whats Love for u..huh?

[anyaa]

Hey there...

I'd be thinking about this for a looong looong time.....and I have reached certain conclusions as what I 'd define love (I in no way mean its 100% my original definition...but..I think I did comprehend it to a decent level..)

so just curious to know ur definition of love....
huh???

Note:
Love in general ...
Love for work, parents, all under a common roof ....

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Even in general I have two concepts of love.

1. Practical love, undying devotion towards someone.
2. Embraceful love, accepting people for who they are.

They overlap, but the two are ocassionally seperable.

 

[Joohanh]

I think there's only one kind of love, which is exactly practical love. Other than that, 'love' as a word only functions as a symbol of acceptance.

One might argue that love between family members and partners is different, but it actually is not. Only thing that's different is the romantic tense in partnership. First comes romance, then comes love.

 

[snafupants]

^ not to compare your lover with your sister/brother, but love in both instances entails sacrifice and selflessness and a genuine concern about the other person. the contention for love would be hard to make if self regard undermines, overly informs that relationship, romantic or otherwise. self love should be considered an oxymoron. action should probably be coupled with regard for the other person to adhere to this definition - perennially sending someone twenty bucks in the mail on birthdays, thus, would not constitute love. that is obligation, guilt, or pity.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Baby, don't hurt me.

 

[Anchorite]

I would say love is wanting to be around someone whether you like them or not, or liking them whether or not there is a legitimate explanation as to why.
Other than that it's hard to say, I haven't experienced much of it.

 

[DarkGreen]

You know what was beautiful about the Greek culture? They had different words for love. Like 'Agapé' and 'Eros' and 'Philial'. Agapé is self-sacrificing, Eros is self above others, and Philial is brotherly love. They are all love but in English we only have one word for it which is sad because it doesn't plumb the depths of the subject like I'd like it to. Eros is unsatisfying ultimately while Agapé is fulfilling and it can move mountains. Did you know that Hate is like cement to the human heart? If you combat someone out of hate you merely reinforce their bad impressions and create more hate. If you choose to love someone you can solve problems faster and you feel like everything will be alright after all. There's nothing love can't fix. Philial love is what you have for your best friend and it can even be Agapé if you really consider them as a brother or a sister. For me I like Philial love mixed with Agapé because you get a lot of good lasting friends that way.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I think there's only one kind of love, which is exactly practical love. Other than that, 'love' as a word only functions as a symbol of acceptance.

Well then by your logic, practical love is really only a symbol of devotion. I see love as subjective in terms of experiencing the feeling, but it is also objective to the point that it can and needs to be distinguished from lust, affection, infatuation, dislike and hate.

 

[Words]

I find it really ineffective to use the word love; I'd rather boil it down to 'attachment'.

Like and love are attachments; the only difference is determined by 'form' and 'level'. Thus, love and like are 'forms' of attachment. There are also different forms.

So the question is "what is 'attachment'?". A sense of meaning. it can be affected by experience and an inner arrangement of values, but I don't think you can choose attachment.

 

[chuhulil]

I really have never thought about this before.

Though, I guess I'd consider love a genuine positive emotion towards another.

 

[The Gopher]

love is what happens when you stop thinking but still like(love) them.

 

[Fukyo]

Home.

 

[Anthile]

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

 

[Thoughtful]

Love is a Verb. It is something one consciously chooses to do. To willingly put another persons happiness before your own without need of compensation. It may lead to a happy bubbly feeling inside which is commonly referred to as love, but the feeling is a result of the action, not vice-versa as seems to be the common conception.

 

[Saeros]

I'm going to answer this question in 2 parts. In the first part, I'll reference Robert Sternberg's triangular theory of love. Sternberg claims that there are 3 components of consummate love ("true" love). All three components are required, and if even one is missing, then it isn't consummate love. The three components are:
- Intimacy: A feeling of closeness with the other person. It means that, among other things, you feel comfortable enough with this person to discuss things about yourself that you wouldn't discuss with complete strangers. It's about being open with the other person.
- Passion: Passion is attraction. Enough said.
- Commitment: The desire to commit to the relationship in the long term.

