AthenaSeptember 25, 2024 at 14:246625 views56 comments
My family is going through a rough patch and the core of the problem is a poor understanding of love. I think you all might help with your wisdom about love. What is love and how do we know when we are loved?
Comments (56)
Deleted UserSeptember 25, 2024 at 15:25#9345710 likes
This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.
The closest feeling I have to love unalloyed with other factors such as desire, expectation, and obligation is my love for my three children. It came to me as a force of nature - immediate and uncaused - automatic, like a switch being switched. It's a feeling of affection, respect, interest, protectiveness, and commitment. Most importantly, it's unconditional - it doesn't expect or require any response or acknowledgement.
There are a few people in my life who have shown me they feel for me something similar to what I feel for my children. I don't feel like they owe it to me, but it feels wonderful. A gift.
wonderer1September 25, 2024 at 19:33#9345960 likes
Yeah. Before my first child was born, I knew that I would love her, but I didn't come close to anticipating how intense the emotional reaction would be when I first saw her.
OutlanderSeptember 25, 2024 at 20:04#9345980 likes
My family is going through a rough patch and the core of the problem is a poor understanding of love.
If you know that to be a fact, you should have no problem helping them understand. Meaning, if you truly understand something others purportedly don't, what's the problem?
It seems to me, though this may be a bit dismaying (or simply wrong) to sentimental types, what most people call love is a simple sense of being able to relate to something or someone, seeing one's own self and potential in things to the point it instills a sense of purpose and self-worth that did not exist prior resulting in a fundamental change of identity and priorities. A quote I feel quite relevant: "We love a rose because we know it will soon be gone; whoever loved a stone?"
Why do we love our kids and not any of the 2 billion other children who are just as special for no logical reason? Because by nature, love is not logical. No sense of "understanding", great or poor, is going to remedy what is intuitive and largely subconscious.
We see our own frailties and strengths, a bit of our own essence in things we love. We love our pets, living beings that seem to show conscious awareness and affection, emotions, positive and negative, eyes we can look into, heartbeats we can feel, breath we can observe, things that we ourselves value and fear losing. I loved my dog, because I can relate to it as a sensory, vulnerable being. I can't say I'd feel the same about a pet roach or even a lizard, despite both beings being miraculous nearly unfathomable examples of the miracle of life. It's as if they don't feel emotion, or rather, they "ignore" my own and pay me no mind, going about their business as if I didn't even exist. You really can't love something you either don't understand or cannot relate to or that otherwise pays you no mind. You can be fascinated, even in awe, but you won't feel love toward it.
Hope this didn't come off as crass, just a few well-intended personal musings is all.
Before my first child was born, I knew that I would love her, but I didn't come close to anticipating how intense the emotional reaction would be when I first saw her.
Before my first child was born, I wasn't sure how the whole love thing worked. I've never grown emotionally attached to pets, so I wasn't sure how I would feel about my children. Then, like I said, it was like a switch. Makes me think maybe Darwin was right.
Fromm contrasts symbiotic union with mature love, the final way people may seek union, as union in which both partners respect the integrity of the other.[24] Fromm states that "Love is an active power in a man",[26] and that in the general sense, the active character of love is primarily that of "giving".[27] He further delineates what he views as the four core tenets of love: care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge.[28] He defines love as care by stating that "Love is the active concern for the life and the growth of that which we love", and gives an example of a mother and a baby, saying that nobody would believe the mother loved the baby, no matter what she said, if she neglected to feed it, bathe it, or comfort it.[28] He further says that "One loves that for which one labours, and one labours for that which one loves."[29]
Also, I got many good references the last time I broached this topic, and even though I followed up on those readings the question of love is still one that is philosophically interesting to me.
Reply to Athena
I like the way Kierkegaard talks about it. Love builds up. Beyond forms of affection (or the seeming absence of such), love assumes the presence of love. Looking for proof of it is to step away from it a certain distance.
Fidelity in marriage is more than not committing infidelity. Love builds up. If one or the other completely stops doing that, a light does go out. In my mind, that is different than the struggles that cause much of the friction of relationships. Honesty suffers a lot of slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.
wonderer1September 25, 2024 at 21:21#9346090 likes
Yeah, that clearly came from something about me that was built in deep! It makes a lot of sense, when you think about the time it takes human children to be able to fend for themselves.
My family is going through a rough patch and the core of the problem is a poor understanding of love.
I'm sorry to hear that. I will venture some small insights that haven't been mentioned. It is a grave sin to test love. Because the test can only be to destruction. "Will you still love me if ... ?" The answer never satisfies until it becomes 'no'. We are all finite, and we all have a breaking point.
And do not measure or compare; do not count or keep an account.
And half remembered from Ursula LeGuin, I think "Love is like bread, you cannot preserve it; it has to be made fresh every day."
PatternerSeptember 25, 2024 at 22:54#9346200 likes
Reply to wonderer1Reply to T Clark You two nailed it. Before they're born, you know you'll love your kids. It's a given. Then it happens, and you realize you had no idea. To steal a line from comedian Larry Miller, it's like the difference between shooting a bullet and throwing it. It's not a decision. It's like breathing.
PatternerSeptember 25, 2024 at 22:55#9346210 likes
Reply to Shawn According to the Apostle Paul, "Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, it is not pompous, it is not inflated, it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails." (I Corinthians, 13)
According to John the Disciple, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13)
Some nice looking gay guy said: "Love is a combination of lust and trust." Word Is Out, 1976
The Greeks said that there are at four kinds of love: Eros, Agape, Filos, and Storge. Storge [pronounced 'stor - gay'] is the natural love and affection of a parent for their child. It is described as the most natural, emotive, and widely diffused of loves.
Love III by George Herbert, 1593-1633
Love bade me welcome: yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-eyed Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lacked anything.
"A guest," I answered, "worthy to be here":
Love said, "You shall be he."
"I, the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear,
I cannot look on thee."
Love took my hand, and smiling did reply,
"Who made the eyes but I?"
"Truth, Lord; but I have marred them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve."
"And know you not," says Love, "who bore the blame?"
"My dear, then I will serve."
"You must sit down," says Love, "and taste my meat."
So I did sit and eat.
It came to me as a force of nature - immediate and uncaused - automatic, like a switch being switched. It's a feeling of affection, respect, interest, protectiveness, and commitment. Most importantly, it's unconditional - it doesn't expect or require any response or acknowledgement.
Sounds like storge, described as the natural love and affection of a parent for their child; the most natural, emotive, and widely diffused of loves.
The OP implies that there is one entity called "love". However most agree there are different types of love. Some are described as a burning fire, others as glowing embers.
