Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bronson on January 10, 2011 at 8:18pm

I don't think love is something that can be easily described in a few paragraphs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Reardon on January 10, 2011 at 9:34pm

Love, like most things in life, is different for each individual.  I love my wife, I would die to protect her, but her concept of love is not the same as mine.  Every time there is a conflict between what I want and what she wants, I ask myself is this more important than being with her?  And the answer has always been, so far, no.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erik H. Brush on January 10, 2011 at 9:38pm

Tough question. I think love is when you care about someone or something as much as or than you care about yourself.

 

The definitions get trickier when you talk about being "in love" as opposed to "feeling love" etc. It could be romantic or it could be compassionate.

 

"I love my job" in most cases is not the same as "I love my dog" or "I love my spouse/child/mom/family etc."

 

You have self love too. (Not conceit or vanity, just a degree of healthy self awareness and appreciation.)

 

One thing is sure about love, it is a subjective feeling or idea that as as individual as all of the people who can feel it, and as universal as any thought or drive on the planet.

 

Love is a tough thing to define since we all see it so differently.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan E. Hoffman on January 10, 2011 at 11:19pm

Lady don't hurt me, don't hurt me, don't hurt me...

 

no more.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave G on January 11, 2011 at 12:21am

Thank you, Ryan. Now I don't need to post that video. :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ungodlynews on January 11, 2011 at 7:42am

Yeah could't help but to bop my head a little when I read the title of this discussion. Damn you Haddaway!*

 

 

*no inference is being made that there is a skydaddy capable of damning Haddaway. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill on January 11, 2011 at 10:57pm

 

 

 

I think this one adds to our understanding as well!

(you have to refresh the page to make it stop. Sorry about that!!!)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kelin420 on January 12, 2011 at 6:51am

Baaaaa Haaaaaa HAAAA- lol-thanx - I tried to avoid this discussion just because that stupid song-lol

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T A A on January 11, 2011 at 1:30am

But then there is the problem of someone who claims they don't like a family member, but they "still love them."

 

That to me is modern religious hypocrisy... Throughout history, family members have been banished for 'non compliance' with (insert whichever rule/action) family/community law. Today I think due to nuclear families, the expection of love towards thy family, above and beyond even liking them, stems from a guilty religious conscience. I cannot 'love' whom I do not 'like'. I cannot place family ties above my own values. "Blood thicker than water" is a very modern concept. As recently as medieval times (recent in evolutionary terms) it was routine for sibbling and/or family members to kill each other fighting for bits of land and for power.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by karl on January 11, 2011 at 2:18am

I started to read everyone's comments and realized it was better to state my opinion on the subject, then I'll read everyone else, that way I stay clear!
Love, between parent and child, a primal instinct to preserve the species.
Love, between partners, an understanding of the contributions each brings to the betterment and happiness of the other and in turn themselves. A mutual agreement that this partner is the best possible choice, there will be flaws and problems, but still, a knowing that this is the best choice for the growth of ones self. In addition a physical connection, with or with out procreation is necessary to create the depth of the partner bond, we all need affection, one way or another!
Love, between friends, a bond as significant as a partner, with similar traits that affect of the progression of growth within ones self. Friends can hold a higher place than a partner since the interference of physical commitment is dispelled, or relegated to a lower, simpler, physical process, opening the doors for a deeper understanding of intellectual growth.
Did I miss anything, would love to hear opinions!
K

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T A A on January 11, 2011 at 3:03am

between parent and child ... nuclear families are a recent phenomenom in Homo sapiens history. Historically, weaning occured between the ages of three and five, period of intense maternal 'love'. Beyond that children were raised by extended familial groups of women.

 

between partners... monogamous couples are even more recent in human evolution

 

between friends... if by that you mean group/tribal belonging, yes that dates back very far in history. But I've always used the word love sparingly in that context. I have known people who shout it constantly tho, ever so annoying.

 

So it's not only that we may disagree on the meaning of love, but also on it's historical/evolutionary relevance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jennifer Ulean Breedlove on January 11, 2011 at 1:42pm

To me love is the same thing that morals are.

It is to be defined by the person defining it and nothing more or less.

It can be very oppressive in nature.

It should not be used lightly, or spoken of lightly..

Having said that, I love my children and my husband of 8 years. I love my younger sister and several of my friends.

But they are all different forms of love. They can all be defined differently.

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page