Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Autonomous]
    #1896292 -

How about those women who are attracted to losers who beat them and their children?
Should we shift the discussion to highly neurotic people?

What you are are writing about is not romantic love.
This is addressed to anyone here, not just you. If a relationship is based on mutual giving (you take care of my needs and I will take care of yours) then how is that different than any other business deal? A service offered in exchange for a service is what romantic love is.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: GanjaManDan]
    #1896322 -

Except for lots of people around the world who are truly in love...
Ah, true love. True love is only determined in retrospect. My grandparents were married for 52 years then divorced. Guess it wasn't true love. Lisa Presely married for a short time then found it was not "true love".

An example? My parents :P
And do they not have a quid pro quo relationship? Would the relationship not dissolve if one partner put in a great deal more than the other? The relationship ONLY continues when both parties feel their needs are being met (as in any business deal).


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: kaiowas]
    #1896331 -

I've seen plenty of examples of how a guy can treat a chick like shit...

So is this is your example of a romantic or a neurotic relationship?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1896343 -

Quote:
A service offered in exchange for a service is what romantic love is.



Thank you, Dr. Phil.


--------------------
I am what Willis was talkin' bout.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Jellric]
    #1896407 -

OK, let's shift gears here for a moment. Here are a couple of typical statements about me. (Could be anyone.)

Person A: I like the Swam because he is funny and makes me think.

Person B: I hate Swami because his cynicism and sarcasm is irritating to me.

In neither case does the person's affinity/repulsion towards me have anything to do with some mystical, ineffable quality of mine; merely their emotional response to my words.

Both Person A and B are solely concerned with how THEY feel when reading a post; not about my being.

Shifting back, I love my woman because I feel great when I am around her. Selfishness in action.





--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1896490 -

Swami I agree with what your saying... selfishness is a big problem in this world...

but to asess ganjaman's parents as a business deal is an extreme over generalization... I see alot of the problems of people worried about 'me' and 'my' as well...its very abundant... but there exists in this world alot of very pure people who do alot of good for the world... how did it come to be that people reproduce? shiva + parvati was not a selfish relationship... isnt the ego an after-the-fact of creation? an illusion? I beleive that this selfishness you speak of although very abundant in todays society...is not the way it always has been...and if you look at two birds who spend their life together...the love seems very pure

sure we may be seeking refuge in another person...and sure it may be an illusion... but that doesnt make it simply a business deal...our intentions are to find pure love and although we seek in the wrong places I think alot of good and very pure relationships have happend and continue to...

The love my parents have given me is very selfless and they have taught me a great wisdom... I see in this society alot of 'me' and 'my's as well.... swami arent we very selfish for sitting here in a chair while people out there are starving and have no water

you never gave an alternative to the illusion of romance... is there no hope?

what is true love?

"alot of people wont get no supper tonight...alot of people going have to suffer tonight"
how will we help them?^

eliminating selfishness and utilizing compassion in action is a very good start I beleive

to a child his parents are god and his only refuge...the love they teach him is what has created alot of very good people on the earth...
that is a very important part of nature and I think this illusion you speak of is an after the fact problem of an egotistical society and is not always the case


--------------------
I&I

Edited by Rastafari (09/09/03 01:32 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Rastafari] * 1
    #1896568 -

The love my parents have given me is very selfless...
Is it selfless? You are their genetic material passed on. Their form of immortality - a piece of themselves. This "love" is instinctual and biologically imprinted and is no different than what most animal parents would do for their offspring.

and sure it may be an illusion... but that doesnt make it simply a business deal...
It doesn't? What happens when one partner no longer sexually satisfies the other? When the breadwinner stays unemployed for too long? When one partner puts on 100 pounds while the other stays lean and fit? When ones needs are no longer met, the relationship is over (even if they stay together for dubious reasons).


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1896618 -

these problems you speak of only occur while you are under the influence of ego.

what do you mean about the biological part? do you beleive this universe is a scientific experiment and if so, why seek anything spiritual?

the love my parents gave me, was selfless because they put I before themselfs...they also taught me to help people who suffer and because of that I was passed on a great love for eliminating selfishness.


