to my advantage in the argument if you would take your time to reread it and fully understand it.

Also, what is pl0x?

Avatar image for darktiger
darktiger

4861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#115  Edited By darktiger

Yes I have had five girl friends I am currently in a relationship and I am inlove

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#116  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123:

that we should love our enemies just as we love ourselves and friends, and I feel it's important we realize that stance.

hmm, we had a sermon this friday about the same thing.

Socrates saying "A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true".

Hate to break it to ya, but all the info in that qoute was mentioned and expanded in my post above the vid. You kinda weren't paying attention, huh? and guess what, it contrudicts your self-sacrifice thing too, you know morals cause by emotions are illusions.

The last portion of your post, about ego, is merely double talk, it basically says, to love others, we have to love ourselves. I'd tell you that we don't have to love ourselves, but rather put others before ourselves, and love others more than we do ourselves, to show them how important they are to us, which is that others are everything. That is the basis for actual love.

Not double talk, but basic psychology. I said nothing of self-love, and yet again you prove you didn't understand what I said, because you understood the exact apposite. You can't love yourself out-side Ego(self satisfy more accuratly. You need the ID for that which tap to the Ego. The super-ego is the one with the ideals and that works in the "making other people happy for there happiness" of the "self sacrifice for others and not the self". Either way, you still do it because you want to, therefore it's impossible to rise above the ego because your goal are for yourself, as in you'd logically be satisfied for the others satisfaction.

I repeat again. There is nothing to argue here. Love is subjective, that is actually a conclusion of many philosopher, psychologists, psycho-analyticalists, anthropologist, sociologists. Nonetheless, I highly doup as you say that for thousands of years philosiphers have agreed on such a narrow thought(that love = self-sacrifice), Philosophers don't usually agree like that, and if some did I doubt history would care mention them for repeating something like that in such a simple manner.

So you think that everyone helps others only because it helps themselves in some sort of selfish way? That's interesting. I'm sure the people who got tortured in Vietnam as POW's would like to disagree. And yet, I imagine some of them would do it again, so that they could be helping their country by enrolling in the armed services.

A sermon on Friday? Huh. What religion do you follow?

Socrates' quote actually goes against what you're saying. Socrates is saying that the definitive love is not relative, nor is morality. These are absolute constructs. You kinda weren't paying attention, huh? Love isn't just one emotion. Love isn't even a group of emotions. Love can actually be thought of as a spiritual and intellectual feelings just as much as an emotional one.

Psychologists and similar studies mean absolute bunk in a case like this. They can't measure things accurately at all. If they had sensors attached to a person, to measure brainwaves and chemical responses in the body, and they proposed scenarios to him to try and test what love is, how do we know he's even feeling love? How do we know he knows what he's feeling, himself? How do we know he's being honest in saying "I'm feeling love towards X right now", how do we know he even knows what love is? It's a question in itself, we have to know what love is, to find out what it is, using science. That's why I never mentioned psychologists or any such things, you were the one to bring them up. They're not trustworthy in this matter. It's got to be a thought exercise, not a scientific one.

To that end, find me a philosopher that's of as much repute as Socrates or Aristotle, that agrees that love is a horrible, diseased joke, serves no purpose other than to mate and reproduce (that conclusion is so flawed it's hilarious, for example in Nazi Germany, they stuck Jewish infants in two different cells, gave them the same things with one differing factor; one group of babies had human contact with nurses, the others had the same resources (milk, water) but no nurses, no major human contact. That group of babies died, the other did not, so something in human contact and at the very least whatever form of affection babies can have towards something, is integral to simple survival), and is self-serving even though people often sacrifice things to help others (because apparently, people enjoy sacrificing things including their life or lifestyle, according to your logic).

The things I've been saying all along about love and self sacrifice, have been thought and known for almost all human history, and have played integral parts in society throughout almost all of human history as well, including many modern-day people and societies as a whole, and what you're saying flies in direct contradiction to all of this. How can you not think that maybe, that might indicate a problem with your theory? More importantly, why are you giving off hostile vibes to me, with things such as "you kinda weren't paying attention, huh", and "give me some examples so I can disprove them"? Are you really so determined to prove that you know love better than 80% of mankind, that you're actually angry over it? Shouldn't love be relative, to your mind, thus allowing me to think that you're wrong without you getting mad at me for it? By getting angry, you're indicating that you don't think love is relative, but that you think you've got the absolute answer, and my explanation is horribly, horribly flawed, thus meaning it's not totally relative, and you're irrate that I'm somehow not understanding you (when really, I think I've got you pegged just fine). This is what always happens in discussions like these (religion, emotions, philosophy), on this website; people get mad at each other and then claim they're not being hostile or mildly insulting, and it escalates. Let's just both agree to calm down a bit. I'd rather not have to banish myself from 90% of the threads on here because people keep getting upset at me for having different viewpoints.

Last thing... If there's indeed nothing to argue over, then why are you arguing that I'm incorrect in my thinking? I think there is something to argue, or more accurately debate over, but if you don't, then I don't see why you're responding to my messages. If you're really content thinking love is completely relative, and you don't want to debate, I won't debate with you. If you really want it to stop, you'll have to be the one to stop, because I've got no trouble debating this topic with you.

Avatar image for _grifter_
_Grifter_

13179

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#117  Edited By _Grifter_

@Blood1991 said:

No, I regret the way some of my relationships have ended, but I never have thought my life would be better if I had stayed with one of them.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123: Oh dear, philosophy more reliable psychology to understand the human mind, How ancient is that!

do you have low self esteem or something, stop saying I'm angry with you. I am not. you want a hug or something? here http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgtvb2poxX1qd8ocoo1_400.png

You know something, there are actually a lot of research on love in chemical-psychology and biology that you mentioned it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_basis_of_love and they are as much worth mentioning as any ancient philosophical qoutes translated from languages not used anymore.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#119  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123: Oh dear, philosophy more reliable psychology to understand the human mind, How ancient is that!

do you have low self esteem or something, stop saying I'm angry with you. I am not. you want a hug or something? here http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgtvb2poxX1qd8ocoo1_400.png

You know something, there are actually a lot of research on love in chemical-psychology and biology that you mentioned it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_basis_of_love and they are as much worth mentioning as any ancient philosophical qoutes translated from languages not used anymore.

Hopefully a mod will be having a talk with you, smartass. Nice job losing the argument, wikipedia is not a valid source for anything, and as well, I don't have to romantically feel anything to anyone in order to love them. That is a form of attraction. You fail at life.

Your arguments are bad and you should feel bad.

