The Definition of Love

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by pdidyking, Mar 9, 2014.

  1. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    This is just a broad definition of love. Not specific towards relationships with family, couples or friends etc.

    I believe love is the urge to do good. True love is when it's executed.

    This is could be true according to one who believes in a religion. For religions define what good is. Just like the Bible has a whole list of words that describes what good is or what love is. Therefore, good becomes concrete and love is defined by a concrete thing.

    This is not true at all according to non-religous or athiests. In their terms (generally), good is subjective. Love as a subjective thing can not be defined by another subjective thing.

    Tell me what you guys think. I would love for this idea of mine to be challenged.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    So love is an urge? Naaa! Love is a word used to describe a high magnitude of affection towards a subject. More magnitude than "like", for sure.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Problem is, entropy exists, so that "magnitude" is constantly attempting to come to an equilibrium with "like", and oft, eventually in full equilibrium with hate.

    "There's a fine line between love and hate."
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,353
    I won't refer you to 1 Corinthians 13 since it sounds like you are familiar with it anyway. The best definition of love I have ever come across is that it is when your happiness is wholly dependent on the happiness of another's.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. elte Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,345
    I hope you will like the forum. Indeed, it will help if you like to be challenged here.

    Love just requires feeling, and action doesn't need to be involved. Think of a person who is trapped inside a totally immobile body and whether he/she could love or not.
     
  8. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    For Motor Daddy

    I include urge in my idea because it includes feeling. Then right after i use true love for the action. It goes hand in hand. In the end you could use urge and the action for love and say there is no true love. I'm just using words if you know what i mean. Trying to be poetic i guess.

    Your idea is great but it's just a more specific version of my idea. With proper affection, musn't you do good? There can not be bad affection...right? I also seem to believe things aren't black and white . A fine line between love & hate is another discussion.
     
  9. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Yes i'm familiar with it. So love doesn't include action?
     
  10. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Ah, thank you. I've been looking for a solid forum and a solid community.

    I agree that love requires feeling. Though i think the only way love can be seen by others is through action (quite generally). Using your analogy, i bet showing love could be true by looking into the persons eyes. Though that kind of seems like an action (from the immobile human--as if they are trying to show love towards the other person) does it not? Or i could be crazy haha, either way.

    Love requires action because no one will ever be inside your head viewing your thoughts. The way you present your feelings are through actions (quite generally). It's common sense.
     
  11. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,353
    Of course it does. You do stuff to make your beloved happy. Like buy your child a toy she wants, or just spend time with her, paying attention to her interests.
     
  12. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Just making sure. It sounded like your idea of love was just purely emotional.
     
  13. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Just making sure. It sounded like your idea of love was just purely emotional.
     
  14. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Actually, there are many, many definitions of love. But the one that says it ALL is "putting someone else's needs and wants ABOVE anything of your own."
     
  15. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Does my idea not cover over what you just stated? To put someone else before you is good. See, I feel like people don't connect to my idea. It is as if my idea has no passion or a strong feeling of love. Is this true? Not just towards you but towards everyone else.
     
  16. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Really? What if the person you love wants to do something that would NOT be considered good? Have you even considered that? Bonnie and Clyde are a prime example.
     
  17. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Good example. They loved eachother, therefore, did good to each other. That's why they stayed together. If they did wrong to each other or did bad things to each other, they would've most likely not stayed together. They did wrong to others, therefore, did not love others. There's a difference.
     
  18. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Love is like a more passionate like.
     
  19. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Yes, that's true.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. elte Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,345
    You're welcome.

    So say you it is common sense, but I take issue with it being so since the feeling is only required on the part of the lover and not the loved. If love exists, it depends only on the originator for that existence. However, a positive, or even negative, feedback loop could develop between the lover and the loved to either strengthen (positive feedback) or weaken (negative feedback) it, but that isn't a requirement for there to be the love. The loved one doesn't need to even be aware that the other person loves him/her.
     
  21. Nataliee Registered Member

    Messages:
    13
    ..all I know is romantic love is caused by libido, it has no dreamy side to it... but we like to think that there is... and other kinds of love is just attachment... it's all actually very bad... being unable to live without certain things, or being unable to stop feeling sorry for things, remembering things...

    love is only beautiful at the time it occurs, but in time it will become pain or sorrow, one way or another... because there will always come a time to say goodbye...
     
  22. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    True love is eternal.
     
  23. pdidyking Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    My understanding towards your text is a little fuzzy. I think I mostly understand it though.

    Everyone is different. No one is exactly the same. Therefore, it is simply true that we all have different ways of showing love (physically). Now listen to this quote I live my life on, "People do what they know." Whether their love is negative or positive (like I said in the beginning that good is defined by religion and people try to follow it and for non-religious people and atheists good is subjective so anything can be argued), it would be their love, their urge to do good. And sure for your last sentence. I don't remember my idea saying that the other person must be aware of the love given.

    Also, you still state in the beginning of your text that love only takes feeling and actions aren't necessary. I feel as if we haven't progressed in the conversation (as if you still didn't give information for why love is just an emotion) and just more things were added like negative or positive love and the other being aware of love (which didn't really help your idea of love just being an emotion, you were just stating situations and other things).

    To state more clearly, aren't actions the only way to display emotions? I'll give an example.

    There is a couple that have been married for 15 years. Both have created bad habits and their marriage is slowly dying. The woman tries to talk to him about her feelings and he just ignores her. Deep down he loves her but he doesn't do anything to show it. Maybe he thinks just being there is showing love? Depends how he was raised, it depends on what he commonly knows. The wife had to divorce him because their marriage wasn't progressing. Her husband wouldn't do anything to show her the love he had for her.

    What do you think?
     

Share This Page