Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?

No, but that's just my opinion.

i agree with you, but do you care to expand on why you hold your opinion.

How am I supposed to justify my personal feelings? I guess I could just say I'm not a gambler.

Now personally, I'd say yes.

This really belongs in General Philosophy.

Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?

yes

It is like asking 'is it better to have lived and died or never to have lived at all?'

Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?
yes without a doubt.

its apparent you have never been in love or you wouldn't have asked the question

Yep, i agree with you leopold.

Love is about the best 'thing' which can 'happen' to you.

The feeling is totaly unbeatable.

:m:

Hmm, isn't it just chemicals in your bloodstream? ;)

yes

It is like asking 'is it better to have lived and died or never to have lived at all?'

Well, actually, I think it's better to have never lived at all than to have lived and died... but that's somewhat of a separate issue.

As for the loving thing, I think it depends on the situation. To have loved happily and lost? Certainly. But when the love is pretty painful to begin with, I'm not at all sure it is better. In my opinion, love is far too varied for that saying to be declared either true or false.

I have experienced a period of what i think of as "a perfect love". It lasted for a month and a half, I lost to circumstance. She had joined a volunteer corps prior to us having met.

When she left my heart literally ached. It felt like it was literally being ripped from my chest. I'm married now to someone else, whom I love dearly.. but it's not the same.

It took me a few years to get over it, long story.

Whether or not it is better depends on your ability to manage your attitude.

All in all for me, it is better to have experienced it.

Unfuckignbelievable.

TOR, without reading much but ur post:
BS
it's like, your good, but you don't consider poor exista. funny that.
anyway to have loved, and lost.
than to have ever loved at all???
i'd much rather never loved, than be lost of (love)
much better existence.

then again: there are other perspectives and lines...
i'm good at this bs
(nobody cares bout my bs thread)

ps
never to have loved at all implies death. this is bs.

i think that it is better to have loved and lost, at least you were happy for a short while

yeah, you're gonna be shittin beans when u find out that you're fucked.

existabrent

Not if you're capable of dealing with it properly instead of falling to pieces and becoming an emo bitch.

Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?

Of course not. If you have been happy, you are no longer happy because you have fear losing the happiness.

Strange, but the only one who is really happy is the one who has never been happy.

Hmm, isn't it just chemicals in your bloodstream? ;)

Off course not. Chemicals don't cause love, you first have to understand what causes them to behave the way they do so that they "create love". But love does not just exist in humans, it exists everywhere in nature, it is the power of nature, it is God. Humans can't attract and create things like magnets so a "mental" attraction had to be created.

---

Love exists because of separation. There is a will to become one again. Religions say that we have separated from God (Garden of Eden). This means that we have separated and lost our true self. God is our higher self. But because we identify ourselves with our body, we search for love outside ourselves, that way we can never become whole. Infact, that kind of love creates only more separation (bodies)

We want to unite, but our bodies resists unification. This must mean that we are not the body, the body has no will, only we (consciousness) have a will to unite. The body could not want something that it itself restricts from happening.

What if you have had happiness but do not fear losing it again?

Happiness is always temporary if the source is temporary. The only way to be eternally happy is the receive the happiness from the only thing that lasts forever: you (God). Unification is only possible in the consciousness.

Is it better to have a shitty life, or not be born at all?

baumgarten you are a POS

baumgarten you are a POS
You'll never know how I feel, you asshole! I hate you!

Happiness is always temporary if the source is temporary. The only way to be eternally happy is the receive the happiness from the only thing that lasts forever: you (God). Unification is only possible in the consciousness.
Okay, I understand that happiness is transient. My question to you was, what if you aren't afraid to lose it?

Is it better to have a shitty life, or not be born at all?

No one wants to be born. When we don't exist, we have no will. I don't see why someone would want to be born.

"Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?"

It is exactly what happened to me very recently, to have loved and lost, and I must say it is better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all, although when in the midst of the pain one may be inclined to say otherwise.

You just have to know when to let go. It may be hard and painful at the beginning, but there's nothing to regret. I have learned much. And you know, despite the fact that two persons love each other, to me there's no possession in this. Their two paths may eventually naturally separate and go in different ways, and maybe they'll meet again someday. But anyway you know, lovers don't finally meet somewhere, they live in each other all along. Life just is, things are in perpetual movement and changes, and resistance towards the flow is what engenders suffering, and it is what would make one say that it is better to have never loved at all.

Edit to add: As c7ityi_ said above, know that which does not come and go.

Is it better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all?

Technically it's a trick question. The two experiences are mutually exclusive; once you've loved you cannot never have loved--that door is closed. So nobody can compare them to give you an answer from experience.

But if you mean, is it better to have loved and lost than to not have loved, then I think yes, so that one can appreciate the difference. If you have never experienced bad weather (whether that's a hurricane or sunshine for you), can you appreciate good weather? I think not, so I would not want good weather all the time.

it's as stupid as asking: is it better to have existed or not?

Those silly emotions.

For sure, if any of family died tomorrow id still be glad of the things they taught me and gave to me.
Although i think youre probably talking about being infatuated with a member of the opposite sex when youre talking about 'love'. I have to say i personally think that brand of love is complete bullshit, couples should say 'i infatuate you!' instead of 'i love you' too each other.
Its a weird type of love, its too parasitic for my liking, its like allowing someone to completely inhabit your phyche and merge with you. And of course when the bond breaks down you have to rebuild yourself from top to bottom.