Avatar image for terminator__fan
TERMINATOR__FAN

160

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#120  Edited By TERMINATOR__FAN

Love comes and goes.

Avatar image for terminator__fan
TERMINATOR__FAN

160

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#121  Edited By TERMINATOR__FAN

Love comes and goes.

Avatar image for powerherc
PowerHerc

86191

Forum Posts

211478

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

#122  Edited By PowerHerc

There was a time when I thought she had but I had misidentified whom it was.

I now have my true love.

Avatar image for warlock2792
WARLOCK2792

18078

Forum Posts

1894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#123  Edited By WARLOCK2792

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

Avatar image for darktiger
darktiger

4861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#124  Edited By darktiger

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

Avatar image for warlock2792
WARLOCK2792

18078

Forum Posts

1894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#125  Edited By WARLOCK2792

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

...........Meh, I'll believe anything once

Avatar image for darktiger
darktiger

4861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#126  Edited By darktiger

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

...........Meh, I'll believe anything once

oh really want to see a pic of me

Avatar image for warlock2792
WARLOCK2792

18078

Forum Posts

1894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#127  Edited By WARLOCK2792

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

...........Meh, I'll believe anything once

oh really want to see a pic of me

.........................................Do you look like Santa?

Avatar image for longbowhunter
longbowhunter

9425

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

#128  Edited By longbowhunter

After having a horrible marriage and raising two kids who weren't mine I got lucky and fell in love for real.

Avatar image for darktiger
darktiger

4861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#129  Edited By darktiger

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

...........Meh, I'll believe anything once

oh really want to see a pic of me

.........................................Do you look like Santa?

No,Look way better

Avatar image for warlock2792
WARLOCK2792

18078

Forum Posts

1894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#130  Edited By WARLOCK2792

@longbowhunter said:

After having a horrible marriage and raising two kids who weren't mine I got lucky and fell in love for real.

.......................congratulations to you, sir

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

...........Meh, I'll believe anything once

oh really want to see a pic of me

.........................................Do you look like Santa?

No,Look way better

That works. Not that Santa is by any means the ugliest man I've ever laid eyes on...

Avatar image for asagod
Asagod

304

Forum Posts

199

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#131  Edited By Asagod

This happened to me not so long ago, I still love the girl and I will not forget her that easy. What happened was that we were friends, we both liked each other, but none of us had courage to say or do something. She was perfect, the most beautiful girl I have ever seen, but I was a fool; I made it all wrong. Gods, if I could have done something to change. I had the chance to kiss her many times, but I never did it. Once, we were seating really close to each other, she was looking into my eyes, as I was looking to hers; we exchanged some love verses and she told me she would follow me until hell. After that day I grew foolish and foolish (I cannot write all the things I did, but they were not good things),I and then it all was gone. I think she still likes me, but the way I treated her... I cannot meet her without be ashamed. I hope if any of you love someone, do not do as I did.

Avatar image for pooty
pooty

16236

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#132  Edited By pooty

@longbowhunter said:

After having a horrible marriage and raising two kids who weren't mine I got lucky and fell in love for real.

I know a guy who went through the same thing.

Avatar image for blood1991
Blood1991

8115

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#133  Edited By Blood1991

@White Mage said:

@longbowhunter said:

After having a horrible marriage and raising two kids who weren't mine I got lucky and fell in love for real.

.......................congratulations to you, sir

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

@darktiger said:

@White Mage said:

Hhmm...did he "get away"? I don't know...."get away" sounds inappropriate for my current situation...I'd say he's "missing". "Missing" sounds much better, since I've yet to find his a$$....

maybe I am him lol

...........Meh, I'll believe anything once

oh really want to see a pic of me

.........................................Do you look like Santa?

No,Look way better

That works. Not that Santa is by any means the ugliest man I've ever laid eyes on...

This thread is for wallowing in self pity, take those sparks elsewhere.

Avatar image for hbktimhbk
HBKTimHBK

5731

Forum Posts

1056

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#134  Edited By HBKTimHBK

Well there was this girl I liked a lot..probably still like, I don't wanna call it love because I'm not sure if it is, but she's dating my best friend.

Avatar image for warlock2792
WARLOCK2792

18078

Forum Posts

1894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#135  Edited By WARLOCK2792

@Blood1991: .....................self pity wallowing, with love connection floaties.......

Avatar image for zdaybreak
Zdaybreak

1004

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#136  Edited By Zdaybreak

@slacker the hacker said:

No I don't think at my age a serious relationship is possible.

Avatar image for blood1991
Blood1991

8115

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#137  Edited By Blood1991

@White Mage said:

@Blood1991: .....................self pity wallowing, with love connection floaties.......

It's like a bar for comic nerds.

Avatar image for charlieboy
charlieboy

7179

Forum Posts

248

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#138  Edited By charlieboy

@Blood1991 said:

@White Mage said:

@Blood1991: .....................self pity wallowing, with love connection floaties.......

It's like a bar for comic nerds.

lmao. I refuse the notion that you can only find love once in your life.

Avatar image for warlock2792
WARLOCK2792

18078

Forum Posts

1894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#139  Edited By WARLOCK2792

@charlieboy said:

@Blood1991 said:

@White Mage said:

@Blood1991: .....................self pity wallowing, with love connection floaties.......

It's like a bar for comic nerds.

lmao. I refuse the notion that you can only find love once in your life.

Giggles

The truth is, you can find love at least 9 times.............narrowing down which one to choose? That's the tough part.

Avatar image for charlieboy
charlieboy

7179

Forum Posts

248

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#140  Edited By charlieboy

@White Mage: lol. Exactly.

Avatar image for darktiger
darktiger

4861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#141  Edited By darktiger

lol

Avatar image for nathaniel_christopher
Nathaniel_Christopher

3301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@pooty said:

Have you dated someone.....lost them... and wish you could have them back? Have you ever had a friend....who you wished was "more then a friend"....now you can't have them at all? Have you ever just randomly encountered someone or seen a stranger and thought " There is something special about this person".... but never got a chance to meet them?

Yes to the first 2, no I think to the 3rd. I've never seen a girl and just had that love at first sight feeling, as in their was an aura about her or something in her eyes, or we talked and had an instant connection (Always wanted to experience that though I now realize) I've seen girls I thought were hot of course, but nothing more.

I always care about the girls I date, and its always been that I can honestly see myself falling in love with them, so whenever its ended i've always wished for her back (At least on the occasions i've been dumped) but I eventually move on I suppose. Though I remember every girl i've ever had feelings for (As i'm not the type to go on casual dates) and each one has a special place in my heart.

