The Old Classic Q about Love

[subterranean]

Is it love or is it just the idea of being in love? How'd you differentiate them?

The first means that you do love the person and the later means that you think that you love someone but you actually don't love the person

[Snukes]

I'd suggest that between being in love with a person and being in love with the idea of being in love, the levels of happiness may differ.

If you're really in love with someone, you are happy. If the person doesn't return your love, you might be frustrated, but thinking of that person, being with that person, planning your future with that person - in general - makes you happy.

If you only think you're in love (say, you're with a really good person and *wish* you could love them, or have been desperate for someone for so long that you latch on to the first person who comes along) you end up spending a lot of time wondering why things aren't perfect. You like the attention, you're flattered by compliments and gifts, but when it comes right down to it, can you happily imagine spending the rest of your life with this person?

Perhaps a question like "what would I do if this person cheated on me?" or "where will we be in 20 years?" could help you deduce the depth (or shallowness) of feelings.

There's also the distracting possibility of being "in lust" with someone, which throws whole new shades of complication on the question.

Personally, I believe real love is a question of being a better person due to the support and presence of the beloved, whereas immitations of love manifest in more selfish ways. Of course, all love must be a little selfish. Or so I think. ;)

[Anselmus]

Not unlike the meaning of life, people have been discussing this - figure out the meaningful differences - for...well, a while.

I think one of the key factors (common mistakes) is not filling in unknowns with desirable fancies - which is incredibly difficult to keep from doing - like building someone up on a pedestal (which is common to the 'in love with being in love'). This goes into the entire acceptance of character flaws and what-not. You have to be open to new experiences, differences, and change - many things that these include are instinctively undesirable.

But then, even if you discover how to do this, your loved one must also know...

Yet, the detials of these challenges vary from individual to individual, same as for each individual's desired love - so, it's not hard to see where the difficulty comes.

I hope this makes sense; I find this subject immensely interesting and equally as complex.

[crisaor]

Is it love or is it just the idea of being in love? How'd you differentiate them?
I think it's hard to differentiate between them because usually oneself won't let him/herself see the difference. Everything in the relationship (and those things connected to it) just works better if you think the bond between the people is mutual love, at least from oneself perspective. Or, maybe one does know the difference, but won't let him/herself accept it (i.e. if one believes the other one loves him, it would be "unfair" to not return in kind, so to speak).
Personally, I think the only time when someone can objectively tell the difference is when the relationship is over. When that happens, there's no more obligations pressing the mind, feelings (past and present) appear as what they are. If you can't possibly make the transition to the new situation, chances are you were in love, specially when this doesn't change with time.
Anyway, every person is its in itself its own universe, so the above may perfectly not apply, of course. It's just one of those general rules one comes by every now and then.

[subterranean]

If you only think you're in love (say, you're with a really good person and *wish* you could love them, or have been desperate for someone for so long that you latch on to the first person who comes along) you end up spending a lot of time wondering why things aren't perfect. You like the attention, you're flattered by compliments and gifts, but when it comes right down to it, can you happily imagine spending the rest of your life with this person?

Good point


Perhaps a question like "what would I do if this person cheated on me?" or "where will we be in 20 years?" could help you deduce the depth (or shallowness) of feelings.;)

Yes, I agree with the shallowness point.

[imthefoolonthehill]

ask the bard.

Sonnet 116.

that should give you a direct answer to your question.... if not a satisfactory one



ask the bible.

Song of Songs (song of Solomen in some versions)

This is a little more indirect, but I think it still relates to your question, and its my favorite part of the Bible.

The little subheading the publishers of my Bible added at the start of song of songs is "Love the way its supposed to be"

Some think its "an allegory of love between God and his people"... but i'm not so sure of that... what i am sure of is that its one of the world's oldest recorded love songs.



Ask yourself. Think about it. You might not get an answer that satisfies you... but you might get a little closer. Just don't let it drive you up a wall... for too long. :-)

[subterranean]

Why thank You Fool...;)

[imthefoolonthehill]

no problem... i figure these guys know better than i do on the subject....

that question can become haunting, even painful... but i'm pretty sure everyone asks it at least once sometime in their life...

[subterranean]

that question can become haunting, even painful... but i'm pretty sure everyone asks it at least once sometime in their life...

True Fool. I asked this question to my bf and he thought that I was doubting him and further he beginning to doubt my feelings for him.

[Jay]

Hey, funny you should bring up this topic, SubT. Latelly I was wondering if I'm in love or in love with being in love. Thing is after talking it over with a few friends I'm still not sure and am doubting myself cos I don't know if they're right or if I'm right. Hey this is confusing :D.
Have you worked out the problem with your bf yet? Or is he still doubting your feelings for him? Dare I ask... well, I do actually... do you doubt his feelings for you?

