Have you ever been in LOVE?

[Zapaan]

Originally Posted by Koshiba

Zapaan, That may perhaps be true for some but you don't really have to be a certain age to *experience* love. :P Some people may not *realize* the difference between love and crushes and stuff but eh.. It isn't true for all. I've known several people that met their current husband/wife when they were quite young and have had a long relationship. I guess it all depends on the person though. Supposedly being older means you're wiser but I wouldn't say it's like that all the time. Since different people have been through different things and at different times in their life. Anyways, that's my two cents or so. :P As for me, I think that I'm fairly wise for my age and I dont' judge things on my experiences alone. ^^

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. I wasn't saying people couldn't experience it, I was simply saying that most people don't have the life experience to truly understand what they were/are going through at the time when they're still young. The result is more likely as I described above, though certainly not impossible. I too know many people who met at a generally young age and are still together now. However, most of them, as the years passed, realized their relationship changed (not necessarily better or worse, just different), and the state of 'love' changed with it. So what does that say about love? Anyone who's been in a relationship longer than 5 years will attest that love isn't enough to make a relationship work, and the truth is, most young people don't have the faculties to even realize this, let alone actually do it. Again, not impossible, but it's not until you're older that you realize what it means to actually have a real relationship rather than something like juvenile dating.

Experience is what will ultimately define you, and while it can certainly come while you're young, generally speaking in North America/Western cultures, it usually takes around the 25 year mark until you truly become an adult. Again, not impossible, but generally speaking, that's what it tends to fall under.

As for older == wiser, it's generally true, but I also know MANY 40+ year old babies, as well as some 18 year old philosophers.

- Z

[Koshiba]

Originally Posted by Zapaan

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. I wasn't saying people couldn't experience it, I was simply saying that most people don't have the life experience to truly understand what they were/are going through at the time when they're still young. The result is more likely as I described above, though certainly not impossible. I too know many people who met at a generally young age and are still together now. However, most of them, as the years passed, realized their relationship changed (not necessarily better or worse, just different), and the state of 'love' changed with it. So what does that say about love? Anyone who's been in a relationship longer than 5 years will attest that love isn't enough to make a relationship work, and the truth is, most young people don't have the faculties to even realize this, let alone actually do it. Again, not impossible, but it's not until you're older that you realize what it means to actually have a real relationship rather than something like juvenile dating.

Experience is what will ultimately define you, and while it can certainly come while you're young, generally speaking in North America/Western cultures, it usually takes around the 25 year mark until you truly become an adult. Again, not impossible, but generally speaking, that's what it tends to fall under.

As for older == wiser, it's generally true, but I also know MANY 40+ year old babies, as well as some 18 year old philosophers.

- Z

Yeah, alot of people take a long time before they notice the difference between like simple crushes and love. =x Though I think once you do experience love, you'll be able to tell the difference. It's quite different and alot stronger.. Haha, yes, it takes *alot* more then love to make a relationship work. It's the sad truth. It'd be nice if love was all it took but hey.. I'm at least glad that I realize it. :P Though I wish more people would realize that and put more effort into their relationships..

I agree there also, people *usually* take quite a long time to mature. Though it certainly wouldn't cover everybody. Though generally, it is true.

[Shousha]

...love is in the air..... ^_^

[Zapaan]

Speaking of love...

I'm curious how many of you believe in love?

It's something I've struggled with since my third girlfriend (about 2 relationships back/8 or 9 years ago). See, if you stop and think about it, and consider the scientific studies done on the brain, it's evident that all "love" is, is a chemical reaction in the brain brought on by millions of years of evolution combined with social conditioning/reinforcement. The general concensus seems to hold that this thing we call love has become a language definition of an evolved state of a desire to procreate, genetically programmed into us and has become a sort of catch-all for defining relationships that extend beyond simple contact.

The truth is, there is no such thing as love. All that exists is elevated levels of dopemine that gets released into your bloodstream when certain stimulii are triggered. It's not as simple as something like a pheremone response in animals or insects, in fact it's very complex, in that it's typically a combination of stimulus response, social conditioning, and various cues, but ultimately, it's just a chemical reaction in the brain.

The historical belief that love is some mysterious spiritual bonding which occurs is pure hogwash. There's nothing there except synapses firing based on stimulii and social conditioning. It most certainly has a powerful effect when it occurs, but that's no indication of anything beyond the fact that it's a powerful reaction.