The 2nd one's the one that i've done....4 times now lol the first was in 9th grade. We were just friends, I thought she was smart and cute, but never got up the courage to ask her out. Strangely enough that's the one of the 4 i'd go back and change if I could, because I realize it would've been such a simple thing back then. I ended up transferring schools without letting her know and we didn't talk again until 12th grade. We chatted on facebook, but I only ever saw her in person once before college. She worked at a theme park and I went there with some friends, she told me she'd be working that day, but didn't mention where. I literally spent all day looking for her while I was with my friends, and finally saw her at the end of the day as she was leaving (She was on the one ride we hadn't been one, but my friends had suggested we go on earlier) We hugged, and talked, and then she left. I must've been out of it, because I completely forgot to get her number. After that though I didn't see any chance again as she moved to Virginia for college. We don't really talk much anymore, but from what i've seen once facebook she's dating someone else now and seems to be doing well.

The 2nd was a girl I met in 10th grade, but for some reason I wasn't attracted to her back then. I assure you, she was hot and has only grown more beautiful over the years, but for some reason I didn't see her in a romantic light back then. Fast forward to Junior year and suddenly she's the hottest thing on two legs. I'm completely blown away by her, and to top it off she's always had a great personality. Really lighthearted and bubbly, she likes being around people and smiles a lot. Unfortunately, she was dating someone. So I stayed distant and just talked to her in the hallway every now and again. Senior year, she's dating the same guy, but brakes up with him around so she Christmas I think. We're talking (Just as friends) and texting one night and I say we should go see a movie sometime. She asks if I mean like a date. That's exactly what I meant, but my courage failed me and along with the fact she'd just broken up with a guy, I say no I mean just as friends. She says that'd be cool, but we never find the time to go see it. Fast forward to February. I give her a bear for Valentines day (She told me just last year on Valentines day that she still has that same bear. Blew me away!) It doesn't lead to anything but she does tell me she loves it. Fast forward to March and its time for Prom. She's not with anybody, i'm not with anybody, I should ask her, I want to ask her, one of her friend's asks me if i'm gonna ask her, and i'm pretty sure tells her i'm gonna ask her, but I never do and she ends up going with someone else. We promise to dance with each other at Prom but never get to. She starts dating another guy soon after that and stays with him until a while after graduation. We're still friends, though we don't hang out that much, and as I said she still has the bear I gave her apparently. She's no longer into guys though lol she's a lesbian now and with some girl, though a mutual friend of ours pointed out to me how she and a bunch of other girls all coincidentally became lesbians at the same time and says she's just doing it cause she's in college. IDK, I still care about her and think she's great, and if she wasn't a lesbian would definitely ask her out now. Looking back on her I can definitely see that I missed a few chances to make a move on her because of fear.

The 3rd girl is the most complicated girl i've ever been involved with, and was one of the reasons I didn't ask the 2nd girl to Prom in fact. See I liked both girls at the same time, but didn't really know which to choose. (Stupid, I know) Anyways, this girl surprised me. We met Junior Year and had classes together the entire year and got to know each other. Before I knew it i'd developed feelings for her. We exchanged numbers at the end of the year and one day she texted me over the summer. We must've texted for hours every day for like a week. I even texted her while I was at work. We really got along well and when she got back from visiting some colleges ended up going on a few dates. I asked her to be my girlfriend, but she said no. (There are various reasons that I don't want to get into) So we stopped talking. I still cared about her, and we even ended up having another class together lol we'd in fact chosen the class together the year before. We went like half the year without exchanging more than a few words. It wasn't until Valentines Day that we did in fact. I got her some chocolate and gave it to her. I still remember how surprised she was. She said she'd thought I hated her. I was shocked at why she'd think that. (again, reasons I don't wanna get in to) But we finally started talking again, and I thought we could make things work this time. I ended up asking her to Prom, but she said she just wanted to go with friends so she did. From there things got so much worse lmfao from listening to rumors about me, to calling me arrogant, this girl put me through hell and it eventually came to a head with us arguing over facebook and not talking to each other the rest of the year and well into the summer. One day she messaged me and apologized and everything and I said it was fine. About a year after that we started talking again, and then hanging out again, and now we're just friends. With her....I don't know, its strange. I care about her, she has a place in my heart, but at the same time we have never talked about anything that happened and I always kind of feel like that's between us. Just sitting there and neither of us ever confronts it. The problem is i'm not sure if its just me or both of us. Its been a few years so she might not even care about all that stuff anymore, but I still think about it sometimes.

The 4th girl is the final of the girls I wanted to be more than friends with. Met her almost 3 years ago. We talked, we texted, and became really good friends, but I never told her how I felt about her. We have a really good relationship and acknowledge each other as friends, but i've always felt more. Back in August she asked me why I said she was special to me. She'd asked me before, but she really seemed to want a concrete answer this time, so I told her how I felt about her. Though many, many, many, many, conversations (lmfao) we talked about the idea of us being together, made out a bit, and have now reached an impasse I suppose. I of course want us to be together, but while I say I think i'm the guy for her, she has a list of reasons why we shouldn't be together (She introduced me to it just a few days ago in fact lol) I'm going to be gone for 5-8 months (The only reason I personally agree with), we're two different, going in different directions, I don't know what she's like in a relationship, she's afraid of things working out because she tends to sabotage things when they get to good, I don't know all of her, she doesn't wanna risk it, just doesn't think it'd work, etc. lol at least that's what I remember. Anyways, i've decided that she's at least right on the idea we shouldn't be together right now since I am going to be gone for a while and it'd be stupid to start a relationship with a good friend and then go away like a month and a half later. We came to a sort of agreement I suppose. She told me I couldn't expect her to wait for me, and I agreed. And I promised her I wouldn't wait for her, that I wouldn't turn away from opportunities because of the thought of her, when she isn't going to be doing the same for me. So currently we're still just friends, and i'm actively trying to keep my promise by not thinking of her and facing the future head on. If I get over her I get over her, if I don't then when I get back i'll see.