[baddad]

Love according to the Psychology (Brain and Behavior) text books: Chemically induced feelings of euphoria lasting between 18 and 36 months. Elevated levels of dopamines are attributed with being responsible for these feelings of attraction, happiness, etc.

....OHHH......that is just so romantic!!!!

But, if it is not true 'LOVE' (love = chemical reaction) these feelings will disipate in a much shorter period of time for most people.

*......I am always so pleased when my education can be put to such good use....*

.........*or not....*

[Scheherazade]

So you cannot love someone more than 36 months?
*begs to differ*

[Jay]

*SECONDS Scher and glares at baddad :D*

[imthefoolonthehill]

it is difficult to describe love using naturalistic terms in a way that could be agreed upon.

[baddad]

Well, of course I am not claiming you cannot love someone longer than 36 months! Love as the euphoric wonder felt at the start of most love affairs is what I am claiming as a chemical reaction. 'Love', as most people would describe it, morphs into something quite removed from this euphoria as time spent in a relationship accumulates. The euphoria may linger, but caring, sharing, compromise, patience, and a host of other maintenance techniques are required, are indeed mandatory, in order for any relationship to sustain itself longer than the science indicates.......in a general sense.....

But hey, I'm a hopeless romantic myself, and I still believe in the fairytale love.......after all, it has been drilled into us since we were children...

[Anselmus]

^ well said ^ :)

[Scheherazade]

it is difficult to describe love using naturalistic terms in a way that could be agreed upon.

Maybe fool is right that it is hard to define what love actually is... As in my opinion what baddad refers as 'the euphoric wonder felt at the start' is not 'love' but some kind of infatuation... What comes afterwards, if the relationship persists, is the real love... which make us care, share, compromise... Maybe we do need to go through that euphoria to for our feelings to mature into love.
I am a hopeless romantic too, I guess because I cannot bring myself to call some kind of chemical reaction and passing infatuation love...

[Stanislaw]

I think true love goes beyond the physical ideals of "loving". When I feel that I am in 'love' I try and look over the situation, if i find that the woman is just hot, ie I like her asthetics, than I realize that is a little shallow, but if the feeling goes beyond lust, and all you want is to hold the lady in your arms and stare out at a sunset, just lounging, than it is a little stronger. It is not that the physical is not present, just that the feelings transcends those of basicity and all you want is to be with them, and have them be with you.

[Scheherazade]

Stan, you romantic boy! ;)

[Stanislaw]

:blush: or be it :ladysman:

lol :D

[subterranean]

Yeh, I almost shed a tear reading it ;)

I don't know people still do that..holding arms and watching the sunset..Or kissing under the tree (Schery...ahem ;) )
But I agree with you Stan, when the feelings are way pass the lusty needs, then it must be love, and not just a thought of being in love :nod:


I think true love goes beyond the physical ideals of "loving". When I feel that I am in 'love' I try and look over the situation, if i find that the woman is just hot, ie I like her asthetics, than I realize that is a little shallow, but if the feeling goes beyond lust, and all you want is to hold the lady in your arms and stare out at a sunset, just lounging, than it is a little stronger. It is not that the physical is not present, just that the feelings transcends those of basicity and all you want is to be with them, and have them be with you.

[Molko]

I was thinking about this question today, and I think that if you really love the person, then you would love everything about them. Even the annoying things that they do would seem attractive and tolerable. But most importantly, I think that if you really love the person, you'd want him/her to be happy and whatever happiness you have in your life, you would like to share it with them.

In regards to the other one (the idea of being in love) I guess if a person found themselves in that situation, and only loved their partner soley on that fact, then they wouldnt be happy deep down inside. And besides, I dont think a relationship with a foundation like that would last for very long

[Snukes]

I think that if you really love the person, then you would love everything about them. Even the annoying things that they do would seem attractive and tolerable.

Hehe! I beg to differ. I think what you've described there is serious infatuation. Love with a capital L comes when you recognize annoying habits for what they are - really annoying - and you're still willing to put up with them because you want to be with the person that much.

I add my vote to those opposed to a 36 month limit on love.

I also agree that the only way you can really tell if it WAS love is to get out of the relationship. Which, if it was love, is a really lousy way to find out.

[baddad]

....Uhhhh.......ok.........one more time:

....the 36 month limit is the upper limit of the chemical reaction and brain chemical changes involved in those heady moments of infatuation.......

This posts no limits on LOve, like, infatuation, or whatever you wish to call it when two people become involved with each other. BUT..... the changes in brain chemicals lasts between 18-36 months.Period. You don't have to like these scientific conclusions. The truth isn't always pretty......