A relationship in which only intimacy is present is like to be more of an acquaintance. You might feel comfortable to discuss personal details, but you aren't attracted to them, and it wouldn't really matter if you never saw them again. If only passion is present, then it's called infatuation. Basically, you don't really know the person so you won't share personal details with each other, and you have no intention of maintaining a long-term relationship, but you're really attracted to the other person. If only commitment is present then it is called empty love. You aren't open with the person, and aren't attracted to the person, but you feel that you have an obligation to maintain the relationship. This is often the last stage of a dieing relationship, except in countries with pre-arranged marriages, in which this is the first stage of a relationship.

A relationship with intimacy and passion is called romantic love. This is where you're close with the other person, you're attracted to them, but you don't really have any definite plans on how to maintain the relationship. If passion and commitment are present, it is a fatuous relationship. This is where you're attracted to each other, you have plans to maintain the relationship, but you really aren't open with each other, and can't share anything. Like a lot of celebrity relationships . If intimacy and commitment are present, then it is called companionate love. This is where you're really close with the person, are committed to maintaining the relationship, but you aren't physically attracted to each other. This probably would have been the ideal relationship in ancient Greece, considering the kind of asceticism that was common then.

In the second part, I'm going to completely destroy the concept of love by exploring the biological basis for love in the brain. Why do scientists have to ruin everything that's good and true in the world?

 

[Joohanh]

Well then by your logic, practical love is really only a symbol of devotion. I see love as subjective in terms of experiencing the feeling, but it is also objective to the point that it can and needs to be distinguished from lust, affection, infatuation, dislike and hate.

No, practical love is a 'force' that devotes even the unwilling to somebody or in worst cases something. You could say that it well and truly is the most powerful and remarkable emotion that exists (or that we know of).

The emotions you named are indeed different from love. They may or may not be involved.

I would say love is wanting to be around someone whether you like them or not, or liking them whether or not there is a legitimate explanation as to why.

Yes. This is also my personal status at the moment.

I've been utterly in love for a certain person for five or four years now; yet I see no reason for my emotions. This person acts ruthlessly to anyone trying to get closer (I have never tried, but watched others fall), only cares about herself and her social status, and on top of it all, isn't intelligent by a long stretch, which has always been my main criteria.

I can not find one good reason for my silly emotions, but this is the situation where I find myself in. So I don't underestimate 'love'.

 

[Anchorite]

Love is a Verb. It is something one consciously chooses to do. To willingly put another persons happiness before your own without need of compensation. It may lead to a happy bubbly feeling inside which is commonly referred to as love, but the feeling is a result of the action, not vice-versa as seems to be the common conception.

Well I looked it up and the definition I found said it was both a verb and a noun, as I expected. I really can't imagine consciously deciding what level of affection I could have for any one, If humans were capable for such a thing my life and many others would be much more simple.

 

[lone_dreamer]

When in doubt...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love#Chemical_basishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love#Chemical_basis
But seriously, that's pretty much my idea of love.

 

[Joohanh]

When in doubt...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love#Chemical_basis
But seriously, that's pretty much my idea of love.

I believe that these chemical reactions are caused by love and not the other way around. (Yes, I also believe that mind along with emotions is immaterial. No scientific proof for it, though.)

 

[cheese]

Quick, someone denounce his INTP status!

 

[SpaceYeti]

I believe that these chemical reactions are caused by love and not the other way around. (Yes, I also believe that mind along with emotions is immaterial. No scientific proof for it, though.)

What reason do you think that?

 

[Joohanh]

Quick, someone denounce his INTP status!

Heh, it indeed is not very INTP-ish.

What reason do you think that?

Just because I'm a silly dreamer. I find the concept of "my thoughts and mind are only chemical reactions" to be... how should I put it... depressing. I would like to believe it isn't so, but I have no real arguments to back me up.

 

[anyaa]

Quick, someone denounce his INTP status!

Hmm...
Interesting....
I see ... I'd be much happy to not be called an INTP ..... if an INTP never thinks about such "essentials" for life...

can u explain (fully justify) the 'INTpish .. which seems that u think u r the one' and give even a reason for not thinking about such questions? huh?
Justificaton is the key(escp. for an INTP..huh?)

Lemme see how the INTP replies..huh? .. so I can learn something ... :-P

 

[jachian]

Love is a Verb. It is something one consciously chooses to do. To willingly put another persons happiness before your own without need of compensation. It may lead to a happy bubbly feeling inside which is commonly referred to as love, but the feeling is a result of the action, not vice-versa as seems to be the common conception.

This is one of the more interesting definitions of love i've seen........

 

[Oster]

After thinking about it for years I came to the conclusion that love is a feeling, an emotion. Like hate. or sadness.

I like to think of emotions as hue's of colors - as youngster you learn that there's 3 main colors, and later on you recognize 6 colors, then 12 and eventually you'll learn to see hundreds, if not thousands of different colors, depending on what colors you mix them and how much white/black you add to them.

With emotions like love or sadness, there's as many different hues and mixes as there is humans. All feelings have different causes and reasons, depending on the people and the story behind them.

I also think love is an annoyance.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Just because I'm a silly dreamer. I find the concept of "my thoughts and mind are only chemical reactions" to be... how should I put it... depressing. I would like to believe it isn't so, but I have no real arguments to back me up.

I was never egotistical enough to pretend that reality exists in a way that pleases me instead of however it wants.

 

[Joohanh]

I was never egotistical enough to pretend that reality exists in a way that pleases me instead of however it wants.

Normally I would agree, but it is my mind afterall which we are talking about here. In my opinion, intuition does hold some value.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Value perhaps, but how much of it is "truth value", instead of subjective value?

 

[Dormouse]

Love is all gooey, kinda like what you get when you forget about the gummy bears and chocolate in your pocket and they merge together in the heat. It's a mess, and it will probably make you sick if you ingest it, but at least it comes with one hell of a sugar buzz.

...Yeah.

 

[giaduck]

I guess that there are different stages of love.
For me, when I met my husband I went through this:
1. Passion/attraction/infatuation
2. Intimacy
3. Affection through shared experiences.

For my daughter it wasn't instantaneous (as some mothers would make you believe).
1. Disbelief that she actually existed and came out of me
2. Bonding in the simplest forms (touch, talking, breastfeeding ect)
3. Affection/willingness to sacrifice anything for her safety.
The older she gets and the more she communicates with me makes it easier to love and respect her.

For friends there is also a different formula:
1. Interest in personal life
2. A sort of infatuation where you talk to them all the time because they are your new friend.
3. Affection and a sharing of intimacy (non sexual).

These are not based on science, only from a personal point of view.

 

[orion]

i look at love as 2 kinds being in love which is just for no reason u cant get someone out of your mind or have romanttic feelings for them. and loving some one as in caring for them deeply as in family or your best friend.

 

[nexion]

What is it? I don't have a definition. I have been thinking for the last two days, and I haven't come up with a definition. I have no idea what it is, and highly doubt I have felt a genuine love (if anyone ever has) for anybody. Also, if love (depending on your definition) even exists. Obviously, I would say that all these 'loves' which are defined as "subverting one's own will for the sake of others" clearly doesn't exist.

Sad, sad me.

 

[Zique]

The definition I came up with is passionate altruism, admiration, and devotion. In fact i think you can replace the word love with passion (to some extent), because of the broad range of definitions it has (any powerful or compelling feeling, strong amorous feeling or desire, lust, experience of strong love, etc.). I thought that the ideal definition would be passionate passion because it can merge all of the possible definitions of passion that relates to love together, but i do not know whether or not that definition could be literarily correct (i suck at english >.<), and also passion alone lacks the concept of geniuine concern and consideration that is also important when it comes to love.

There are also two different kinds of love (the love you have for your mother, sister, friends, etc., and the love you have for a soulmate, or "partner", "In love"). I would say that the only difference between the two would be the sense of intimacy you would have or want for a person when your "In love". Regardless, the definition still fits because of the broad range of definitions the word passion has. So, while passion handles the desire, lust, and powerful emotion side of love, and altruism and admiration handles the envy, concern, and caring side of love. Still, the definition still have some flaws because i don't know how to put it together so that it considers every aspect. Also I've never experienced being "in love", so my thoughts on it is nothing but detached speculation.

 

[nexion]

Greek has four different words translated into English as love.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love

I don't believe it is possible for agape love to exist. But perhaps storge love exists only in the relationship two people have and not in any sort of real love, making it mostly indistinguishable from philia love.

But where is the love of self? Should there not be a separate category for that?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Self love should be redundant. Everyday you love yourself in a practical way by keeping yourself alive and catering to yourself. But if you mean love as in acceptance, then self love can be distinguished. You may or may not accept yourself...

 

[nexion]

Self love should be redundant. Everyday you love yourself in a practical way by keeping yourself alive and catering to yourself. But if you mean love as in acceptance, then self love can be distinguished. You may or may not accept yourself...

Maybe the human instincts, the drive to survive, just outweighs the love of self, or acceptance, which keep many people from suicide. Obviously, both you and I would likely say that people who commit suicide don't love themselves or their lives (though that is not the only case) but do they do so because they have no desire to survive or because they have a real or fantasized view of excessive self-loathing?

Or what are some of the other reasons one would commit suicide, and what involvement in love do they have?

 

[nexion]

I will say, however, that I have more love for a man on the side of the street, than I do for my own family. That's what happens when you know someone to well.

 

[5k17]

I would define love as an addiction to perceiving a specific person.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Maybe the human instincts, the drive to survive, just outweighs the love of self, or acceptance, which keep many people from suicide. Obviously, both you and I would likely say that people who commit suicide don't love themselves or their lives (though that is not the only case) but do they do so because they have no desire to survive or because they have a real or fantasized view of excessive self-loathing?

Or what are some of the other reasons one would commit suicide, and what involvement in love do they have?

I want to clear up something. Are you contrasting the drive to survive with self love? I was claiming they are the same thing.

I'd say people who commit suicide override their love of self to relieve the self of the self. It's a cataclysmic contradiction resulting in death. No desire to live and a desire to die are two different things. The former is selfless and the latter wishes nonexistence upon the self. They have similar ends, but a desire to die is selfish, even if you wish to achieve a selfless state similar to moksha, becoming one with the universe.

I will say, however, that I have more love for a man on the side of the street, than I do for my own family. That's what happens when you know someone to well.

I don't see love as having grey areas, either you love someone or you don't. I think it is the will to love that varies. Some people have a greater will to love than others, but no one can possibly love someone more than someone else.

 

[nexion]

I want to clear up something. Are you contrasting the drive to survive with self love? I was claiming they are the same thing.

I'd say people who commit suicide override their love of self to relieve the self of the self. It's a cataclysmic contradiction resulting in death. No desire to live and a desire to die are two different things. The former is selfless and the latter wishes nonexistence upon the self. They have similar ends, but a desire to die is selfish, even if you wish to achieve a selfless state similar to moksha, becoming one with the universe.

I suppose it's just semantics then. It makes more sense to me to say that self-love is only acceptance of self and that drive to survive is merely instinctual. Oh, but damn, there are some people who lose the will to survive... I will think more on this.

I would object to suicide often being for selfish reasons, but to do so would only be based on the unnecessary negative connotation of the word "selfish," and not based in fact.

I don't see love as having grey areas, either you love someone or you don't. I think it is the will to love that varies. Some people have a greater will to love than others, but no one can possibly love someone more than someone else.

An interesting way to think, but I am not sure that I could think in this way. I think for me, there is conditional love and there is unconditional love. In the case of conditional love, the condition determines the type of love. The Greeks got it best. Agape is unconditional love, whereas the other three are conditional loves. But I haven't defined the differences between these conditions yet. And then, the absence of any type of love is either indifference or some degree of hate (of which I would say there are also different "categories").