Throughout all this i've dated a few girls who I really cared for and like all the above, save the first girl, I am still relatively good friends with. There's never been a time where the relationship ended (Regardless of who dumped who) where cheating was an issue or anything. We've always parted on pretty good company i'd say, and now i'm just looking towards the future. Writing all this was actually very cathartic. Good to get all that out and look back on these 4 girls, who along with the others have played a pretty big part in who I am today. Its good to be able to look back and remember both the good times and the bad, and not feel bitter about anything.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123: a mod, for what? I have not broken the rules, and I have read the rules, please. and I neither have any warnings. I have not lost anything, you are using Socrates, a guy who doesn't believe in grey areas to[try to] disprove an an issue relating subjectivity. I would love to hear a professor grading that. You only keep coming up with claims about 90% of the world thinking something, yet you didn't prove it, while I used logic( a $HITload of it if you read all the previous posts) while you sound like your writing a poem or something. Love is not self-sacrifice, but self-sacrifice can come from love. However a person can believe that love is when you would go to self-sacrifice for something. That can be love. Love is subjective, and emotions are not(black and white). IMO There is no ultimate Evil or ultimate good(except for, theoretically, god and the devil) and even if there was then that doesn't mean there are no gray areas. Sure big S is a genius, but he wasn't always right, and in few the recorded instances when he lost debates,first against Protagoras(although Soc did complain that the man won't shut up AND HE KEPT FORGETTING PARTS, lol) second is Xanthippe(who he married after admitting his defeat), and he kept forgetting, or he was very happy to learn something new, and erase ignorance.

Don't change the subject with all that, by saying wikipedia is not reliable, I know it isn't. I was just pointing out that these sciences do exist, and you are horribly trying to avoid that. If you want details I could give you other articles about the science of love like this interview with a professor http://www.syr.edu/news/articles/2010/ortigue-neuroimaging-of-love-10-10.html or this amaizing university essay http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1218&context=srhonorsprog. You want to tell me you are more reliable than the many universities that accepted these studies, please.

BTW, man. There are no hard feelings. I wouldn't mind being your friend. Don't let this debate make you hate me cause I don't, but that's just how I debate. can't stand the heat, stay out of the ketches :)

Now let's get down to business... to defeat the huns. sorry Mulan moment, lol.

Your argument only works with people, and not objects. I love my PS3 and Video-games, but I won't take a bullet for them(even if it is Infamous 2, or Asura's Wrath ) ROFLMAO! XD

I am gonna continue the debate but I am gonna lean much more to the type of love mentioned in the OP since that's what started this discussion.

Love, friendship, respect, admiration are the emotional response of one man to the virtues of another, the spiritual payment given in exchange for the personal, selfish pleasure which one man derives from the virtues of another man’s character. Only a brute or an altruist would claim that the appreciation of another person’s virtues is an act of selflessness, that as far as one’s own selfish interest and pleasure are concerned, it makes no difference whether one deals with a genius or a fool, whether one meets a hero or a thug, whether one marries an ideal woman or a slut. There are two aspects of man’s existence which are the special province and expression of his sense of life: love and art.

I am referring here to romantic love, in the serious meaning of that term—as distinguished from the superficial infatuations of those whose sense of life is devoid of any consistent values, i.e., of any lasting emotions other than fear. Love is a response to values. It is with a person’s sense of life that one falls in love—with that essential sum, that fundamental stand or way of facing existence, which is the essence of a personality. One falls in love with the embodiment of the values that formed a person’s character, which are reflected in his widest goals or smallest gestures, which create the style of his soul—the individual style of a unique, unrepeatable, irreplaceable consciousness. It is one’s own sense of life that acts as the selector, and responds to what it recognizes as one’s own basic values in the person of another. It is not a matter of professed convictions (though these are not irrelevant); it is a matter of much more profound, conscious and subconscious harmony.

Many errors and tragic disillusionments are possible in this process of emotional recognition, since a sense of life, by itself, is not a reliable cognitive guide. And if there are degrees of evil, then one of the most evil consequences of mysticism—in terms of human suffering—is the belief that love is a matter of “the heart,” not the mind, that love is an emotion independent of reason, that love is blind and impervious to the power of philosophy. Love is the expression of philosophy—of a subconscious philosophical sum—and, perhaps, no other aspect of human existence needs the conscious power of philosophy quite so desperately. When that power is called upon to verify and support an emotional appraisal, when love is a conscious integration of reason and emotion, of mind and values, then—and only then—it is the greatest reward of man’s life.

To love is to value. Only a rationally selfish man, a man of self-esteem, is capable of love—because he is the only man capable of holding firm, consistent, uncompromising, unbetrayed values. The man who does not value himself, cannot value anything or anyone. You know that reminds me also of the hero from a story called The Fountainhead(You should read it, Minigunman) has a famous qoute "“To say ‘I love you’ one must know first how to say the ‘I.’”

[Selfless love] would have to mean that you derive no personal pleasure or happiness from the company and the existence of the person you love, and that you are motivated only by self-sacrificial pity for that person’s need of you. I don’t have to point out to you that no one would be flattered by, nor would accept, a concept of that kind. Love is not self-sacrifice, but the most profound assertion of your own needs and values. It is for your ownhappiness that you need the person you love, and that is the greatest compliment, the greatest tribute you can pay to that person.

One gains a profoundly personal, selfish joy from the mere existence of the person one loves. It is one’s own personal, selfish happiness that one seeks, earns and derives from love.

A “selfless,” “disinterested” love is a contradiction in terms: it means that one is indifferent to that which one values.

Concern for the welfare of those one loves is a rational part of one’s selfish interests. If a man who is passionately in love with his wife spends a fortune to cure her of a dangerous illness, it would be absurd to claim that he does it as a “sacrifice” for her sake, not his own, and that it makes no difference tohim, personally and selfishly, whether she lives or dies.

The practical implementation of friendship, affection and love consists of incorporating the welfare (the rational welfare) of the person involved into one’s own hierarchy of values, then acting accordingly.

To love is to value. The man who tells you that it is possible to value without values, to love those whom you appraise as worthless, is the man who tells you that it is possible to grow rich by consuming without producing and that paper money is as valuable as gold . . . . When it comes to love, the highest of emotions, you permit them to shriek at you accusingly that you are a moral delinquent if you’re incapable of feeling causeless love. When a man feels fear without reason, you call him to the attention of a psychiatrist; you are not so careful to protect the meaning, the nature and the dignity of love.

Love is the expression of one’s values, the greatest reward you can earn for the moral qualities you have achieved in your character and person, the emotional price paid by one man for the joy he receives from the virtues of another. Your morality demands that you divorce your love from values and hand it down to any vagrant, not as response to his worth, but as response to his need, not as reward, but as alms, not as a payment for virtues, but as a blank check on vices. Your morality tells you that the purpose of love is to set you free of the bonds of morality, that love is superior to moral judgment, that true love transcends, forgives and survives every manner of evil in its object, and the greater the love the greater the depravity it permits to the loved. To love a man for his virtues is paltry and human, it tells you; to love him for his flaws is divine. To love those who are worthy of it is self-interest; to love the unworthy is sacrifice. You owe your love to those who don’t deserve it, and the less they deserve it, the more love you owe them—the more loathsome the object, the nobler your love—the more unfastidious your love, the greater your virtue—and if you can bring your soul to the state of a dump heap that welcomes anything on equal terms, if you can cease to value moral values, you have achieved the state of moral perfection.