When someone really has your back, that's being loved. It's easy to be romantic when things are going well.
But the bigger issue is what it says about someone's life experience (and make up) who needs to ask the question. Nothing dramatic, I hope in your family's case. Good luck.
Reply to Athena I disagree with @LuckyR that inquiring into the nature of love reflects something significant about the inquirer. I hope your rough patch is smoothed out soon. Families are often the site of failed love, unhappily. It isn't that the structure of "the family" is flawed; it isn't that "love" isn't enough; it is just US, flawed, inconstant, fickle beings that we are. What was it that Tolstoy said? All happy families are alike? Or was it all unhappy families are all alike. Happy or unhappy, WE are kind of all alike, and bring about the same kinds of problems in infinite variety.
One thing I've seen in my own family: long term stress erodes good behavior.
PatternerSeptember 26, 2024 at 02:26#9346500 likes
Reply to Athena
Humans are the worst. It's hard to articulate how stupid we are. We know love is the best thing about life. We know you can't use it up, because giving love only generates more love. And yet, we so very, very ... very often blow it.
Pride is one of love's biggest enemies. I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love. I can't do both. They're mutually exclusive.
As Ed learned on Northern Exposure, low self-esteem is also a big problem. It's difficult to accept love when you don't think you're worthy of it. And it's difficult to give love when you think your love isn't worthy.
Fear. "What if it's too late?" "What if s/he doesn't feel the same any longer?" But, if you don't try, you definitely lose.
AlonsoacevesSeptember 26, 2024 at 03:15#9346530 likes
Compassion is the embodiment of love. Through mutual understanding, we cultivate the willingness to connect and love unconditionally. When we show compassion to others, we also nurture ourselves. Ultimately, isn't the union of consciousness where boundaries dissolve and we recognize our shared humanity the true essence of love?
What is love and how do we know when we are loved?
There are different types and flavours and degrees of love.
They all begin with regard: some particular person is more significant to us than other people are, for some particular reason. That person is somehow special.
Parental love begins in ego: This is my offspring, my DNA, my legacy. But then the baby becomes a separate individual, who is special because... of its vague unfocused eyes, its ultra-fine hair, its smell, its velvet skin, its tiny hands curling around our finger (that makes most fathers gaga from day 1) its total helplessness and need of care and protection: it makes us heroes. And then love grows and expands in milestones, in challenges, frustrations, accomplishments, hardship and sorrows as the baby grows. Love changes over time, over the development of a new, increasingly autonomous individual. It's never the same from day to day and yet is constant from year to year.
Filial love, fraternal love, friendship, all go though changes over time. But they are all grounded in regard for that other person who is special to you for some particular reason.
Romantic love goes through changes, too. Sometimes it dies young, because its roots were shallow. Sometimes it lasts a lifetime and beyond, because its roots are deep: because the other person is special for reasons fundamental to your own well-being and happiness.
How do you know if you are loved? How does the other person treat you? Do they make you feel small and stupid, or interesting and accomplished? Do they support your ambitions or applaud your failures? Do you trust them with an embarrassing secret? If you called them at 3am because you're stranded at a closed mall due to your own foolishness, would they come to get you?
Filial love, fraternal love, friendship, all go though changes over time. But they are all grounded in regard for that other person who is special to you for some particular reason.
Romantic love goes through changes, too. Sometimes it dies young, because its roots were shallow. Sometimes it lasts a lifetime and beyond, because its roots are deep: because the other person is special for reasons fundamental to your own well-being and happiness.
I very much like what you said here because you covered many types of love. Hopefully, a mother and father feel love for a child, especially if the mother breastfeeds the baby, there are hormonal factors in that love. However, mothers and fathers do not always experience love for a child. In the past I don't think love had much to do with family. It was expected for a man and woman to marry and have children. From there was family duty. That could result in very unloving families. There was some charity but no government assistance. Which brings me to religion and God as love and how do we understand love?
I am most concerned with sisters and brothers loving each other and love of grandparents and grandchildren because these relationships have presented challenges. I get we love someone who is special to us but what if that person does not feel loved? No amount of effort can change the minds of people who do not receive love. At least I have not found the magic key that makes a hurt, scared, and angry person feel loved. And my gosh siblings who think they have to compete with a brother or sister for love can be miserable people.
A friend of mine feels strongly about everyone believing God is love. I think that is a wonderful fantasy but have to agree that that fantasy has had a good cultural benefit and for the people who believe, it is a very beneficial fantasy.
In the past I don't think love had much to do with family.
Well, if you look at the few remote peoples who still live as their ancestors did, close to the earth and river, fathers carry their small children on their shoulders; mothers croon their babies to sleep; older children teach younger the skills they have learned; they laugh and play together . If anything, they're nicer to their children than we are - or anyway, closer.
If you don't want to go that far back in the past, look at the history of toys and burials. Quoting Athena
It was expected for a man and woman to marry and have children. From there was family duty. That could result in very unloving families.
It could, especially if a nasty strain of Christianity ruled all their lives and limited what they were allowed to do. Even then, some families managed warmth and kindness, even if the parents could not love each other.
There is a lot of "past" to dip into, and a lot of different cultures
People have always loved their children, just as gorillas and bears do, but they don't all show it the same way.
Compassion is the embodiment of love. Through mutual understanding, we cultivate the willingness to connect and love unconditionally. When we show compassion to others, we also nurture ourselves. Ultimately, isn't the union of consciousness where boundaries dissolve and we recognize our shared humanity the true essence of love?
I was wondering where Buddhist compassion played into love. I do not always see conservative Christians as loving people and I have gained some familiarity with Eastern religion and philosophy. I also pay much attention to awareness, consciousness, and intentional living.
Research tells us doing for others is a good way to make ourselves happy.
The movie What the Bleep Do We Know blends quantum physics with spirituality. That opens more questions than I have answers. Is pure consciousness loving?
It could, especially if a nasty strain of Christianity ruled all their lives and limited what they were allowed to do. Even then, some families managed warmth and kindness, even if the parents could not love each other.
I strongly favor studying animals to know ourselves. I also strongly favor cross-cultural studies.
I think our creation stories are very important and I do not like the Christian one. My first introduction to Eastern thought was a Hindu book putting the responsibility of making good choices on us without blaming an evil power and a God's curse for our struggles. I don't think Christians saw God as a loving God until our bellies were full. The Christian god was jealous, revengeful, and punishing, and I don't think that was good for loving families.