--------------------
I&I

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
a [Re: kaiowas]
    #1896660 -

a

Edited by enacid (08/16/08 02:16 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: silversoul7]
    #1897175 -

Quote:
So just because physical appearance is an important factor, that means romantic love doesn't exist?  :wtf:


I agree, the conclusion doesn't follow. I would rather say that romantic love may arise from an attraction, and that attractions are caused (statistically speaking) by qualities that make a person eligible for partnership, and that partnerships in turn are basically business deals.
 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Rhizoid]
    #1897309 -

There's a difference between 'Hollywood love' - the way it's portrayed through books and films. Love is really something you define yourself and you should try as hard as possible to resist other people's interpretations of it.

UH


--------------------
They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference - Bill Hicks

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1897325 -

"I can already feel the lame anecdote coming on about a beauty and the beast combo..."






i hate to dissapoint :grin:




 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1897420 -

I guess it's time for the Swami Erotic Challenge, right?

Well, not really. Love is not an objective measurable thing, thus there is no point arguing over the illusiveness of it.

You are making some observations (probably correct) on the male/female patterns of attraction and that's about it. That is truly incapable of denying the mystical spiritual something to come into play.

And I do not think that erotic, romantic love means unselfishness, as it often involves possessiveness and abuse.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1897627 -

Swami said:
Should we shift the discussion to highly neurotic people?


No, we should talk about romantic love. You apparently conflate the concept of romantic love with attraction based on practicalities. Although the two may co-exist and there is very often elements of both, they are not the same thing. As a matter of fact, to be romantic implies that something is not practical but quixotic.


Quote:
This is addressed to anyone here, not just you. If a relationship is based on mutual giving (you take care of my needs and I will take care of yours) then how is that different than any other business deal? A service offered in exchange for a service is what romantic love is.


You are wrong. You hold a different concept of romantic love than most people (particularly women) I've encountered, see above comments. If you redefine a term so you can knock it down, isn't that a 'straw man?'


--------------------
"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination."
-- Mark Twain

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Autonomous]
    #1897639 -

Please share your definition of romantic love.

Wilt Chamberlain had over 10,000 female lovers because:

A. He was a superstar.

B. He was the ultimate alpha male.

C. He was a near-giant.

D. He was supremely confident.

E. He was a soulmate to each and every lover and had some mystical quality.

"But Swami, that is not romantic love, but pure sex/lust."

Perhaps, but I would bet that hundreds of those women would have married him in a second believing they were experiencing "romantic love".


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1897652 -

Quote:
Swami said:
"But Swami, that is not romantic love, but pure sex/lust."


Exactly (with a good dose of 'gold digging').

Quote:
Perhaps, but I would bet that hundreds of those women would have married him in a second believing they were experiencing "romantic love".


Have you read their minds? Have you read my statements? You have given us an example of women who are after the material, who consider that man a prize, not common romantic love. There may have been some elements of romantic notions in some of these women's heads, but it is obvious that for the most part such feelings weren't mutual. If you want a primer on romantic love, perhaps you should revisit the story of Romeo and Juliet.


--------------------
"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination."
-- Mark Twain

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Autonomous]
    #1897660 -

If you want a primer...

No, I want your defintion, not a piece of fiction. Stop side-stepping.

How often does an 18 y.o. man fall romantically in love with a 58 y.o. woman? Almost never, because romance is sexual/biological; not mystical.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami] * 1
    #1897735 -

Damn, Swami, I feel sorrier and sorrier for you the better I get to know you. Here you are, spitting out yet another "It isnt real for me, so it isnt real for anyone." statement.

And what is your statistical data to back this up? Personal Ads? You don't think that the fact that these people put personal adds on the internet kind of takes them apart from the general populace? How can you make the assumption that they accurately reflect the totality of human nature?

Don't get me wrong, in my darkest hours, romantically speaking at least, I would definitely agree with your cynical thoughts on romance. There are definitely a lot of superficial people out there. Superficiality tends to come with low intelligence.

You have professed to have an IQ of 180. That really narrows your dating pool to about one percent of the population. 99 out of every 100 women you meet are going to seem stupid and superficial. That doesnt mean that there arent intelligent ladies out there who have less materialistic standards. You just need to start looking for them in the right places.

I know a lot of broke guys who have beautiful women that pay their rent. How does that fit in to your theory? I know gorgeous women with 180 IQs that work as waitresses and are content with simple pleasures in life. They are not looking for anything in a man but a faithful companion. Are they the majority? Of course not, but they do exist.

There is a serious difference between love and casual sex. If I ask a girl out, then spend all the requisite $$ on her and play all the little romantic games I'm supposed to and she hops in the sak with me, it certainly isn't love. But occaisionally, a girl asks me out, doesn't expect me to pay anything and bases her estimation of me on my character, not my assets. That really blows my mind, and then I find myself in love.