Like any other value, love is not a static quantity to be divided, but an unlimited response to be earned. The love for one friend is not a threat to the love for another, and neither is the love for the various members of one’s family, assuming they have earned it. The most exclusive form—romantic love—is not an issue of competition. If two men are in love with the same woman, what she feels for either of them is not determined by what she feels for the other and is not taken away from him. If she chooses one of them, the “loser” could not have had what the “winner” has earned.

It is only among the irrational, emotion-motivated persons, whose love is divorced from any standards of value, that chance rivalries, accidental conflicts and blind choices prevail. But then, whoever wins does not win much. Among the emotion-driven, neither love nor any other emotion has any meaning.

Self-sacrifice is not only a matter of serving the truth. In some sense, it is the perception of the truth. To truly perceive the truth, there must be some kind of self-sacrifice, because perceiving the truth is realizing that the truth is something bigger than the self, beyond the self, which ultimately abolishes the self. To see the truth is to see that the self does not exist in the way we think that it exists. Then we see also that a true life is not the life we have conceived of. Self-sacrifice is not a matter of suffering. In fact, if we see self-sacrifice as painful, we are still not seeing the truth completely. It is bound to be painful for a long time. It will become less painful. After a while, self-sacrifice is an impulse that arises out of love for reality. When it becomes truly understood, it is a joyful thing to sacrifice yourself to the truth.

(Diamond Heart Book 4, pg 357)

HOWEVAAAR

There is no self-sacrifice, not a hint of personal renunciation, but he is not selfish, not self-centered and not preoccupied with himself. His service is the expression of love, compassion, and truth. But he does not necessarily feel that is why he serves. He does not even think that he is serving. Love, compassion and truth are the constituents of his personal beingness. He is all of Essence, and so does not need to think of it or of acting according to its values. That is what it means to be a person of Being, the essential person. He is a precious pearl, rare and incomparable.

(The Pearl Beyond Price)

Also, here is an article that I don't fully agree with, but the way it concludes is unquestionable(read it..now): http://www.lynneforrest.com/relationships-loved-ones/2008/12/self-sacrifice-is-not-love/

Let us answer the question: “Can you measure love?”

The concept “love” is formed by isolating two or more instances of the appropriate psychological process, then retaining its distinguishing characteristics (an emotion proceeding from the evaluation of an existent as a positive value and as a source of pleasure) and omitting the object and the measurements of the process’s intensity. The object may be a thing, an event, an activity, a condition or a person. The intensity varies according to one’s evaluation of the object, as, for instance, in such cases as one’s love for ice cream, or for parties, or for reading, or for freedom, or for the person one marries. The concept “love” subsumes a vast range of values and, consequently, of intensity: it extends from the lower levels (designated by the subcategory “liking”) to the higher level (designated by the subcategory “affection,” which is applicable only in regard to persons) to the highest level, which includes romantic love. If one wants to measure the intensity of a particular instance of love, one does so by reference to the hierarchy of values of the person experiencing it. A man may love a woman, yet may rate the neurotic satisfactions of sexual promiscuity higher than her value to him. Another man may love a woman, but may give her up, rating his fear of the disapproval of others (of his family, his friends or any random strangers) higher than her value. Still another man may risk his life to save the woman he loves, because all his other values would lose meaning without her. The emotions in these examples are not emotions of the same intensity or dimension. Do not let a James Taggart type of mystic tell you that love is immeasurable. It is funny that you mentioned Socrates, cause not only he would he not agree of this because it has gray areas(he would look at love like an on/off with no scaling), but ALSO he did not sacrifice his ideals for his Wife and kids, even though he said he loved them because Socrates wouldn't except money for his philosophy meetings. This left them broke to properly raise a family.

Avatar image for inlife
INLIFE

1614

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#144  Edited By INLIFE

@Killer_of_trolls said:

To love is to value. Only a rationally selfish man, a man of self-esteem, is capable of love—because he is the only man capable of holding firm, consistent, uncompromising, unbetrayed values. The man who does not value himself, cannot value anything or anyone. You know that reminds me also of the hero from a story called The Fountainhead(You should read it, Minigunman) has a famous qoute "“To say ‘I love you’ one must know first how to say the ‘I.’”

Self-sacrifice is not only a matter of serving the truth. In some sense, it is the perception of the truth. To truly perceive the truth, there must be some kind of self-sacrifice, because perceiving the truth is realizing that the truth is something bigger than the self, beyond the self, which ultimately abolishes the self. To see the truth is to see that the self does not exist in the way we think that it exists. Then we see also that a true life is not the life we have conceived of. Self-sacrifice is not a matter of suffering. In fact, if we see self-sacrifice as painful, we are still not seeing the truth completely. It is bound to be painful for a long time. It will become less painful. After a while, self-sacrifice is an impulse that arises out of love for reality. When it becomes truly understood, it is a joyful thing to sacrifice yourself to the truth.

(Diamond Heart Book 4, pg 357)

  • I Respectfully disagree.............I did value myself a long time ago, but I have realized that seeing value in me is not required to see the value in everything that inhabits life. As long as you realize the ultimate truth......The truth that everything you see has history and existence in ways beyond present thought. I no longer value myself, but value everything that surrounds me for it is a separate existence and one that deserves value. How do I have the right to say it deserves value? Because it is not my existence. I wish I could say more, but I finding it extremely difficult to write or speak of the true concepts in my head.........It is why I have a vast and strong communication problem.
  • This is very true........Self-sacrifice is realizing that the truth is bigger than the self. However, it is not always a joyful thing to sacrifice yourself to the truth.
Avatar image for inlife
INLIFE

1614

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#145  Edited By INLIFE

@Asagod said:

This happened to me not so long ago, I still love the girl and I will not forget her that easy. What happened was that we were friends, we both liked each other, but none of us had courage to say or do something. She was perfect, the most beautiful girl I have ever seen, but I was a fool; I made it all wrong. Gods, if I could have done something to change. I had the chance to kiss her many times, but I never did it. Once, we were seating really close to each other, she was looking into my eyes, as I was looking to hers; we exchanged some love verses and she told me she would follow me until hell. After that day I grew foolish and foolish (I cannot write all the things I did, but they were not good things),I and then it all was gone. I think she still likes me, but the way I treated her... I cannot meet her without be ashamed. I hope if any of you love someone, do not do as I did.