I also think our time and place in history makes a difference. Each cohort is affected by different historical events and movements. I am nostalgic for the Hippie period of love, a return to nature and equality. I remember troubles but our spirits were better and full of hope. We were going to make the world a better place and I think we made a lot of progress but it is not well balanced. I have a sense that between my generation and sister's, there was a shift a backlash maybe. Cooperate power and the drive for money over powered our drive for love.
Pride is one of love's biggest enemies. I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love. I can't do both. They're mutually exclusive.
As Ed learned on Northern Exposure, low self-esteem is also a big problem. It's difficult to accept love when you don't think you're worthy of it. And it's difficult to give love when you think your love isn't worthy.
Fear. "What if it's too late?" "What if s/he doesn't feel the same any longer?" But, if you don't try, you definitely lose.
It has been pretty easy for me to be egoless and giving rather than taking. I associate what you said with the Hippie movement. As I saw communes struggling, I realized we were not cultivated to live communally. Today not even families can not live together. We all have to have our own homes and live apart to avoid all the conflicts of interest.
I want to focus on "I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love." I don't have anything to say about that now, but want to write that thought on a piece of paper that I can read often and ponder. I have some pretty uneasy feelings when I read that thought and think of my behavior. I need to look deeper into why that thought makes me feel uncomfortable as though I have done something wrong.
Pride is important. It is why we do our laundry and take a shower and give social service but it could have a negative side if it isn't balanced. Hum,:chin: I have to think about that.
There was some charity but no government assistance. Which brings me to religion and God as love and how do we understand love?
In some communities, there was - and is - a good deal of charity. Government assistance is good and much needed, as are social workers to monitor potentially dangerous situations and vulnerable persons, as are public health nurses, teachers and professional caregivers. But there is much more a charitable community can do to make the lives of marginal people less precarious, less lonely and frightening. And sometimes neighbours do. You do, right?
God's love or God as love doesn't work for me. It sits quite awkwardly on the Biblical God. He wasn't Christian; he was Hebrew and he was primarily a god of territorial conflict. I guess he still is. The Christians - starting with the Jesus cult - made adjustments, as one would to the programming of a holodeck character. They made him big enough to represent the Roman Empire and then even bigger to encompass subsequent European empires, to subsume any number of local deities. They made him just, rather than capricious; merciful rather than vengeful - they made him more palatable for export. They stuck the 'love' banner on him, but it never really fit - which is why women pray to Mary or one of the saints, and men are more likely to address Jesus or one of the saints.
That cute saying: "Sure God answers prayers, but sometimes the answer is No." is cruelly unsatisfactory for a believer in distress. That's exactly nobody's idea of divine love.
There can be compassion and caring and helpful effort in the name of one's deity of choice (often a Catholic saint) or under the auspices of a religious organization of any kind. But it's insulting to the recipient to call that love, when the volunteer doesn't particularly like them. (I have to admit here, I have encountered two examples where nursing sisters genuinely loved their charges - damaged children and veterans, respectively.)
Love is spontaneous, personal and uncoercable. It happens or it doesn't and sometimes the reasons are hard to understand. And too often, it is fragile. We can arrange our social structures to be more conducive to loving relations - lessen the physical discomforts, the stress, the anxiety, competition for scarce resources, the need for deceit; give people enough leisure time and decent housing. I imagine UBI would be a huge boost to family harmony.
I also think our time and place in history makes a difference. Each cohort is affected by different historical events and movements.
Yes, in many ways. But some basic human needs and responses are constant. You have romantic love stories from two thousand years ago. I've already mentioned parental love, and neither filial nor fraternal love is rare in ballads, plays and legends of many cultures and ages. If they sang about it in a form that survived hundreds of years, it must have been important to them and those who followed. The oldest love song is in Ashurbanipal; the oldest lullaby is Babylonian c. 2000 BCE, according to wiki - but these are just from the period since writing. People had been singing for a long time before that. And having the same feelings.
I am nostalgic for the Hippie period of love, a return to nature and equality.
In my experience, it sounded better than it was in practice. It had lively moments and some good sentiments. There was indeed much tolerance and liberty, but also much fecklessness self-indulgence. I wasn't at all impressed with the drug scene, or the neglect of education and refusal to work. I was irked by those who begged money from the very people they professed to despise. Many young people rejected their parents' affection and were callously ungrateful. Extolling nature, writing poems, making paper flowers and dancing in filmy fabrics is all very well, but most of the urban hippies had no idea what to do with nature.... and they were not mindful to 'leave nothing but footprints'. I also knew several young women who came out of the period supporting a child, on their own, in poverty.
Of course, many of those youngsters emerged strong and committed and grew up to be competent, responsible people. I suppose it helped that some had found lasting love and were determined to take care of their offspring. And eventually their parents, too.
Count Timothy von IcarusOctober 01, 2024 at 22:48#9358380 likes
Eros leads the way upwards, as Plato says in the Symposium:
[I]And the true order of going, or being led by another, to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these as steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair forms, and from fair forms to fair practices, and from fair practices to fair notions, until from fair notions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty, and at last knows what the essence of beauty is.[/I]
Agape sends mercy downwards. Eros and agape move up and down the Great Chain of Being, uniting being in love.
Saint Bernard of Clairvaux's De Diligendo Deo and sermons on the Song of Songs come to mind. Or St. Francis' classic Canticle of the Sun, which finds agape coming down and eros going up in all things, the sun, the clouds, even death.
Or St. Augustine's conversation with his mother in the Confessions:
[I]
The conversation led us towards the conclusion that the pleasure of the bodily sense, however delightful in the radiant light of this physical world, is seen by comparison with the life of eternity to not even be worth consideration. Our minds were lifted up by an ardent affection towards eternal being itself. Step by step we climbed beyond all corporeal objects and the heaven itself, where sun, moon, and stars shed light on the earth. We ascended even further by internal reflection and dialogue and wonder at your works, and we entered into our own minds. We moved up beyond them so as to attain to the region of inexhaustible abundance where you feed Israel eternally with truth for food. There life is the wisdom by which all creatures come into being, both things which were and which will be. But wisdom itself is not brought into being but is as it was and always will be. Furthermore, in this wisdom there is no past and future, but only being, since it is eternal And while we talked and panted after it, we touched it in some small degree by a moment of concentration of the heart. And we sighed and left behind us the firstfruits of the Spirit bound to that higher world, as we returned to the noise of our human speech where a sentence has both a beginning and an ending (ix.10.24).[/I]
AlonsoacevesOctober 02, 2024 at 00:16#9358600 likes
From the standpoint of Buddhism, love would be the act of mindfulnessthe inner peace and interconnectedness we reach when we momentarily touch Nirvana. In a more mundane sense, loving kindness in our thoughts, words, and deeds is a consequence of love. I would say it's not necessary to "know" the person or thing that receives love; simply being aware makes it possible to express and share this mind state.