So having said that, after my 3rd girlfriend nearly destroyed me, along with other philosophical thoughts on mankind, it occured to me that we're not so removed from the animal kingdom as I had previously believed. Yes, we're certainly more evolved, but ultimately we're still bound by our genes. Obviously the only thing seperating us from animals is our brains, but truthfully, we really don't excercise that difference very much (if at all). We still are driven by genetic programming to procreate, we're still driven by the animus that drives the beast inside us, and add to that the societal reinforcements which are themselves a product of our genetic makeup, and we're nothing more than just a complex animal.

Love is just an illusion. Just like control and freewill.

- Z

[Koshiba]

Originally Posted by Zapaan

Speaking of love...

I'm curious how many of you believe in love?

It's something I've struggled with since my third girlfriend (about 2 relationships back/8 or 9 years ago). See, if you stop and think about it, and consider the scientific studies done on the brain, it's evident that all "love" is, is a chemical reaction in the brain brought on by millions of years of evolution combined with social conditioning/reinforcement. The general concensus seems to hold that this thing we call love has become a language definition of an evolved state of a desire to procreate, genetically programmed into us and has become a sort of catch-all for defining relationships that extend beyond simple contact.

The truth is, there is no such thing as love. All that exists is elevated levels of dopemine that gets released into your bloodstream when certain stimulii are triggered. It's not as simple as something like a pheremone response in animals or insects, in fact it's very complex, in that it's typically a combination of stimulus response, social conditioning, and various cues, but ultimately, it's just a chemical reaction in the brain.

The historical belief that love is some mysterious spiritual bonding which occurs is pure hogwash. There's nothing there except synapses firing based on stimulii and social conditioning. It most certainly has a powerful effect when it occurs, but that's no indication of anything beyond the fact that it's a powerful reaction.

So having said that, after my 3rd girlfriend nearly destroyed me, along with other philosophical thoughts on mankind, it occured to me that we're not so removed from the animal kingdom as I had previously believed. Yes, we're certainly more evolved, but ultimately we're still bound by our genes. Obviously the only thing seperating us from animals is our brains, but truthfully, we really don't excercise that difference very much (if at all). We still are driven by genetic programming to procreate, we're still driven by the animus that drives the beast inside us, and add to that the societal reinforcements which are themselves a product of our genetic makeup, and we're nothing more than just a complex animal.

Love is just an illusion. Just like control and freewill.

- Z

That was the most depressing thing I've read all day. =x I'm *really* glad I'm more of a spiritual person rather then a scientific person because the scientific outlook on life is *so* damn depressing, I think I'd want to shoot myself. :P

[Shadowlord]

I seem to be the only lovesless loser who has never had a girlfriend. Must be because of my lack of social life, or the lack of social life due to being a loveless loser? Hmmm, what a paradox I seem to have created. Perhaps if I sit alone in my room for a couple days the answer will come to me....

anyway, yeah its sad, and i feel bad that I have never met anyone who wants to be with me/i want to be with. I guess there aren't many people who enjoy what I do around where I go. Everyone else is lucky, after all, "tis better to have loved and lost, than to never have loved before"........

[Zapaan]

Originally Posted by Koshiba

That was the most depressing thing I've read all day. =x I'm *really* glad I'm more of a spiritual person rather then a scientific person because the scientific outlook on life is *so* damn depressing, I think I'd want to shoot myself. :P

What makes you think those of us who are "wise in the ways of science" (to quote Monty Python ) aren't spiritual? In fact, most of the upper echelon of scientific thinkers have historically been almost hyper religious. Of course you can also be spiritual but still be an aetheist as well, but that's another cup of tokayaki.

But let me ask you this Koshiba. Are you saying that you'd prefer to live ignorantly, simply because it would be easier? Or are you saying that you don't believe that love is an illusion?

- Z

[Roots]

Originally Posted by Shadowlord

I seem to be the only lovesless loser who has never had a girlfriend.

You're not alone. I turn 22 tomorrow and I've never had a girlfriend. How old are you? When I was younger, say between 15-19, I used to constantly be about not having a girlfriend. But I've gotten used to being alone now and I don't think about it that much anymore. Rather than spending my time aggressively trying to find love, I'm just going to be patient and let it happen naturally. Just find something in your life that you enjoy doing and focus on it and the pain will gradually go away

Originally Posted by Zapaan

What makes you think those of us who are "wise in the ways of science" (to quote Monty Python ) aren't spiritual? In fact, most of the upper echelon of scientific thinkers have historically been almost hyper religious.