The Ultimate Way To End Such Shame Is To Say It To Her. Apologize to her for what you believe went wrong.......You must show that you blame yourself..........Then get serious and admit your feelings to her. Tell her that will you make it up to her and look her in the eyes......Make the move and take the initiative..................See where it goes, I am sure it would be a better place than where you are right now.

I also found the most perfect girl in the world for me, but I will never be what she deserves or wants. I doubt that I will see and love somebody like her again. It all went downhill, but I doubt there was even a chance of standing up on that hill.

Avatar image for pooty
pooty

16236

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#146  Edited By pooty

THESE ARE SOME OF THE MOST DEPRESSING STORIES EVER!!! DAMN PEOPLE, IF YOU LOVE SOMEONE LET THEM KNOW. SHOW IT. SAY IT. WRITE IT.

Avatar image for asagod
Asagod

304

Forum Posts

199

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#147  Edited By Asagod

@INLIFE: Thanks for the advice. I am trying to do this since a while, but I'm going slowly to be sure I won't do anything wrong once again.

Avatar image for nlghtcrawler
NlGHTCRAWLER

2896

Forum Posts

1494

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

#148  Edited By NlGHTCRAWLER

I have been with someone, dumped them, missed them, got back together with them, then dumped them again. There is plenty of fish out there... try people first, but if not then try fish.

Avatar image for minigunman123
minigunman123

3262

Forum Posts

558

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#149  Edited By minigunman123

@Killer_of_trolls said:

@minigunman123: a mod, for what? I have not broken the rules, and I have read the rules, please. and I neither have any warnings. I have not lost anything, you are using Socrates, a guy who doesn't believe in grey areas to[try to] disprove an an issue relating subjectivity. I would love to hear a professor grading that. You only keep coming up with claims about 90% of the world thinking something, yet you didn't prove it, while I used logic( a $HITload of it if you read all the previous posts) while you sound like your writing a poem or something. Love is not self-sacrifice, but self-sacrifice can come from love. However a person can believe that love is when you would go to self-sacrifice for something. That can be love. Love is subjective, and emotions are not(black and white). IMO There is no ultimate Evil or ultimate good(except for, theoretically, god and the devil) and even if there was then that doesn't mean there are no gray areas. Sure big S is a genius, but he wasn't always right, and in few the recorded instances when he lost debates,first against Protagoras(although Soc did complain that the man won't shut up AND HE KEPT FORGETTING PARTS, lol) second is Xanthippe(who he married after admitting his defeat), and he kept forgetting, or he was very happy to learn something new, and erase ignorance.

Don't change the subject with all that, by saying wikipedia is not reliable, I know it isn't. I was just pointing out that these sciences do exist, and you are horribly trying to avoid that. If you want details I could give you other articles about the science of love like this interview with a professor http://www.syr.edu/news/articles/2010/ortigue-neuroimaging-of-love-10-10.html or this amaizing university essay http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1218&context=srhonorsprog. You want to tell me you are more reliable than the many universities that accepted these studies, please.

BTW, man. There are no hard feelings. I wouldn't mind being your friend. Don't let this debate make you hate me cause I don't, but that's just how I debate. can't stand the heat, stay out of the ketches :)

Now let's get down to business... to defeat the huns. sorry Mulan moment, lol.

Your argument only works with people, and not objects. I love my PS3 and Video-games, but I won't take a bullet for them(even if it is Infamous 2, or Asura's Wrath ) ROFLMAO! XD

I am gonna continue the debate but I am gonna lean much more to the type of love mentioned in the OP since that's what started this discussion.

Love, friendship, respect, admiration are the emotional response of one man to the virtues of another, the spiritual payment given in exchange for the personal, selfish pleasure which one man derives from the virtues of another man’s character. Only a brute or an altruist would claim that the appreciation of another person’s virtues is an act of selflessness, that as far as one’s own selfish interest and pleasure are concerned, it makes no difference whether one deals with a genius or a fool, whether one meets a hero or a thug, whether one marries an ideal woman or a slut. There are two aspects of man’s existence which are the special province and expression of his sense of life: love and art.

I am referring here to romantic love, in the serious meaning of that term—as distinguished from the superficial infatuations of those whose sense of life is devoid of any consistent values, i.e., of any lasting emotions other than fear. Love is a response to values. It is with a person’s sense of life that one falls in love—with that essential sum, that fundamental stand or way of facing existence, which is the essence of a personality. One falls in love with the embodiment of the values that formed a person’s character, which are reflected in his widest goals or smallest gestures, which create the style of his soul—the individual style of a unique, unrepeatable, irreplaceable consciousness. It is one’s own sense of life that acts as the selector, and responds to what it recognizes as one’s own basic values in the person of another. It is not a matter of professed convictions (though these are not irrelevant); it is a matter of much more profound, conscious and subconscious harmony.

Many errors and tragic disillusionments are possible in this process of emotional recognition, since a sense of life, by itself, is not a reliable cognitive guide. And if there are degrees of evil, then one of the most evil consequences of mysticism—in terms of human suffering—is the belief that love is a matter of “the heart,” not the mind, that love is an emotion independent of reason, that love is blind and impervious to the power of philosophy. Love is the expression of philosophy—of a subconscious philosophical sum—and, perhaps, no other aspect of human existence needs the conscious power of philosophy quite so desperately. When that power is called upon to verify and support an emotional appraisal, when love is a conscious integration of reason and emotion, of mind and values, then—and only then—it is the greatest reward of man’s life.

To love is to value. Only a rationally selfish man, a man of self-esteem, is capable of love—because he is the only man capable of holding firm, consistent, uncompromising, unbetrayed values. The man who does not value himself, cannot value anything or anyone. You know that reminds me also of the hero from a story called The Fountainhead(You should read it, Minigunman) has a famous qoute "“To say ‘I love you’ one must know first how to say the ‘I.’”

[Selfless love] would have to mean that you derive no personal pleasure or happiness from the company and the existence of the person you love, and that you are motivated only by self-sacrificial pity for that person’s need of you. I don’t have to point out to you that no one would be flattered by, nor would accept, a concept of that kind. Love is not self-sacrifice, but the most profound assertion of your own needs and values. It is for your ownhappiness that you need the person you love, and that is the greatest compliment, the greatest tribute you can pay to that person.

One gains a profoundly personal, selfish joy from the mere existence of the person one loves. It is one’s own personal, selfish happiness that one seeks, earns and derives from love.