I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love. I can't do both. They're mutually exclusive.
Hours later your words mixed with another thought I am holding and together those thoughts could potentially be life changing. I take pride in being pretty egoless, but I became aware of what my ego has to do with some conflict resolution failures. Interesting. I look to seeing if a changed behavior pattern gets better results. I thought that you might like to know your words were so effective.
If anything I've learned from my own failures helps, then I'm happy. Love to you.
I don't know about you but when I was 18 I thought I was an adult and knew everything that I needed to know. Several years later it is amazing how much more there is to learn. It is a shame it takes so long to learn how to live well, and then we are old and no one wants to listen. What hurts is seeing how family problems can affect the children for several generations.
Seagulls are more careful about mating and birds do not reproduce until they have a nest. I think a god could have made us smarter before giving us freedom of will and setting us out to fend for ourselves.
From the standpoint of Buddhism, love would be the act of mindfulnessthe inner peace and interconnectedness we reach when we momentarily touch Nirvana. In a more mundane sense, loving kindness in our thoughts, words, and deeds is a consequence of love. I would say it's not necessary to "know" the person or thing that receives love; simply being aware makes it possible to express and share this mind state.
I am beginning to understand that of which you speak. There was a time in my life when I could not imagine happiness and love. I had done my best to have a happy family and failed. A problem I have with Buddhism is, I have not picked up family values from Buddhism. In my later years, I have the luxury of focusing on my own happiness and it is no longer dependent on family, but I think civilizations depend on families. That may not be true. However, if civilization is dependent on families and our happiness depends on happy families, we are in trouble.
"Several years later"? Don't I wish! :rofl: I'm 60.
You are still a kid.
It is wonderful to have a place where thinking people can gather and share their thoughts and what they have learned. I was intellectually starving to death before the Internet. The media talks about the problems with social media, but I see reason to hope for a better world because of social media.
Eros leads the way upwards, as Plato says in the Symposium:
Women were not permitted to attend "respectable" symposia in ancient Greece, but high-class female prostitutes (hetairai) and entertainers were often hired to perform and converse with the guests.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/history-magazine/article/ancient-greece-symposium-dinner-party#:~:text=In%20ancient%20Greece%2C%20wealthy%20men,women%2C%20wine%2C%20and%20song.
That order of things is not apt to bring us close to the good life because women were not equals and leaving men in charge is problematic. Appreciating beauty, good music, and good art and intentionally becoming refined may bring heaven to earth, but not if women are excluded.
When I see fathers with their children, I have hope that we will see a better day. I think our culture has been male-dominant, especially since industrialization. I think we are suffering serious problems because of that. Homes without good fathers are not a good thing.
Reply to Athena
Ironic for those who don't like it to use it to complain about it. But social media isn't all bad. Even if it's more difficult to have the kinds of conversations on fb that we have here, fb is great for keeping and reestablishing connections from long ago.
unenlightenedOctober 02, 2024 at 09:34#9359300 likes
I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love. I can't do both. They're mutually exclusive.
Patterner
Hours later your words mixed with another thought I am holding and together those thoughts could potentially be life changing. I take pride in being pretty egoless, but I became aware of what my ego has to do with some conflict resolution failures. Interesting. I look to seeing if a changed behavior pattern gets better results. I thought that you might like to know your words were so effective.
That is about the most profound little exchange I have seen on this site. Thank you both for your insight and honesty. I, too have to think for myself about this in my own life.
AlonsoacevesOctober 02, 2024 at 15:21#9359670 likes
I hardly doubt that family values exist in Buddhism, as this leads to creating concepts in our minds. However, there are some core values that can apply to family - such as understanding that the pain family causes is a consequence of our attachment to ideas. I don't believe family is necessary for happiness, but I advocate for the family institution since it's the primordial link in the broader social fabric.
That is about the most profound little exchange I have seen on this site. Thank you both for your insight and honesty. I, too have to think for myself about this in my own life.
I like the word "profound". That is the perfect word for my experience.
A few months ago someone at the pool told me a Hawaiian greeting goes like this....
"I am sorry, I hope you forgive me. I love you. thank you." Can you see how Pattener's words played into that greeting?
Humans are the worst. It's hard to articulate how stupid we are. We know love is the best thing about life. We know you can't use it up, because giving love only generates more love. And yet, we so very, very ... very often blow it.
Pride is one of love's biggest enemies. I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love. I can't do both. They're mutually exclusive.
I have recently used that greeting with my sister and my granddaughter when fear and anger were being very destructive. Because of Patterner's post I realized it is my ego that rebelled against saying those loving words. What I want most is love for all of us, but my ego was saying "hello no, I am not going to let them believe they are right and all the emotional problems are because I have been so bad." My ego wanted them to see their wrong. But I didn't understand that my ego was making matters worse until I read Patterner's post.
Frustrating! I got that my sister and granddaughter are going through serious turmoil and therefore they are not being rational. I got that the emotional problems would not be resolved by trying to be rational with them. But to let go and give love a chance is a huge leap of faith in love. My ego is jumping up and down and screaming like a charter in the Disney movie "Inside Out".
Probably not all. Hehe. Anyway, I certainly hope it works out!
Regardless of what happens. Your words have changed how I think and I think I will like this change.
What we all want is love and love does increase love. It is only rational to give the screaming ego a sucker and tell it to sit in the corner. Its intentions are good but maybe it should not be the driver of our lives. This bleeds into the thread I started about being rational. Maturing is learning to be more rational and not letting our emotions control us.
Our child-rearing skills are different today from when we beat the devil out of our children. In the past how we reacted to children was dependent on how we felt. Today our reactions are more likely to be guided by research on child development. I think this is now an evolutionary change. I sure hope so.
However, I also think a better world means happier families. I think it is very damaging to children when parents divorce or move, always expecting the child to adjust to any changes the parents make. Emotional pain is passed on from generation to generation and I think we need to stop being so careless about how the children are affected.
The badly hurt children in my life are now the adults, and their pain became the pain and suffering of their children. Tolerating the use of drugs and alcohol is not good for the children. Wars and sending men and women home with serious disabilities and post-trauma syndrome is not good for the family. Severe economic depressions are terrible for individuals and families. I think cultural adjustments are necessary for a better civilization.
I hardly doubt that family values exist in Buddhism, as this leads to creating concepts in our minds. However, there are some core values that can apply to family - such as understanding that the pain family causes is a consequence of our attachment to ideas. I don't believe family is necessary for happiness, but I advocate for the family institution since it's the primordial link in the broader social fabric.
