73 replies to this topic

[brandonxan]

I'm really curious about what you think signals if you are in true love or instead just obsession..attachment..etc.

I'm not completely sure myself but one thing I think is a signal for me is when every love song you hear you think of your significant other.
For example, I listened to one of Carrie Underwood's songs about this girl's husband dropping dead at the wedding and I started to cry a little cause it made me think what if my significant other died. Hmm.

Edited by brandonxan, 10 April 2009 - 02:54 PM.

[Tetiel]

Like Kit said, it really depends on the person and especially how they were raised. I think we base our own love towards another person and imitate how we act in marriage from our parents. The same thing happens with parenting a child. We learn how to be parents from our own parents or if not, another role model. I think the person that you have to be your husband or wife should be your best friend and someone you think you could trust to still love you no matter what you do. Romantic love isn't unconditional like what we have with our offspring, so I think you really need to be in a long relationship with someone to really judge if you love them or not.

I just think a lot of people mistake deep infatuation for love. I know I once did.

[Cassy]

When you're in love you love a person deeply simply because it's that person. Not simply because of this and that trait and such.

[brandonxan]

When you're in love you love a person deeply simply because it's that person. Not simply because of this and that trait and such.

But aren't a person's traits what make them unique? Apart from other people?

[Cassy]

True, but you've got to remember you love that person and anything they come with. Even if they change into an entirely different person overnight you'll still love them, not simply because you remember how they were, simply because you love them. It's like motherly love for example.

[brandonxan]

True, but you've got to remember you love that person and anything they come with. Even if they change into an entirely different person overnight you'll still love them, not simply because you remember how they were, simply because you love them. It's like motherly love for example.

But if they change overnight then they're not the same person anymore and don't have the same qualities that made you love them..right?

[Cassy]

A person doesn't need the same qualities. When you fall in love, you fall in love with the person, not their body, mind, personality etc. The person himself/herself. The person's personality or appearance may change, but they are still the same person. Even though there's nothing someone can identify them by.

When you fall in love with someone sexually/physically, it's lust. When you fall in love with someone due to their personality or traits, it's infatuation. When you fall in love with the actual person due to no reason undue to their traits (even if you do ordon't like their habits or traits) it's love.

Love is a confusing thing really, been deeply into someone too. Total workaholic and dead serious. I've never seemed interested in people like that since I'm a total opposite; fun-loving and love to joke around, but for some reason I guess I started to get along with people like due to them reminding me of him. And even now even though he's moved on with someone else and so have I, I still have a soft spot for him. I guess that feeling was much different than the others I had.

Edited by Cassy, 11 April 2009 - 02:49 PM.

[brandonxan]

A person doesn't need the same qualities. When you fall in love, you fall in love with the person, not their body, mind, personality etc. The person himself/herself. The person's personality or appearance may change, but they are still the same person. Even though there's nothing someone can identify them by.

When you fall in love with someone sexually/physically, it's lust. When you fall in love with someone due to their personality or traits, it's infatuation. When you fall in love with the actual person due to no reason undue to their traits (even if you do ordon't like their habits or traits) it's love.

Love is a confusing thing really, been deeply into someone too. Total workaholic and dead serious. I've never seemed interested in people like that since I'm a total opposite; fun-loving and love to joke around, but for some reason I guess I started to get along with people like due to them reminding me of him. And even now even though he's moved on with someone else and so have I, I still have a soft spot for him. I guess that feeling was much different than the others I had.

So if someone just completely and totally changes how can you still be in love with them? If you fall in love with someone what are you falling in love with? When you fall in love with someone "as a person just as they are" isn't it just their actions/what they do that makes you fall in love? If so, when they change and aren't doing the same things anymore, how could you still be in love? Or are you in love with the memory of what it used to be?

[Frizzle]

Love is a man made emotion used to describe extreme emotions of like, lust and chemical reactions.

Love is any of a number of emotions and experiences related to a sense of strong affection and attachment. The word love can refer to a variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes, ranging from generic pleasure to intense interpersonal attraction.

As you can see, it's a descriptive, nothing more, nothing less.

[Cassy]

You are in love with the person, it's hard to explain, but there's no reason to love, it's simply a feeling

Love is controlled by some of the same hormones that make an attachment between mother's and their children. So it would be reasonable a mother would still love her child if they were separated and met together again with him/her as a grown up and completely different person. Oxytocin I believe is the hormone.

But, for more information on the theory of love, here's a nice link for anyone to read up on.

http://en.wikipedia....ientific_views)

[Bryan]

Love is a manifestation of the human emotion. It doesn't truly exist as there's no true definition for it.

Plus, I think you were just crying because you were listening to Carrie Underwood. It hurts my eardrums too, don't worry.