A “selfless,” “disinterested” love is a contradiction in terms: it means that one is indifferent to that which one values.

Concern for the welfare of those one loves is a rational part of one’s selfish interests. If a man who is passionately in love with his wife spends a fortune to cure her of a dangerous illness, it would be absurd to claim that he does it as a “sacrifice” for her sake, not his own, and that it makes no difference tohim, personally and selfishly, whether she lives or dies.

The practical implementation of friendship, affection and love consists of incorporating the welfare (the rational welfare) of the person involved into one’s own hierarchy of values, then acting accordingly.

To love is to value. The man who tells you that it is possible to value without values, to love those whom you appraise as worthless, is the man who tells you that it is possible to grow rich by consuming without producing and that paper money is as valuable as gold . . . . When it comes to love, the highest of emotions, you permit them to shriek at you accusingly that you are a moral delinquent if you’re incapable of feeling causeless love. When a man feels fear without reason, you call him to the attention of a psychiatrist; you are not so careful to protect the meaning, the nature and the dignity of love.

Love is the expression of one’s values, the greatest reward you can earn for the moral qualities you have achieved in your character and person, the emotional price paid by one man for the joy he receives from the virtues of another. Your morality demands that you divorce your love from values and hand it down to any vagrant, not as response to his worth, but as response to his need, not as reward, but as alms, not as a payment for virtues, but as a blank check on vices. Your morality tells you that the purpose of love is to set you free of the bonds of morality, that love is superior to moral judgment, that true love transcends, forgives and survives every manner of evil in its object, and the greater the love the greater the depravity it permits to the loved. To love a man for his virtues is paltry and human, it tells you; to love him for his flaws is divine. To love those who are worthy of it is self-interest; to love the unworthy is sacrifice. You owe your love to those who don’t deserve it, and the less they deserve it, the more love you owe them—the more loathsome the object, the nobler your love—the more unfastidious your love, the greater your virtue—and if you can bring your soul to the state of a dump heap that welcomes anything on equal terms, if you can cease to value moral values, you have achieved the state of moral perfection.

Like any other value, love is not a static quantity to be divided, but an unlimited response to be earned. The love for one friend is not a threat to the love for another, and neither is the love for the various members of one’s family, assuming they have earned it. The most exclusive form—romantic love—is not an issue of competition. If two men are in love with the same woman, what she feels for either of them is not determined by what she feels for the other and is not taken away from him. If she chooses one of them, the “loser” could not have had what the “winner” has earned.

It is only among the irrational, emotion-motivated persons, whose love is divorced from any standards of value, that chance rivalries, accidental conflicts and blind choices prevail. But then, whoever wins does not win much. Among the emotion-driven, neither love nor any other emotion has any meaning.

Self-sacrifice is not only a matter of serving the truth. In some sense, it is the perception of the truth. To truly perceive the truth, there must be some kind of self-sacrifice, because perceiving the truth is realizing that the truth is something bigger than the self, beyond the self, which ultimately abolishes the self. To see the truth is to see that the self does not exist in the way we think that it exists. Then we see also that a true life is not the life we have conceived of. Self-sacrifice is not a matter of suffering. In fact, if we see self-sacrifice as painful, we are still not seeing the truth completely. It is bound to be painful for a long time. It will become less painful. After a while, self-sacrifice is an impulse that arises out of love for reality. When it becomes truly understood, it is a joyful thing to sacrifice yourself to the truth.

(Diamond Heart Book 4, pg 357)

HOWEVAAAR

There is no self-sacrifice, not a hint of personal renunciation, but he is not selfish, not self-centered and not preoccupied with himself. His service is the expression of love, compassion, and truth. But he does not necessarily feel that is why he serves. He does not even think that he is serving. Love, compassion and truth are the constituents of his personal beingness. He is all of Essence, and so does not need to think of it or of acting according to its values. That is what it means to be a person of Being, the essential person. He is a precious pearl, rare and incomparable.

(The Pearl Beyond Price)

Also, here is an article that I don't fully agree with, but the way it concludes is unquestionable(read it..now): http://www.lynneforrest.com/relationships-loved-ones/2008/12/self-sacrifice-is-not-love/

Let us answer the question: “Can you measure love?”

The concept “love” is formed by isolating two or more instances of the appropriate psychological process, then retaining its distinguishing characteristics (an emotion proceeding from the evaluation of an existent as a positive value and as a source of pleasure) and omitting the object and the measurements of the process’s intensity. The object may be a thing, an event, an activity, a condition or a person. The intensity varies according to one’s evaluation of the object, as, for instance, in such cases as one’s love for ice cream, or for parties, or for reading, or for freedom, or for the person one marries. The concept “love” subsumes a vast range of values and, consequently, of intensity: it extends from the lower levels (designated by the subcategory “liking”) to the higher level (designated by the subcategory “affection,” which is applicable only in regard to persons) to the highest level, which includes romantic love. If one wants to measure the intensity of a particular instance of love, one does so by reference to the hierarchy of values of the person experiencing it. A man may love a woman, yet may rate the neurotic satisfactions of sexual promiscuity higher than her value to him. Another man may love a woman, but may give her up, rating his fear of the disapproval of others (of his family, his friends or any random strangers) higher than her value. Still another man may risk his life to save the woman he loves, because all his other values would lose meaning without her. The emotions in these examples are not emotions of the same intensity or dimension. Do not let a James Taggart type of mystic tell you that love is immeasurable. It is funny that you mentioned Socrates, cause not only he would he not agree of this because it has gray areas(he would look at love like an on/off with no scaling), but ALSO he did not sacrifice his ideals for his Wife and kids, even though he said he loved them because Socrates wouldn't except money for his philosophy meetings. This left them broke to properly raise a family.

Lol, I can stand the heat, it sounds to me like you can't. When you start resorting to insults to try to win a debate, you've lost the debate, and begin acting like a child. There are very few grays in the world, much of it is black and white, people are simply too weak to want to admit that. They want everything that's socially normal to be "acceptable" and "gray" and "relative" so that everyone can feel just fine in whatever they're doing. It's weakness that our greatest enemies, the terrorists, don't share, for example; they see the world as black and white. Sure, they've got their values screwed up, but they're the latest example in what strict moral code and discipline does; it makes you powerful. It lets the world see what your beliefs are without any fence-sitting or equivocation. America doesn't do this, and everyone knows it, and because we're so at odds with ourselves in part because of this, many other countries can't stand us, because we're worthless, except for the very powerful individuals in America that might still stand for something without getting caught up in pathetic social memes to delude themselves in (luckily, those are usually people that command other people into action, hence why America initially tried starting this "war on terror".)