I googled for information about Buddhism. The first Buddha came from a royal family and he renounced those family ties and obligations. This set the stage for nuns and monks who abstained from sex and family obligations but interestingly society rationalized family values as compatible with Buddhism. So you are correct.
The nature and purpose of the Buddhist family
Buddhism has a long tradition of encouraging
monastic celibacy
. This is because the life of a nun or monk, free of sex and family responsibilities, may provide the best conditions for practising the Buddhas teachings. However, most Buddhists live in couples or families, married or unmarried.
Buddhist families vary according to the customs of the country they live in, and include
nuclear families
, extended families and same-sex parents, as well as couples without children.
The Five Moral Precepts and the Noble Eightfold Path are important guides for the Buddhist family and other areas of life. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zshf46f#zbjh3qt
Interesting is seeing marriage as a legal thing, not a spiritual thing. Especially Mormans see family as the ordering of life here on earth and in the afterlife. I think most, if not all Christians, look forward to being with their loved ones in the afterlife. More along the lines of reincarnation tying people to each other. I think Buddhaism favors breaking that karma and that would discourage family and having children.
You mentioned the fabric of society and I hope you have more to say about that. "The Fates, also known as the Moirai, are three goddesses in Greek mythology who weave the threads of life for mortals:" Interesting!
PhilosophimOctober 02, 2024 at 17:37#9360000 likes
Love is an acceptance of another person's pros and cons. Despite knowing the imperfection of a person, you wish that they continue to live their best life, and are able to support them the best you can through their trials in life.
Every other 'addendum' to love includes things like 'family bonds' 'romance' etc. But remove all of that, and this is love.
[quote=an old Rabbi]There is nothing so whole as a broken heart.[/quote] Deep love seems to be mutual joyinspite of rather than because of surrender (e.g. "unselfing" ~ I. Murdoch) without idealization. (Spinoza meets iek) :broken:
I return to this thread because the problem of serious family estrangement seems to be resolving. We will be going through some trials and tribulations, and this may improve bonding. So I want to say, to some degree, "love" is what we make it. Many families become estranged from each other and never get past that.
If I ever thought I wanted to bond with a man, I would begin probing his notions of virtues. I totally want to avoid rash reactions stimulated by oxycontin, the love hormone. That physical nature of love is not to be trusted and can lead to serious regrets.
Looking back on my past, I think leaping into love can be a very serious mistake, especially if the people can produce children who will suffer their parents' errors.
Love is an acceptance of another person's pros and cons. Despite knowing the imperfection of a person, you wish that they continue to live their best life, and are able to support them the best you can through their trials in life.
Every other 'addendum' to love includes things like 'family bonds' 'romance' etc. But remove all of that, and this is love.
Is it love or lust? You speak of virtues and so many positive things happen when we are virtuous, but I don't think things go so well without virtues. I hate it when a guy sweeps me off my feet and two months later it is all over. The physical aspect of love can be very short.
"Several years later"? Don't I wish! :rofl: I'm 60.
You are still a kid. However, you are old enough to start experiencing some awesome mental activity! Our brains change as we age and it is not all bad. When we are young we learn facts but not so much their meaning. In our later years, thoughts start coming together and we get a greater sense of meaning. This is really cool especially when it involves family and a stronger feeling of meaning. I am good with my life coming to an end if I can pass some of the good stuff on to the young.
From the standpoint of Buddhism, love would be the act of mindfulnessthe inner peace and interconnectedness we reach when we momentarily touch Nirvana. In a more mundane sense, loving kindness in our thoughts, words, and deeds is a consequence of love. I would say it's not necessary to "know" the person or thing that receives love; simply being aware makes it possible to express and share this mind state.
Sorry for the delay in replying. I recently attended a meeting where someone promoted using a psychedelic mushroom to release the fear of death, addictions, and depression. This would be guided in a clinical situation and it is very expensive. I would love to try it but I don't have that kind of money.
His explanation seemed similar to the Buddhist/Hindu releasing of ego and touch of Nirvana. I meditate and have had a transcendental experience of oneness. I think this has value but I am prejudiced in favor of family love. Family love involves a lot of ego, while Nirvana is a release of ego, right?
AlonsoacevesNovember 11, 2024 at 19:29#9467220 likes
Indeed, it is. However, I'm not a Buddhist scholar, so I can't make definitive assertions. To the best of my understanding, attachment - whether to family, things or oneself - binds one to what Buddhists call the illusion (Maya). Yet, enjoying family, surroundings and beings without attachment is a form of Nirvana. Being aware in the present moment is key.
Comments (56)
The closest feeling I have to love unalloyed with other factors such as desire, expectation, and obligation is my love for my three children. It came to me as a force of nature - immediate and uncaused - automatic, like a switch being switched. It's a feeling of affection, respect, interest, protectiveness, and commitment. Most importantly, it's unconditional - it doesn't expect or require any response or acknowledgement.
Quoting Athena
There are a few people in my life who have shown me they feel for me something similar to what I feel for my children. I don't feel like they owe it to me, but it feels wonderful. A gift.
Yeah. Before my first child was born, I knew that I would love her, but I didn't come close to anticipating how intense the emotional reaction would be when I first saw her.
If you know that to be a fact, you should have no problem helping them understand. Meaning, if you truly understand something others purportedly don't, what's the problem?
It seems to me, though this may be a bit dismaying (or simply wrong) to sentimental types, what most people call love is a simple sense of being able to relate to something or someone, seeing one's own self and potential in things to the point it instills a sense of purpose and self-worth that did not exist prior resulting in a fundamental change of identity and priorities. A quote I feel quite relevant: "We love a rose because we know it will soon be gone; whoever loved a stone?"
Why do we love our kids and not any of the 2 billion other children who are just as special for no logical reason? Because by nature, love is not logical. No sense of "understanding", great or poor, is going to remedy what is intuitive and largely subconscious.
We see our own frailties and strengths, a bit of our own essence in things we love. We love our pets, living beings that seem to show conscious awareness and affection, emotions, positive and negative, eyes we can look into, heartbeats we can feel, breath we can observe, things that we ourselves value and fear losing. I loved my dog, because I can relate to it as a sensory, vulnerable being. I can't say I'd feel the same about a pet roach or even a lizard, despite both beings being miraculous nearly unfathomable examples of the miracle of life. It's as if they don't feel emotion, or rather, they "ignore" my own and pay me no mind, going about their business as if I didn't even exist. You really can't love something you either don't understand or cannot relate to or that otherwise pays you no mind. You can be fascinated, even in awe, but you won't feel love toward it.
