S
allkratosI have never and never will.Let it be the way it is as i really love her so much...For the eternity thing i want to say that when both lovebirds die,every single memory,bitter or sweet will vanish...
For cosmos-planet relationship,your view is thoughtful and heuristic.I agree,cosmos is like an onimous ocean where we are just explorers on a lost vessel trying decide which direction to head for...that's what i understand from your view.
Love dieing at the grave is probably the best way for it to end.. In that respect, is she happy? Are you happy that she is happy, as it is assumed that when one truely loves another they do not need to be close, even though it is preffered, But all they may need is to see the other person happy and achieve what they want.
Every single memory, Are you prepared though?
You understand my view perfectly :)
Replying to #41
She won't even realize if i'm dead or not but i know she is not happy with her life right now...she had made a wrong choice from what i heard from my investigator...her life is so restrictive, a woman like her at the end of the day in my society is just a slave for their pedophilic men.I wish i could convince her about that but it is too late.I want her to be happy even if i'm not happy.That's why i let her go in the first place thinking that she will find her happiness with the choice that she made back then.Of course,i'm prepared.But i really want to die before her so i don't have to miss her.As for her,she don't care about me.
Replying to #42
Quite the predicament indeed...
I have no idea what to suggest to such a problem, not that my advice is any good anyway.
Although you wish her to be happy even if you are not, will you be happy though if she is happy?
I feel for you. I offer you a hug. I cannot understand how you feel, seeing as though I have never been there. :/ But I imagine it to be of great longing and pain.
allkratosHmmm....actually love is the main cause of wars...no joke.
You're actually right. From the first page of this 'debate' I can say that some people are fixed on what their ideas of love is. Similar to the 'What is the meaning of life?' topic, there isn't one solid definition. Love is such a broad word it covers too many aspects to name. Love for a person, love for a child, love for money, love for faith/God, love for objects, love of love, love for lust etc.
Love does cause war, but it's not just the romance aspect he's talking about. The Vietnam war wouldn't have been if America didn't have such a strong love for democracy. The crusades wouldn't have happened if some people weren't so hellbent on loving God or their faith. There's no solid, no singular definition or single use for the word love.
Relationships/affection/lust/romance are entirely different stories. Love is extremely ambiguous as a word, and even as a feeling
or substance.
Replying to #44
I agree with all of that. It can be interpreted as many different things. And everyone has their own definition for such a powerful emotion.
Replying to #45
Exactly, the only people that are wrong about this sort of topic is the people saying that someone elses definition of love or interpretation is wrong. Their definition isn't wrong, it's just the way they make their definition make it seem like it's the only one.
Replying to #46
And that's one thing I hate, you can't say someone is wrong about such a topic, it's what makes a person a person. It's completely out of order to take that away from someone. :/ I don't understand why some people think it is perfectly okay to deny someone of their main, core feelings.
Natewlie · #44You're actually right. From the first page of this 'debate' I can say that some people are fixed on what their ideas of love is. Similar to the 'What is the meaning of life?' topic, there isn't one solid definition. Love is such a broad word it covers too many aspects to name. Love for a person, love for a child, love for money, love for faith/God, love for objects, love of love, love for lust etc.Love does cause war, but it's not just the romance aspect he's talking about. The Vietnam war wouldn't have been if America didn't have such a strong love for democracy. The crusades wouldn't have happened if some people weren't so hellbent on loving God or their faith. There's no solid, no singular definition or single use for the word love.Relationships/affection/lust/romance are entirely different stories. Love is extremely ambiguous as a word, and even as a feeling or substance.
i wasn't talking about the romance part of it.i was trying to tell what you have told.
When i saw this question all that came to mind was songs XDI'm gonna have to go with "Boston" and say It's more than a feeling
A
Natewlie
sorry i missed it.Man,my sight is deteriorating
just to jump to the beginnig, or the title,
in my opinion it's both
not that when your in love with someone your thinking about this.
i think it dosntmatter, if your in love your in love, if your heart is (figureitivly) breaking, it is.
C
Natewlie · #44Love for a person, love for a child, love for money, love for faith/God, love for objects, love of love, love for lust etc.
some parts doesn't fit the word 'love', but maybe 'desire' suits even better.
Replying to #53
Exactly what I'm talking about.
There is more than one definition of love, as I said before. No one is right, no one is wrong. People can have a love for money, people can have a love for objects or sex or anything you can think of, and it won't be wrong. Love as a word, a term, is so vague, so ambiguous it means absolutely everything in the world.
Replying to #54
but i don't think desire means love. like love for money, it's not really love. well it's just my opinion.
Replying to #55
To some, it's love.
Here's where I'm coming from here,
my idea of love, is a feeling, I personally don't believe you can love an object or thing, but I think you can love someone, be it romance or hereditary, I love my family. That's my idea of love, that's my definition and no other. My opinion isn't wrong, as is yours, in fact we're all correct.
Even the people who have a love for their material possessions, we may think it's wrong, that's simply, not true. They're right, we just don't agree with it.
Love is nothing more than a human emotion that evolved from the mear thought of mating.
We humans are good at defiying what mear animals can't do (they can have partnets, but that's just mating habit).
Those who cheat on people are more like proper animals, love it up, then flee to the next unlucky sap, though some go to extremes to get this...
It's those animals that should be locked up for life.
However...at one point I would have agreed on this.
Replying to #56
Back when I was trying to be normal and fit in, now I just view things as I always do, compare in my own uniquie way.
Some girl tried to come onto me a few nights ago, despite being ok, I turned myself off and ignored her advances...being single and always at ridicule by my mates who have all seena bit of action and love, I just told them.
Love is a dead world to me, maybe I'd change if I found someone who'd agree, but that would be a contridiction.
To rehash a Marxist quote: "Love is the opiate of the masses" :)To be frank, I've never understood love... until I fell in love :p Back then I simply did not know people would make these irrational sacrifices, do ridiculous things, literally bend over backwards on logic: just for a feeling...
M
Replying to #58
I may never have had a girlfriend, but I've been there...doiing all that stuff for a friend who I once loved...now I'm left alone.
No details, but it's a dead world to me.
...though it seems possible syptoms of love still exist, or is it sypathy for those who have s** lives that I comfort simply because no one else cared...
Natewlie · #56That's my idea of love, that's my definition and no other. My opinion isn't wrong, as is yours, in fact we're all correct.
i agree with that, there's no such thing as a wrong opinion
Replying to #59
oh hypnos, you never had a... girl... friend before? did you just said, 'never'? ;D