Where did you draw that conclusion from? What do you mean 'upper echelon' of scientific thinkers? Do you mean those with PhDs, or do you mean famous scientists like Einstein and such? I hope I don't regret posting this URL, because its been debated over here once before already (I think I recall a bloodbath ), but this is directly contradicts your statement.
http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/Jesus/Inte...20religion.htm

Originally Posted by Zapaan

Are you saying that you'd prefer to live ignorantly, simply because it would be easier? Or are you saying that you don't believe that love is an illusion?

I know this isn't directed at me but I couldn't keep my trap shut. First of all I am atheist and a firm believer in science. I agree about your statement of love being nothing more than a mixture of brain signals, horomones, and social influence, but I don't go so far as to call love an 'illusion'. Human emotions are nothing more than a complex series of chemicals and impulses, but would you call them an illusion because of that? If there is a science discovered behind something that is naked to the normal eye does that mean that it doesn't really exist? I beg to differ. I don't believe we are bounded emotionally by our genetic programming, but rather by our own hearts. And I do believe in free will as well; nothing is pre-determined. So in summary...

Believe in the power of love!!!

[Secca]

Originally Posted by Koshiba

That was the most depressing thing I've read all day. =x I'm *really* glad I'm more of a spiritual person rather then a scientific person because the scientific outlook on life is *so* damn depressing, I think I'd want to shoot myself. :P

I couldn't agree more, that sounds so sad, as if he's trying to justify that love is a thing that can be explained scientifically and can be reproduce like cup noodle. ^^

[Zapaan]

Originally Posted by Roots

Where did you draw that conclusion from? What do you mean 'upper echelon' of scientific thinkers? Do you mean those with PhDs, or do you mean famous scientists like Einstein and such? I hope I don't regret posting this URL, because its been debated over here once before already (I think I recall a bloodbath ), but this is directly contradicts your statement.
http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/Jesus/Inte...20religion.htm

I'll admit it, I was speaking off the cuff. Though in my defence I was speaking historically (and to some degree recently), with reference to great minds throughout history, though I probably shouldn't have lumped in people like philosophers with true scientists in my own thoughts on the matter. But what I was trying to convey was that spirituality is by no means exclusive of those who prescribe to science, though I should really have been more precise in stating that religion and spirituality are two seperate things (they just coincide together more often than not).

I know this isn't directed at me but I couldn't keep my trap shut.

All the better for discussion I say

First of all I am atheist and a firm believer in science. I agree about your statement of love being nothing more than a mixture of brain signals, horomones, and social influence, but I don't go so far as to call love an 'illusion'.

Then what would you call it? We define the term 'love' as the result of what we can both agree is a result of my simplistic description above. This fact alone is the defining point that clearly brings us to this conclusion, you merely need to follow it to it's end to see this truth. The denial of this state of being as somehow something more than what it is, is a part of the social conditioning we've evolved societally to reinforce the belief that this gives our existance some kind of cosmic purpose, or meaning that on a subconscious level drives us further to procreate and not give in to the truth that we have no purpose, nor that every single human being since the existance of man is as nothing. It makes us blind ourselves into believing we're somehow special, and that the universe couldn't go on without us, when in truth, once we're gone (mankind), the universe won't have even noticed we existed, thus nullifying every single thing we as a species have ever done. We're cosmic motes adrift as flotsam.

Our brains are a double edged sword in that regard, and love, along with other emotional states that tie directly into procreation and the survival instinct (on a species level, not an individual level) exist to ensure that we try to continue on as a species, it's a genetic evolutionary insurance policy that's resulted from millions of years of evolution. At the same time, thanks to our inordinately large craniums and overly developed grey matter, we're also capable of positing the truth of the nature of the universe and existence itself, though truthfully, most will never even delve into that area thanks primarily again to the societal reinforcements brought forth from our genetic evolution, paired with plain and simple basic fear (one of the most powerful of our built in survival instincts). Once you come to the realization that eons of evolution and societal reinforcements are all in place simply to get us to procreate and nothing more, then couple that with an understanding of human nature along with an unwavering, truly honest view of the nature of the universe, it can be quite frightening to 'stare God in the eye' and try to come to terms with that. Hell, people have killed themselves for infinitely less. What do you think would happen if everyone in the world suddenly realized the truth of their existence tomorrow? Of course it would never happen, since no one would be willing to believe it thanks to the conditioning they've all received, and the fact that humans will willingly stop thinking if it means they can be a little happier.