Hope this didn't come off as crass, just a few well-intended personal musings is all.
Before my first child was born, I wasn't sure how the whole love thing worked. I've never grown emotionally attached to pets, so I wasn't sure how I would feel about my children. Then, like I said, it was like a switch. Makes me think maybe Darwin was right.
A paragraph on Wikipedia summarizing:
Also, I got many good references the last time I broached this topic, and even though I followed up on those readings the question of love is still one that is philosophically interesting to me.
I like the way Kierkegaard talks about it. Love builds up. Beyond forms of affection (or the seeming absence of such), love assumes the presence of love. Looking for proof of it is to step away from it a certain distance.
Fidelity in marriage is more than not committing infidelity. Love builds up. If one or the other completely stops doing that, a light does go out. In my mind, that is different than the struggles that cause much of the friction of relationships. Honesty suffers a lot of slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.
:up:
Yeah, that clearly came from something about me that was built in deep! It makes a lot of sense, when you think about the time it takes human children to be able to fend for themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtmRTeOZyxI
I'm sorry to hear that. I will venture some small insights that haven't been mentioned. It is a grave sin to test love. Because the test can only be to destruction. "Will you still love me if ... ?" The answer never satisfies until it becomes 'no'. We are all finite, and we all have a breaking point.
And do not measure or compare; do not count or keep an account.
And half remembered from Ursula LeGuin, I think "Love is like bread, you cannot preserve it; it has to be made fresh every day."
According to John the Disciple, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13)
Some nice looking gay guy said: "Love is a combination of lust and trust." Word Is Out, 1976
The Greeks said that there are at four kinds of love: Eros, Agape, Filos, and Storge. Storge [pronounced 'stor - gay'] is the natural love and affection of a parent for their child. It is described as the most natural, emotive, and widely diffused of loves.
Love III by George Herbert, 1593-1633
Love bade me welcome: yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-eyed Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lacked anything.
"A guest," I answered, "worthy to be here":
Love said, "You shall be he."
"I, the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear,
I cannot look on thee."
Love took my hand, and smiling did reply,
"Who made the eyes but I?"
"Truth, Lord; but I have marred them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve."
"And know you not," says Love, "who bore the blame?"
"My dear, then I will serve."
"You must sit down," says Love, "and taste my meat."
So I did sit and eat.
Sounds like storge, described as the natural love and affection of a parent for their child; the most natural, emotive, and widely diffused of loves.
An ugly name for a powerful thing.
When someone really has your back, that's being loved. It's easy to be romantic when things are going well.
But the bigger issue is what it says about someone's life experience (and make up) who needs to ask the question. Nothing dramatic, I hope in your family's case. Good luck.
One thing I've seen in my own family: long term stress erodes good behavior.
Humans are the worst. It's hard to articulate how stupid we are. We know love is the best thing about life. We know you can't use it up, because giving love only generates more love. And yet, we so very, very ... very often blow it.
Pride is one of love's biggest enemies. I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love. I can't do both. They're mutually exclusive.
As Ed learned on Northern Exposure, low self-esteem is also a big problem. It's difficult to accept love when you don't think you're worthy of it. And it's difficult to give love when you think your love isn't worthy.
Fear. "What if it's too late?" "What if s/he doesn't feel the same any longer?" But, if you don't try, you definitely lose.
There are different types and flavours and degrees of love.
They all begin with regard: some particular person is more significant to us than other people are, for some particular reason. That person is somehow special.
Parental love begins in ego: This is my offspring, my DNA, my legacy. But then the baby becomes a separate individual, who is special because... of its vague unfocused eyes, its ultra-fine hair, its smell, its velvet skin, its tiny hands curling around our finger (that makes most fathers gaga from day 1) its total helplessness and need of care and protection: it makes us heroes. And then love grows and expands in milestones, in challenges, frustrations, accomplishments, hardship and sorrows as the baby grows. Love changes over time, over the development of a new, increasingly autonomous individual. It's never the same from day to day and yet is constant from year to year.
Filial love, fraternal love, friendship, all go though changes over time. But they are all grounded in regard for that other person who is special to you for some particular reason.
Romantic love goes through changes, too. Sometimes it dies young, because its roots were shallow. Sometimes it lasts a lifetime and beyond, because its roots are deep: because the other person is special for reasons fundamental to your own well-being and happiness.
How do you know if you are loved? How does the other person treat you? Do they make you feel small and stupid, or interesting and accomplished? Do they support your ambitions or applaud your failures? Do you trust them with an embarrassing secret? If you called them at 3am because you're stranded at a closed mall due to your own foolishness, would they come to get you?
I very much like what you said here because you covered many types of love. Hopefully, a mother and father feel love for a child, especially if the mother breastfeeds the baby, there are hormonal factors in that love. However, mothers and fathers do not always experience love for a child. In the past I don't think love had much to do with family. It was expected for a man and woman to marry and have children. From there was family duty. That could result in very unloving families. There was some charity but no government assistance. Which brings me to religion and God as love and how do we understand love?
I am most concerned with sisters and brothers loving each other and love of grandparents and grandchildren because these relationships have presented challenges. I get we love someone who is special to us but what if that person does not feel loved? No amount of effort can change the minds of people who do not receive love. At least I have not found the magic key that makes a hurt, scared, and angry person feel loved. And my gosh siblings who think they have to compete with a brother or sister for love can be miserable people.
A friend of mine feels strongly about everyone believing God is love. I think that is a wonderful fantasy but have to agree that that fantasy has had a good cultural benefit and for the people who believe, it is a very beneficial fantasy.
Well, if you look at the few remote peoples who still live as their ancestors did, close to the earth and river, fathers carry their small children on their shoulders; mothers croon their babies to sleep; older children teach younger the skills they have learned; they laugh and play together . If anything, they're nicer to their children than we are - or anyway, closer.
If you don't want to go that far back in the past, look at the history of toys and burials.
Quoting Athena
It could, especially if a nasty strain of Christianity ruled all their lives and limited what they were allowed to do. Even then, some families managed warmth and kindness, even if the parents could not love each other.
There is a lot of "past" to dip into, and a lot of different cultures
People have always loved their children, just as gorillas and bears do, but they don't all show it the same way.
Seems I have to go. TBC, rainstorm permitting.
I was wondering where Buddhist compassion played into love. I do not always see conservative Christians as loving people and I have gained some familiarity with Eastern religion and philosophy. I also pay much attention to awareness, consciousness, and intentional living.
Research tells us doing for others is a good way to make ourselves happy.
The movie What the Bleep Do We Know blends quantum physics with spirituality. That opens more questions than I have answers. Is pure consciousness loving?