[Cassy]

Lol, who exactly has been crying?

[Ives]

I don't think I'm in love yet with my current partner, but she has a certain vibe which suggests most definitely I will be in love with her.

[brandonxan]

What is the difference between being in love with her or thinking that you could be in love with her one day?

[Frizzle]

Love is controlled by some of the same hormones that make an attachment between mother's and their children. So it would be reasonable a mother would still love her child if they were separated and met together again with him/her as a grown up and completely different person. Oxytocin I believe is the hormone.

But, for more information on the theory of love, here's a nice link for anyone to read up on.

http://en.wikipedia....ientific_views)

That's just a mixture of beahaviourism and socialisation.

Also, don't look up pyschological topics on wikipedia, not reliable.

[brandonxan]

That's just a mixture of beahaviourism and socialisation.

Also, don't look up pyschological topics on wikipedia, not reliable.

I would say psychological topics are probably most reliable on wikipedia. Psychology is the study of mental life and there is no "black and white" when studying people's thoughts and emotions, so the more opinions on the topic, the better the insight.

[Frizzle]

Well of course pyschological matters are mostly insight and opinion but those are always backed up statistics and studies. That's why Freud was decredited on most of his pyschodynamic work. The majority of work done in the pyschologcial field are rescrited to more niche sites and wikipedia has little on it.

[Sweeney]

Everything is black and white. If it looks gray to you, it's because you're too stupid to comprehend it.

That's not to say that I do, but still. Pointing at gray areas is the intellectual equivalent of flapping your hands and crying because it's too hard.

[Bryan]

Pointing at gray areas is the intellectual equivalent of flapping your hands and crying because it's too hard.

Someone finally understands my way of thought.

[Tetiel]

I'll agree to that. I think people confuse grey areas to situations that need to be seen on a case by case basis :\

[brandonxan]

Wiki is never going to be a credible source, no matter if the information was in reality, written by an expert in the field. You can't know who wrote it, so can't possibly know if they've put reasonably object information in or biased bullshit.

brandonxan, are you at uni, high school or neither? I can't quite figure out your age.
It's just that, you'll find that university lectuers will almost always mark you down for using wiki sources. I know we don't ask for much in the way of sources in this section, but the more credible, the better.

Most people use wiki as a reference point to get some basic info, and some pointers on where to go for more info (like hunting down the cited sources).

My name's Brandon and I'm 19 years old and a sophomore at Georgia State University :-P

And I said that wiki is good for psychological topics because psychology is just mainly people's insight and reasoning so why not get a huge online resource of opinions

Edited by brandonxan, 16 April 2009 - 04:36 PM.

[sonic]

This thread is for girls(and urban).

[Sweeney]

My name's Brandon and I'm 19 years old and a sophomore at Georgia State University :-P

And I said that wiki is good for psychological topics because psychology is just mainly people's insight and reasoning so why not get a huge online resource of opinions

Because not all opinions are equal.
For example, my opinion about the parasite burdens of Egyptian Spiny mice is far more valuable than yours, because I've spent three quarters of a year studying the damn things.
Equally, some people are of the opinion that the moon is made of cheese. These people are morons, and their opinion doesn't deserve the slightest shred of respect.

This constant demand (in general, not talking about specifically here) for all opinions to be heard and considered equally is utterly pathetic.

[Frizzle]

Everything is black and white. If it looks gray to you, it's because you're too stupid to comprehend it.

That's not to say that I do, but still. Pointing at gray areas is the intellectual equivalent of flapping your hands and crying because it's too hard.

Not in politics. Everything is gray. (grey?)

Because not all opinions are equal.
For example, my opinion about the parasite burdens of Egyptian Spiny mice is far more valuable than yours, because I've spent three quarters of a year studying the damn things.
Equally, some people are of the opinion that the moon is made of cheese. These people are morons, and their opinion doesn't deserve the slightest shred of respect.

This constant demand (in general, not talking about specifically here) for all opinions to be heard and considered equally is utterly pathetic.

What Joe's trying to explain is that he wasted 3/4 of a year on this mice things so therefore you would have to waste 3/4 of year just have as much respectable opinion as him.

[brandonxan]

Because not all opinions are equal.
For example, my opinion about the parasite burdens of Egyptian Spiny mice is far more valuable than yours, because I've spent three quarters of a year studying the damn things.
Equally, some people are of the opinion that the moon is made of cheese. These people are morons, and their opinion doesn't deserve the slightest shred of respect.

This constant demand (in general, not talking about specifically here) for all opinions to be heard and considered equally is utterly pathetic.

Well true about the mice.
But what I am saying is that since we are all humans with consciouses and emotions, then we are all an equal authority on our emotions and feelings.