Why do you think that the majority of the world prescribes to some form of religious belief system?

Human emotions are nothing more than a complex series of chemicals and impulses, but would you call them an illusion because of that? If there is a science discovered behind something that is naked to the normal eye does that mean that it doesn't really exist?

I think you're misunderstanding me here. I'm not saying the state of love doesn't exist, I'm saying it's an illusion. Love most certainly exists (in the question of it's definition), but the attributed qualities of it are what the illusion is that I'm describing. You yourself have anthropomorphized it like it's some living spirit that guides us in some divine fashion. Humans, over the eons, have placed it upon a holy altar in a subconscious fashion, that while they may understand it on an intellectual level, are unwilling to accept it for what it is (due again primarily to the societal reinforcements that make us think the way we do), so much so, that they are willing to forgo everything they know to be fact, on blind faith. As you can see, belief is not relegated strictly to religion. It's a part of what we are, and only by actually using that big chunk of grey matter up top can we see the truth, and THIS is what distinguishes us from animals. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen too often, myself included in that observation

I beg to differ. I don't believe we are bounded emotionally by our genetic programming, but rather by our own hearts. And I do believe in free will as well; nothing is pre-determined. So in summary...

Believe in the power of love!!!

I completely agree about the power of love. It's frighteningly powerful. Hell, wars have been fought over it, if tales are to be believed in their veracity.

However, freewill is unfortunately, also an illusion. What's really scary is that science is beginning to prove this to be true. Or rather more precisely, it's scary what the result of that will be once the general populace finally casts off the chains of religion and begins to truly grasp the nature of existance on a species level. Personally, I have faith in mankind's inexhaustible ability to fuck itself in the ass, and am fairly certain we'll come pretty damn close to suicide on a species level, but it's a close call, as a certain level of maturity is required (as a species) to be able to finally cast off religion, so it's still possible that man will finally elevate himself above animal. We'll see

Btw, sorry for all the male-centric expressions (man, mankind, etc.). 34 years of conditioning tends to form hard habits to break

Originally Posted by Secca

I couldn't agree more, that sounds so sad, as if he's trying to justify that love is a thing that can be explained scientifically and can be reproduce like cup noodle.

I'm not justifying anything, I'm trying to show you what it is, to try to give you some perspective. And maybe trying to expand your mind a little (as arrogant as that might sound). FWIW though, it IS as easy to reproduce as a cup of ramen. It just takes more time

- Z

[Rhia]

Originally Posted by Zapaan

I don't want to sound condescending to anyone, but based on the number of teenagers replying in this thread, honestly, I don't think many of you actually know what love is.

Please don't think I'm trying to be an asshole here, as I'm not (really!). What I'm saying is that I don't believe many of you have the life experience to actually 'know' what love is

I sooooo dissagree how old do you have to be to know what love is then??
There is no age on love, if you love some one you love them right??I mean what life experience do you have to have??? some people get married to their first love, but because they havent played the feild a bit does it mean she/ he doesnt know what love is because they havent had any experience with other people to compare the feeling she/he gets in side against??

get wat im sayin?

[Secca]

Originally Posted by Zapaan

I'm not justifying anything, I'm trying to show you what it is, to try to give you some perspective. And maybe trying to expand your mind a little (as arrogant as that might sound). FWIW though, it IS as easy to reproduce as a cup of ramen. It just takes more time

aww you missing the point, you need to take this less seriously. ^^ Ok let me try to give you a different perspective. And maybe trying to expand your mind a little (as arrogant as that might sound too). ^^

To be in love, you need to let go your rationality, everything you have learn, everything you think is correct or make sense, forget about them.

When you are in love, you'll be blind of everything around you, even if the world go crazy and doesn't make any sense to you anymore. As long as the person you love is thinking about you, then the world will look beautiful in your eyes and you are on the top of the world. ^^

[Zapaan]

Originally Posted by Rhia

I sooooo dissagree how old do you have to be to know what love is then??

Not to sound like a smartass, but about 25-ish As I mentioned above.

There is no age on love, if you love some one you love them right??I mean what life experience do you have to have???