I strongly favor studying animals to know ourselves. I also strongly favor cross-cultural studies.
I think our creation stories are very important and I do not like the Christian one. My first introduction to Eastern thought was a Hindu book putting the responsibility of making good choices on us without blaming an evil power and a God's curse for our struggles. I don't think Christians saw God as a loving God until our bellies were full. The Christian god was jealous, revengeful, and punishing, and I don't think that was good for loving families.
I also think our time and place in history makes a difference. Each cohort is affected by different historical events and movements. I am nostalgic for the Hippie period of love, a return to nature and equality. I remember troubles but our spirits were better and full of hope. We were going to make the world a better place and I think we made a lot of progress but it is not well balanced. I have a sense that between my generation and sister's, there was a shift a backlash maybe. Cooperate power and the drive for money over powered our drive for love.
It has been pretty easy for me to be egoless and giving rather than taking. I associate what you said with the Hippie movement. As I saw communes struggling, I realized we were not cultivated to live communally. Today not even families can not live together. We all have to have our own homes and live apart to avoid all the conflicts of interest.
I want to focus on "I can hold my pride tight, or I can give and receive love." I don't have anything to say about that now, but want to write that thought on a piece of paper that I can read often and ponder. I have some pretty uneasy feelings when I read that thought and think of my behavior. I need to look deeper into why that thought makes me feel uncomfortable as though I have done something wrong.
Pride is important. It is why we do our laundry and take a shower and give social service but it could have a negative side if it isn't balanced. Hum,:chin: I have to think about that.
Quoting Athena
In some communities, there was - and is - a good deal of charity. Government assistance is good and much needed, as are social workers to monitor potentially dangerous situations and vulnerable persons, as are public health nurses, teachers and professional caregivers. But there is much more a charitable community can do to make the lives of marginal people less precarious, less lonely and frightening. And sometimes neighbours do. You do, right?
God's love or God as love doesn't work for me. It sits quite awkwardly on the Biblical God. He wasn't Christian; he was Hebrew and he was primarily a god of territorial conflict. I guess he still is. The Christians - starting with the Jesus cult - made adjustments, as one would to the programming of a holodeck character. They made him big enough to represent the Roman Empire and then even bigger to encompass subsequent European empires, to subsume any number of local deities. They made him just, rather than capricious; merciful rather than vengeful - they made him more palatable for export. They stuck the 'love' banner on him, but it never really fit - which is why women pray to Mary or one of the saints, and men are more likely to address Jesus or one of the saints.
That cute saying: "Sure God answers prayers, but sometimes the answer is No." is cruelly unsatisfactory for a believer in distress. That's exactly nobody's idea of divine love.
There can be compassion and caring and helpful effort in the name of one's deity of choice (often a Catholic saint) or under the auspices of a religious organization of any kind. But it's insulting to the recipient to call that love, when the volunteer doesn't particularly like them. (I have to admit here, I have encountered two examples where nursing sisters genuinely loved their charges - damaged children and veterans, respectively.)
Love is spontaneous, personal and uncoercable. It happens or it doesn't and sometimes the reasons are hard to understand. And too often, it is fragile. We can arrange our social structures to be more conducive to loving relations - lessen the physical discomforts, the stress, the anxiety, competition for scarce resources, the need for deceit; give people enough leisure time and decent housing. I imagine UBI would be a huge boost to family harmony.
Quoting Athena
Yes, in many ways. But some basic human needs and responses are constant. You have romantic love stories from two thousand years ago. I've already mentioned parental love, and neither filial nor fraternal love is rare in ballads, plays and legends of many cultures and ages. If they sang about it in a form that survived hundreds of years, it must have been important to them and those who followed. The oldest love song is in Ashurbanipal; the oldest lullaby is Babylonian c. 2000 BCE, according to wiki - but these are just from the period since writing. People had been singing for a long time before that. And having the same feelings.
Quoting Athena
In my experience, it sounded better than it was in practice. It had lively moments and some good sentiments. There was indeed much tolerance and liberty, but also much fecklessness self-indulgence. I wasn't at all impressed with the drug scene, or the neglect of education and refusal to work. I was irked by those who begged money from the very people they professed to despise. Many young people rejected their parents' affection and were callously ungrateful. Extolling nature, writing poems, making paper flowers and dancing in filmy fabrics is all very well, but most of the urban hippies had no idea what to do with nature.... and they were not mindful to 'leave nothing but footprints'. I also knew several young women who came out of the period supporting a child, on their own, in poverty.
Of course, many of those youngsters emerged strong and committed and grew up to be competent, responsible people. I suppose it helped that some had found lasting love and were determined to take care of their offspring. And eventually their parents, too.
[I]And the true order of going, or being led by another, to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these as steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair forms, and from fair forms to fair practices, and from fair practices to fair notions, until from fair notions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty, and at last knows what the essence of beauty is.[/I]
Agape sends mercy downwards. Eros and agape move up and down the Great Chain of Being, uniting being in love.
Saint Bernard of Clairvaux's De Diligendo Deo and sermons on the Song of Songs come to mind. Or St. Francis' classic Canticle of the Sun, which finds agape coming down and eros going up in all things, the sun, the clouds, even death.
Or St. Augustine's conversation with his mother in the Confessions:
[I]
The conversation led us towards the conclusion that the pleasure of the bodily sense, however delightful in the radiant light of this physical world, is seen by comparison with the life of eternity to not even be worth consideration. Our minds were lifted up by an ardent affection towards eternal being itself. Step by step we climbed beyond all corporeal objects and the heaven itself, where sun, moon, and stars shed light on the earth. We ascended even further by internal reflection and dialogue and wonder at your works, and we entered into our own minds. We moved up beyond them so as to attain to the region of inexhaustible abundance where you feed Israel eternally with truth for food. There life is the wisdom by which all creatures come into being, both things which were and which will be. But wisdom itself is not brought into being but is as it was and always will be. Furthermore, in this wisdom there is no past and future, but only being, since it is eternal And while we talked and panted after it, we touched it in some small degree by a moment of concentration of the heart. And we sighed and left behind us the firstfruits of the Spirit bound to that higher world, as we returned to the noise of our human speech where a sentence has both a beginning and an ending (ix.10.24).[/I]
Hours later your words mixed with another thought I am holding and together those thoughts could potentially be life changing. I take pride in being pretty egoless, but I became aware of what my ego has to do with some conflict resolution failures. Interesting. I look to seeing if a changed behavior pattern gets better results. I thought that you might like to know your words were so effective.
If anything I've learned from my own failures helps, then I'm happy. Love to you.