I'm not reading your entire post. It's nearly the size of an essay, and I'm sure it's not as worthy of my attention span as an actual published essay would be. I'd feel confidant in saying that about almost any Viner's replies of such magnitude, not just yourself, because that reply is ridiculously long, probably the longest post I've ever seen on here (besides the "longest word" thread).

The ending of your post, however, mentions where one places certain things he loves. You state love is graduated and that you, yourself, love your videogames and Playstation 3. Really? You love them? I'd really think you only have a strong liking for them. One loves things such as music, or a wife, or an ideal, if one is willing to sacrifice oneself for them, because anything less would be dishonest, simply being a manner of liking the object very much, not actual love; other feelings such as bravery can also lead to self sacrifice, but actual love will drive you to try and progress or empower that which you love at your own expense, because that is simply what love is. I do not like criminals. In fact, many of them I dislike rather strongly. But I still love humans. Not because we're capable of such great good, not because we're so wonderful each other, because we are equally capable of vile acts and evil towards each other; but I simply love them because I do. I don't know why, I just do. I explained before the limits to that love, and I also love music; not rap or country western music per se, because that's a dime a dozen. Music like Chopin or Bach, or Beethoven, or even some Hans Zimmer or Philip Glass works, because they are actually lovely pieces of music. They're not repetitive, they're not foul, they're dramatic without being raucous, they're stimulating, they're emotionally gripping, they require actual attention to detail, and can allow us to see and feel more than a Mark Twain novel, if one learns to pay attention and feel the music (that sounds overly hippie, but honestly, a book is a story, it has a beginning and ending (though the endings can sometimes be open-ended), but music lives on forever, it's never bound to a single story, and its' context is limited only by your imagination, whereas most books are either purely intellectual such as textbooks, or have clear-cut endings and plots, such as, say, the Jungle Book). If, somehow, I had to choose between Hans Zimmer never composing music, or my own life terminating right there on the spot, I'd pick my life to be terminated, because I love many of his compositions. I do not believe I love HALO however. I do enjoy the story and I greatly enjoy and like the overall expanded universe of HALO, but I don't think I'd choose HALO over my own life.

This isn't something that can be debated over, you simply have to think about it and either come to terms with it or continue using a loose definition that solely relies in yourself and makes everything about the "I", rather than the object (object can mean anything, a person, a concept, an actual object) you profess to love, which I'd propose you don't actually love if you put yourself first before even considering the thing you "love". Understanding starts with looking at things and ideals in relation to yourself, but loving others starts with understanding them in relation to themselves. Sometimes (often times) you don't even have to understand how you love it/them to know you love it/them. The kind of love you're using is a bastardized form that suggests we all do yoga, meditate, and contemplate how wonderful we all are (or horrible, either way), before even thinking of the person next to us, who happens to literally be on fire. You're suggesting we try to understand whether we really want to put them out, or if that's the right thing to do, before just putting them the hell out, so that the immediate portion is over, and you then have time to actually consider these secondary observations.

This isn't a science. This is simply philosophical and moral debate. I believe there is an absolute standard for love and that there are tons of black and white things in the world, and only very few gray ones. You believe differently. Due to my belief, I think you are wrong, but even if you think I'm also wrong (instead of just accepting my view as "relative to me only" like you keep professing), this debate will never get anywhere. It's not something that can be proven, just something you have to accept or not, based on what I try to explain to you, but again, it's the type of debate where you can even ignore the basis for which the truth is grounded, so there's no convincing unless you're willing to convince yourself of what I'm saying.

I'm not going to post anymore in this thread because it's a bit purposeless, at this point. Either agree or don't, but the debate's gotta stop some time, and I think that now is a good stopping time.

Also, you did break some rules, FYI, earlier, with your insults towards me. The mods haven't responded to most people's flags lately though (not just this one), probably due to the high amount of spam lately, so we'll just forget about it.

Avatar image for killer_of_trolls
Killer_of_trolls

2068

Forum Posts

316

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@minigunman123:

1- I won the debate because you haven't read all my post. I worked hard and read about 12 sources(books, articles, and essays) to get back to you with a perfect answer. You should be more respecting. Why would you respond to something without reading the whole thing(rhetorical question). your excuse was bad and you lost the debate unless you are willing to read what I said, and give a better argument.

2- A published article should not be considered more important than what I am saying, trust me. Some of the stuff I said I have actually used in essays in my university(and my essays are usually praised by the grader). It disappoints on how you gave up so easily just because of the length of the text. That just proves I read a lot more than you do, and probably understand more on the subject due to that. The only idea I would ever consider forcing on people is to think for thereself, not to keep thinking untill they get my ideas(like you just did in the last part).

3- I have not used insults, and personally contacted a mod(in PM) to check it, and there was nothing illegal, or worthy of a warning. You are just a tad sensitive.

4- "one can love music, but not video games or stories"? that just won't do. All you are backing it up with is that you don't love Halo. yeah, that is a bad argument. I would fail you right now if this was handed to me. Most of the stuff you said in your reply is subjective. You basically explained why you favor classical music.

5- You are telling me that this is something that can't be proven? come on man, what kind of delusion is that? No self-respecting high-ranked philosopher would accept that. My points are better, more coherent, more practical, and more acceptable. Who are you Samuel L.Jackson"The absence of evidence does not refute the evidence of absence.", lol. It's like your trying to convert me or something, lol. Don't try to force you beleifs towards other's, man. You might argue that I am doing the same thing, but I am on the side of subjectivity. and I am still waiting to see you prove that statistic about people who beive in you aregument(The imaginary 90% percent of people in history).

6- I really don't know what you babble on with the america thing. The terrorist thing you mentioned is no different from an American from an American serial killer who is not clinically insane, and thinks he is proving a point. Also I am not an American but don't generalize by calling them useless, even if you are one. America(and the american people) is no more special in any way than other countries in history in any possible way(good or bad): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMqcLUqYqrs

7- I am sorry, but you are not open-minded enough for this conversation(I am 100% serious regarding that conclusion).

8- I have heard thousands of opinions on love. you are not the first to claim it is self sacrifice, and I have changed the opinion of some people who believed that. No body has the right to announce what is love, and that's precisely why I consider it subjective.(That is, however, an over-simplified summary. Everything I have mentioned before expands it perfectly.

object (object can mean anything, a person, a concept, an actual object)

WTF! You did not just explain "object", DID YOU? Do I sound like an ignorant freshman, lol.