Well, perspective for one. How much life perspective will most (not all) 12-16 year olds have that they can compare this feeling to, to really understand it? How many of them understand that every second that passes, thousands of innocent lives are snuffed out somewhere in the world (usually by some inhuman monster in the guise of man), and actually understand the significance of it? How many have had someone they've known for over 20 years die on them? How many have spent 16+ years of their life educating themselves only to find that once they hit the 'real world' their education means very little beyond getting them 'in the door'? How many of them truly understand what sacrifice means? The list goes on and on. At that age, they simply don't have the life experience to be able to put what they're feeling into perspective and thus actually 'know' what love is. I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm saying the majority of them don't have the faculties to really understand what they're going through. Add to that the hormones raging through their bodies and there's simply no question.

Ask anyone that lives on their own, and is independant (financially), and ask them if what they thought was earth shatteringly important to them when they were 14 is anything more than a chuckle to them now. Aside from the one's who have faced some form of terrible tragedy, nearly every single one will respond the same. Why? Because they have life experience. Sadly, it comes at the cost of innocence, and a worse trade-off I can't think of.

some people get married to their first love, but because they havent played the feild a bit does it mean she/ he doesnt know what love is because they havent had any experience with other people to compare the feeling she/he gets in side against??

get wat im sayin?

Certainly, it's true that there are those that do marry their first love and I made no claim that it was impossible. However, you're ignoring the fact that as they grew older, their feelings changed, as well as their relationship. By the time they married, they were most certainly not in the same mindset as they were when they were children. Regardless of this, just how many first loves do you think do end up getting married? I'd have to venture the percentage is extremely low (in fact, I'd wager it's under 1% of the global population). Now I don't have any hard numbers or evidence to back this up, so if anyone has some evidence to prove me right or wrong, I'd certainly be interested to see it.

Then there's also the fact that marriage != eternal love and happiness. I'd be even more curious to see just how many 'first love' marriages end in divorce, or a 'trapped in a loveless marriage' scenario. I'd be guessing, but the likelihood of those two possibilities would seem quite high to me especially in Western cultures, where divorce has about the same significance as buying a new car.

It's naivete of this nature regarding human interpersonal relationships is what I'm talking about when I say young people don't have the life experience to understand what love is.

At the same time Rhia, I'm honestly and truly envious of you. I say with no amount of shame that I would sell my soul (if I had one) to be innocent again. Because for you, love does exist. Not so for this old man.

Originally Posted by Secca

aww you missing the point, you need to take this less seriously. ^^ Ok let me try to give you a different perspective. And maybe trying to expand your mind a little (as arrogant as that might sound too). ^^

To be in love, you need to let go your rationality, everything you have learn, everything you think is correct or make sense, forget about them.

When you are in love, you'll be blind of everything around you, even if the world go crazy and doesn't make any sense to you anymore. As long as the person you love is thinking about you, then the world will look beautiful in your eyes and you are on the top of the world. ^^

Make no mistake, I can still experience the heady feeling of the state of love, as just because I understand something, doesn't mean I'm necessarily immune to it's effects.

What I'm getting at is that because I do understand it, there's now a schizm within me that didn't exist before. Part of me is as you say, casts logic and rational thought to the wind, letting my emotional state take over and is happy to do so. Unfortunately, there's also the other part of me that knows what's happening, and knows at the core of my being that this is all just an illusion brought on by millions of years of evolution and reinforced by societal conditioning. Eventually, the two will need to homogenize into a single thing that is me, and come to terms with that truth. To do otherwise is simply allowing myself to become the ignorant animal, and thus cheapening my existance, albeit likely in a more happy state, but ultimately lying to myself and reducing myself even more.

To give you an analogy, it would be like believing in Santa Claus. I WANT him to exist, but I know he doesn't. Would you then cling to the belief that he exists, simply because you want him to? Or would you reconcile the fact that he doesn't exist and allow yourself to grow and become more than you were?

Facing the world and the universe with open eyes instead of remaining willingly ignorant is the main point here. To do so requires that one actually think and ponder their existance, something that most don't seem to care about, let alone actually do.

- Z

[Secca]

Originally Posted by Zapaan

Make no mistake, I can still experience the heady feeling of the state of love, as just because I understand something, doesn't mean I'm necessarily immune to it's effects.

What I'm getting at is that because I do understand it, there's now a schizm within me that didn't exist before. Part of me is as you say, casts logic and rational thought to the wind, letting my emotional state take over and is happy to do so. Unfortunately, there's also the other part of me that knows what's happening, and knows at the core of my being that this is all just an illusion brought on by millions of years of evolution and reinforced by societal conditioning. Eventually, the two will need to homogenize into a single thing that is me, and come to terms with that truth. To do otherwise is simply allowing myself to become the ignorant animal, and thus cheapening my existance, albeit likely in a more happy state, but ultimately lying to myself and reducing myself even more.