I don't know about you but when I was 18 I thought I was an adult and knew everything that I needed to know. Several years later it is amazing how much more there is to learn. It is a shame it takes so long to learn how to live well, and then we are old and no one wants to listen. What hurts is seeing how family problems can affect the children for several generations.
Seagulls are more careful about mating and birds do not reproduce until they have a nest. I think a god could have made us smarter before giving us freedom of will and setting us out to fend for ourselves.
"Several years later"? Don't I wish! :rofl: I'm 60.
I am beginning to understand that of which you speak. There was a time in my life when I could not imagine happiness and love. I had done my best to have a happy family and failed. A problem I have with Buddhism is, I have not picked up family values from Buddhism. In my later years, I have the luxury of focusing on my own happiness and it is no longer dependent on family, but I think civilizations depend on families. That may not be true. However, if civilization is dependent on families and our happiness depends on happy families, we are in trouble.
You are still a kid.
It is wonderful to have a place where thinking people can gather and share their thoughts and what they have learned. I was intellectually starving to death before the Internet. The media talks about the problems with social media, but I see reason to hope for a better world because of social media.
That order of things is not apt to bring us close to the good life because women were not equals and leaving men in charge is problematic. Appreciating beauty, good music, and good art and intentionally becoming refined may bring heaven to earth, but not if women are excluded.
When I see fathers with their children, I have hope that we will see a better day. I think our culture has been male-dominant, especially since industrialization. I think we are suffering serious problems because of that. Homes without good fathers are not a good thing.
Ironic for those who don't like it to use it to complain about it. But social media isn't all bad. Even if it's more difficult to have the kinds of conversations on fb that we have here, fb is great for keeping and reestablishing connections from long ago.
That is about the most profound little exchange I have seen on this site. Thank you both for your insight and honesty. I, too have to think for myself about this in my own life.
Quoting unenlightened
I like the word "profound". That is the perfect word for my experience.
A few months ago someone at the pool told me a Hawaiian greeting goes like this....
"I am sorry, I hope you forgive me. I love you. thank you." Can you see how Pattener's words played into that greeting?
Quoting Patterner
I have recently used that greeting with my sister and my granddaughter when fear and anger were being very destructive. Because of Patterner's post I realized it is my ego that rebelled against saying those loving words. What I want most is love for all of us, but my ego was saying "hello no, I am not going to let them believe they are right and all the emotional problems are because I have been so bad." My ego wanted them to see their wrong. But I didn't understand that my ego was making matters worse until I read Patterner's post.
Frustrating! I got that my sister and granddaughter are going through serious turmoil and therefore they are not being rational. I got that the emotional problems would not be resolved by trying to be rational with them. But to let go and give love a chance is a huge leap of faith in love. My ego is jumping up and down and screaming like a charter in the Disney movie "Inside Out".
Thank you.
Regardless of what happens. Your words have changed how I think and I think I will like this change.
What we all want is love and love does increase love. It is only rational to give the screaming ego a sucker and tell it to sit in the corner. Its intentions are good but maybe it should not be the driver of our lives. This bleeds into the thread I started about being rational. Maturing is learning to be more rational and not letting our emotions control us.
Our child-rearing skills are different today from when we beat the devil out of our children. In the past how we reacted to children was dependent on how we felt. Today our reactions are more likely to be guided by research on child development. I think this is now an evolutionary change. I sure hope so.
However, I also think a better world means happier families. I think it is very damaging to children when parents divorce or move, always expecting the child to adjust to any changes the parents make. Emotional pain is passed on from generation to generation and I think we need to stop being so careless about how the children are affected.
The badly hurt children in my life are now the adults, and their pain became the pain and suffering of their children. Tolerating the use of drugs and alcohol is not good for the children. Wars and sending men and women home with serious disabilities and post-trauma syndrome is not good for the family. Severe economic depressions are terrible for individuals and families. I think cultural adjustments are necessary for a better civilization.
I googled for information about Buddhism. The first Buddha came from a royal family and he renounced those family ties and obligations. This set the stage for nuns and monks who abstained from sex and family obligations but interestingly society rationalized family values as compatible with Buddhism. So you are correct.
Interesting is seeing marriage as a legal thing, not a spiritual thing. Especially Mormans see family as the ordering of life here on earth and in the afterlife. I think most, if not all Christians, look forward to being with their loved ones in the afterlife. More along the lines of reincarnation tying people to each other. I think Buddhaism favors breaking that karma and that would discourage family and having children.
You mentioned the fabric of society and I hope you have more to say about that. "The Fates, also known as the Moirai, are three goddesses in Greek mythology who weave the threads of life for mortals:" Interesting!
Every other 'addendum' to love includes things like 'family bonds' 'romance' etc. But remove all of that, and this is love.
Something I've recently fallen into, that makes me feel young again, and makes me think philosophy is awfully boring.
:razz:
Deep love seems to be mutual joy inspite of rather than because of surrender (e.g. "unselfing" ~ I. Murdoch) without idealization. (Spinoza meets iek) :broken:
And if you end up devastated with a broken heart, wallow deep. The depths you fall will be matched by the heights you fly next time.
And philosophy will always be there, sometimes more, sometimes less.
Thanks! :grin:
If I ever thought I wanted to bond with a man, I would begin probing his notions of virtues. I totally want to avoid rash reactions stimulated by oxycontin, the love hormone. That physical nature of love is not to be trusted and can lead to serious regrets.
Looking back on my past, I think leaping into love can be a very serious mistake, especially if the people can produce children who will suffer their parents' errors.
Is it love or lust? You speak of virtues and so many positive things happen when we are virtuous, but I don't think things go so well without virtues. I hate it when a guy sweeps me off my feet and two months later it is all over. The physical aspect of love can be very short.
You are still a kid. However, you are old enough to start experiencing some awesome mental activity! Our brains change as we age and it is not all bad. When we are young we learn facts but not so much their meaning. In our later years, thoughts start coming together and we get a greater sense of meaning. This is really cool especially when it involves family and a stronger feeling of meaning. I am good with my life coming to an end if I can pass some of the good stuff on to the young.
Sorry for the delay in replying. I recently attended a meeting where someone promoted using a psychedelic mushroom to release the fear of death, addictions, and depression. This would be guided in a clinical situation and it is very expensive. I would love to try it but I don't have that kind of money.
His explanation seemed similar to the Buddhist/Hindu releasing of ego and touch of Nirvana. I meditate and have had a transcendental experience of oneness. I think this has value but I am prejudiced in favor of family love. Family love involves a lot of ego, while Nirvana is a release of ego, right?
Yes, I'm in a good place lately. :grin: