Philosophy Now Forum

For the majority of us, love is the one part of our lives we believe happens to us solely by chance.

For years passion was not considered a solid basis for marriage until recently.

Here we must exercise caution. When two people instantly fall in love, they are in love with an idealised concept of each other, which eventually, nearly always, ends in disaster.

How many of us would put in the effort needed to keep a relationship going when one person cheats on the other?

What about physical attraction. Yes. It is important, but too much of a good thing, can turn into a bad thing and instead of love it is lust. I chuckle here as some may disagree vehemently with this.

Does it make sense to enter into an aranged marriage where both parties can learn to love each other gradually and travel on solid ground.

I dont believe we have one person only for us. Our soulmate. That is for the poet and his/her muse.

Should we wait around hoping for our true love to happen upon us.

Should we use our common sense and plan for it, like we plan for a career, or anything else, reject the fairytale aspect of it.

Some are quite content without it.

As some wag put it: 'love ain't nuthin' but lust misspelled.'

Way too much attention is paid to gland-based longings/appetites.

And -- of course -- since a whole whack of folks make a living playin' to, making appeals to, 'appetite', it's no wonder lust gets dressed up by those folks and presented as sumthin' other than what 'it' is.


The answers to these questions...

-How many of us would put in the effort needed to keep a relationship going when one person cheats on the other?

-Does it make sense to enter into an arranged marriage where both parties can learn to love each other gradually and travel on solid ground (?)

-Should we wait around hoping for our true love to happen upon us (?)

-Should we use our common sense and search consciously for it, like we search for a career, or anything else and reject the fairytale aspect of it (?)

...depends entirely on 'who' you ask (and 'when' and 'where' you ask)...that is: different strokes for different folks...that is: as far as I can tell, there's no right or wrong answer to any of the above.









*that is, love as some force that descends on a person and possesses him or her, or, love as a pit one falls into...this is a distinctly different and inferior notion when compared to love as verb or process, sumthin' a person 'does'

I see falling in love as an aesthetic thing we do. Passion is a wonderful thing...it is sublime...but it isn't real...it's all about appearances and by appearances I do not mean looks as in she is hot or he is not, I mean appearances on a deeper level ....as in someone allowing themselves to be fooled by a feeling...in fact, fooled so deeply that they even attribute qualities to a person that are not even there! I think the more we understand this concept the more we can enjoy love for what it is, be it passion and romance or commitment and contentment, etc.

Know the truth. It's okay to take the chance and even become passionately enveloped by it...but it is not okay to believe passion = loyalty, kindness, love, etc. Feelings are merely aesthetic in nature, enjoy them to your heart's content...that is a good thing...but don't think they are truth. i.e. he makes my heart go pitter patter therefore he must be strong, manly, responsible, kind (insert good quality of your preference).

There is absolutely nothing wrong in loving a man and seeing his faults too. In fact, that is the basis of truly loving a person. The problem is that most people believe in feelings before believing in their own two eyes and then are incredulous when they have been duped.