To give you an analogy, it would be like believing in Santa Claus. I WANT him to exist, but I know he doesn't. Would you then cling to the belief that he exists, simply because you want him to? Or would you reconcile the fact that he doesn't exist and allow yourself to grow and become more than you were?

Facing the world and the universe with open eyes instead of remaining willingly ignorant is the main point here. To do so requires that one actually think and ponder their existance, something that most don't seem to care about, let alone actually do.

I'm not trying to tell you do something that you don't like here. ^^ See I was telling you that is my perspective in life. To me, being in love has nothing to do with logic or santa claus or the unverse or whatever. ^^

It just between you and the person you love. It's that simple.

[lily_chan]

dunno if i know if i know what love is since im only 16...but ive never had a bf...so im not the only one whohas this..but i believe there;s someone there for everyone you just have to be patient

[The-Wolf-Of-Mibu]

Love is for the weak.
Ask Itachi.
(Puff puff pass jason. mmmmmmm)

[full_metal_31]

yes and still am...y i'm i even answering this question??...i'm gonna go sit in the corner now

[LilEva]

Yes I am. It has brought me the happiest times in my life, but also the saddest and most painful times. But, in the end, I hope we end up together, but if not, I will always remember him and I believe I will always love him.

[junko]

Originally Posted by Zapaan

Then what would you call it? We define the term 'love' as the result of what we can both agree is a result of my simplistic description above. This fact alone is the defining point that clearly brings us to this conclusion, you merely need to follow it to it's end to see this truth. The denial of this state of being as somehow something more than what it is, is a part of the social conditioning we've evolved societally to reinforce the belief that this gives our existance some kind of cosmic purpose, or meaning that on a subconscious level drives us further to procreate and not give in to the truth that we have no purpose, nor that every single human being since the existance of man is as nothing. It makes us blind ourselves into believing we're somehow special, and that the universe couldn't go on without us, when in truth, once we're gone (mankind), the universe won't have even noticed we existed, thus nullifying every single thing we as a species have ever done. We're cosmic motes adrift as flotsam.

Our brains are a double edged sword in that regard, and love, along with other emotional states that tie directly into procreation and the survival instinct (on a species level, not an individual level) exist to ensure that we try to continue on as a species, it's a genetic evolutionary insurance policy that's resulted from millions of years of evolution. At the same time, thanks to our inordinately large craniums and overly developed grey matter, we're also capable of positing the truth of the nature of the universe and existence itself, though truthfully, most will never even delve into that area thanks primarily again to the societal reinforcements brought forth from our genetic evolution, paired with plain and simple basic fear (one of the most powerful of our built in survival instincts). Once you come to the realization that eons of evolution and societal reinforcements are all in place simply to get us to procreate and nothing more, then couple that with an understanding of human nature along with an unwavering, truly honest view of the nature of the universe, it can be quite frightening to 'stare God in the eye' and try to come to terms with that. Hell, people have killed themselves for infinitely less. What do you think would happen if everyone in the world suddenly realized the truth of their existence tomorrow? Of course it would never happen, since no one would be willing to believe it thanks to the conditioning they've all received, and the fact that humans will willingly stop thinking if it means they can be a little happier.

Love is not a tactic to ensure the progeny of the human race; that is the reason for lust, and why sex is enjoyable. People fuck because it feels good. Love is a tool of human development, used to convince ourselves that we are not alone in our experience. If it were not for the interpersonal relationships we form with others, we would not survive, could not survive. Lack of companionship, acceptance, and social importance can literally inhibit our will to live. I remember reading of a certain tribe that was descended upon by missionaries. These missonaries managed to convice they tribespeople that their way of life was uncivilized, moraly wrong, and ineffectual. 20 years later, the tribe died out; the tribespeople, having had their way of life denounced so, had lost the will to procreate, and to live. And this, ladies and jellyfish of the forums, is the reason for the high suicide rate amongst Native Americans. You should read The Birth and Death of Meaning. I think you'll enjoy it.

Getting back to the topic of this thread:

I was in love once, the operative word being was. It ended badly. Lets just say she was a lying little sack of shit.

[Blue*Dragon]

I'am nevere falle in love yet. Neeveer had a date also. I mightbe 16, but I dont fall in love at girls. Not that I like some girls verry good looking. that isn't it.