I think its really all a question of intelligence and drive. Some women see their pussy as a "ticket to ride" and have no aspirations in life other than finding a man using the most superficial of standards. Other women have goals and aspirations, and the intelligence with which to pursue them. These are driven women who can sustain themselves. If they get romantically involved, money and power has nothing to do with it.

Maybe you should spend some time in Europe. Or at a University. Not all women who go to college seek an MRS degree. Some of them have every intention of following carreer goals and self-actualizing, rather than latching onto some man for support. Status- and gold- digging is not a part of their romantic drive.

Whenever I find myself having these cynical thoughts about romance I slap myself in the face for being whiny and immature. Aren't you supposed to be "decades older than me"?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: Swami]
    #1897788 -

Swami said:
Whether male or female, it all comes down to: "What can you do for me?"
   


For me, Romantic Love is like Worcestershire Sauce for "What can you do for me?" (wcydfm)

wcydfm is plain meat, biology, survival, economics, boring (not you personally Swami or realists or realism in general). The notion of Romantic Love presents us with a possibilty; adds spice to wcydfm. Tastes great! :heart: 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The Illusion of Romantic Love [Re: DoctorJ]
    #1897796 -

Damn, Swami, I feel sorrier and sorrier for you the better I get to know you.
You don't know me at all.

Here you are, spitting out yet another "It isnt real for me, so it isnt real for anyone." statement.
I have made a "this is the way things are" statement which no one has yet made a strong point against.

And what is your statistical data to back this up?
A near 50% divorce rate in the USA is a good swath of the general public wouldn't you say? Or should we go to the battered women stats? Or perhaps spousal murder might convince you more...

Don't get me wrong, in my darkest hours, romantically speaking at least, I would definitely agree with your cynical thoughts on romance.
Once again; if something is factual, is it cyncial?

There are definitely a lot of superficial people out there.
There is no mysterious place called "out there". ALL people act in their own best ineterest ALL the time.

You have professed to have an IQ of 180. That really narrows your dating pool to about one percent of the population. 99 out of every 100 women you meet are going to seem stupid and superficial.
IQ has never been a dating requirement. All people are gifted in different ways.

I know a lot of broke guys who have beautiful women that pay their rent. How does that fit in to your theory?
And the women is getting nothing in exchange for her companionship? Of course she is. It is still a business exchange. maybe the guy is great in bed or a good talker that boosts her self-esteem.

I know gorgeous women with 180 IQs that work as waitresses and are content with simple pleasures in life.
Phone number please...

But occaisionally, a girl asks me out, doesn't expect me to pay anything and bases her estimation of me on my character, not my assets. That really blows my mind, and then I find myself in love.
Because she has given you what you most need at the time - reassurance of your basic worth as a human-being.

Other women have goals and aspirations, and the intelligence with which to pursue them. These are driven women who can sustain themselves. If they get romantically involved, money and power has nothing to do with it.
Au contraire mon ami. I emotionally supported a mature, financially secure woman with a PHd through four major life crisis over 5 years. We were soulmates if there ever was. She left me to trade up materially.

Status- and gold- digging is not a part of their romantic drive.
ALL women seek security in some fashion. It is their basic drive.

Whenever I find myself having these cynical thoughts about romance I slap myself in the face for being whiny and immature. Aren't you supposed to be "decades older than me"?
False correlation! Your whininess has nothing to do with me.



--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (09/09/03 01:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Valentine's Day & Romantic Love Swami 1,124 7 02/17/03 01:47 AM
by Scarfmeister
* have you ever been in love?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Atomisk 3,983 47 02/23/04 04:33 AM
by CosmicJoke
* Soulmates & Love... nubious 692 1 05/03/04 03:02 AM
by ParabolaChair
* Spiritual Love BBin 838 2 10/22/02 06:31 PM
by In(di)go
* Path vs. Love the_Landotter 2,343 19 01/16/03 12:21 PM
by In(di)go
* attraction, love, sparks questioning 925 14 11/08/03 01:50 AM
by alakona
* I love my ego.
( 1 2 all )		 Phluck 4,339 24 12/27/02 05:56 AM
by highwayman
* Im Back!!! and still convinced free will is an illusion ;)
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 ZenGecko 17,401 148 04/23/07 12:22 AM
by PhanTomCat

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,250 topic views. 1 members, 50 guests and 48 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.026 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.