So, no, I don't really believe there is gray areas, but instead different conditions placed for a love to be sustained. The conditions determine the type of love. However, whereas agape love can not coexist with conditional love, different types of conditional love can coexist. For example, I could do something to a family member to either temporarily or permanently dismember the philia love between us, but because he is still my family member, the storge love still exists. that's how I see it.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

For example, I could do something to a family member to either temporarily or permanently dismember the philia love between us, but because he is still my family member, the storge love still exists. that's how I see it.

But if you willingly acted that way in the first place did you ever really love them? Of course this just leads back to the definition of love.

It seems love will always be subject to semantics.

 

[nexion]

But if you willingly acted that way in the first place did you ever really love them? Of course this just leads back to the definition of love.

It seems love will always be subject to semantics.

Yes, but even more so. It's not a question of whether you loved them, but whether they loved you. That is, is it possible for any sort of conditional love to be love at all?

 

[mke2686]

You know what was beautiful about the Greek culture? They had different words for love. Like 'Agapé' and 'Eros' and 'Philial'. Agapé is self-sacrificing, Eros is self above others, and Philial is brotherly love. They are all love but in English we only have one word for it which is sad because it doesn't plumb the depths of the subject like I'd like it to. Eros is unsatisfying ultimately while Agapé is fulfilling and it can move mountains. Did you know that Hate is like cement to the human heart? If you combat someone out of hate you merely reinforce their bad impressions and create more hate. If you choose to love someone you can solve problems faster and you feel like everything will be alright after all. There's nothing love can't fix. Philial love is what you have for your best friend and it can even be Agapé if you really consider them as a brother or a sister. For me I like Philial love mixed with Agapé because you get a lot of good lasting friends that way.

funny how im greek and agape is the first 5 leters in my last name and i didnt know that...

 

[Melkor]

A nasty chemical reaction that seeks to usurp your personal logic.

 

[shoeless]

when you can take a shower with someone in a less than 3 foot by 3 foot space, and not feel awkward about it.

 

[nexion]

funny how im greek and agape is the first 5 leters in my last name and i didnt know that...

What is the remainder of your last name?

 

[Magnus]

xxpbdudexx I know what you mean about the stranger thing. I feel like someone I don't know will have more to offer than someone I do. (and also that I can offer more to said person) however I am with Joohanh on this one. Love is not easy to define or explain, It may be god's gift to mankind or a meaningless impulse. For Scientific proof you would have to go to the level below atoms, even that is not absolute proof of anything though. The only thing I have to justify the Idea that love is not chemicals ultimately is blind faith. However if im wrong and this is all pointless there is no reason to worry that im wrong anyway.

 

[nexion]

xxpbdudexx I know what you mean about the stranger thing. I feel like someone I don't know will have more to offer than someone I do. (and also that I can offer more to said person) however I am with Joohanh on this one. Love is not easy to define or explain, It may be god's gift to mankind or a meaningless impulse. For Scientific proof you would have to go to the level below atoms, even that is not absolute proof of anything though. The only thing I have to justify the Idea that love is not chemicals ultimately is blind faith. However if im wrong and this is all pointless there is no reason to worry that im wrong anyway.

I am not currently worried with any explanations for why love, or, more generally, emotion, takes place. I am merely trying to define it in a rational way. I believe it can be done, in as specific way as possible, even if that ends up being incredibly vague. For example, what is a "pen"? It is a instrument which uses ink to write. I believe any word can be described in a similar way, using as concise a definition as possible. A word such as "love" simply requires more thought to the definition since it is intangible. What do you say love is?

 

[Vrecknidj]

Love includes a willingness to suspend one's own wishes in order to accommodate or foster another's wishes.

 

[Lobstrich]

For me, love is when you really want to be with someone. When you want to tell someone what's on your mind, and when you're not talking to whoever it is, you miss the talking, and the person.

I don't really care about the overly dramatic definitions of love. You know, "willing to sacrifice whatever it takes to be with someone!" - "Heartaches when you fight" etc. For me it's as simple as really, really wanting to be with the person. So it can be love as in relationships and friendships.