Love

Four · Aug 30, 2012

Because it was getting a bit rude to be posting in that other thread, and it's an interesting discussion.. lets move it over here.

I define love as such:

Love is our involuntary response to virtue... for good or for bad. I feel we recognize virtues in other people, that we hold important in ourselves... it means love might be brought on by different virtues by different people.

For instance to some, spirituality might be a big virtue that one might involuntarily respond to...

So saying that, i don't think you can love someone you've never met or know nothing about, its hollow. It sounds nice when you say it, but when you think about it it doesn't mean much.

So.. what is your definition of love?

JB0704 · Aug 30, 2012

Because I am a Christian, I am going to have to post a scripture on here to explain it......as a Christian, the term is defined for us....

1 Corinthians 13:3-8
3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing. 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

JB0704 said:
Because I am a Christian, I am going to have to post a scripture on here to explain it......as a Christian, the term is defined for us....

Interesting.. I dont really know if that is a definition, if it is it isnt a definition of a concept...

If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing

This isn't a definition of love, just stressing the importance, not that I have a real objection.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails.

This treats love not as a concept or emotion but something more personified. This could be a description of a personality of a person. I would say that love can't be angered at all, because love doesn't have emotions, love isn't a person.

stringmusic · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
This could be a description of a personality of a person.

But it's a description of the personality traits of a person who loves another person/other people.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

stringmusic said:
But it's a description of the personality traits of a person who loves another person/other people.

AHHH, so its not a definition of love, but a way to identify a person that is in love (or if you are in love)

JB0704 · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
AHHH, so its not a definition of love, but a way to identify a person that is in love (or if you are in love)

That is one way to describe it. I guess the concept is identified by the characteristics it displays.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

JB0704 said:
That is one way to describe it. I guess the concept is identified by the characteristics it displays.

But, would you say that anytime those characteristics are displayed it's always love? OR may one person have those traits but not be in love?

stringmusic · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
AHHH, so its not a definition of love, but a way to identify a person that is in love (or if you are in love)

To me, it is still a definition of love, by describing the charateristics of a person in love, and yes, it could be used to identify if a person is in love or not.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

stringmusic said:
To me, it is still a definition of love, by describing the charateristics of a person in love, and yes, it could be used to identify if a person is in love or not.

Would you agree that it is a poor definition if it cannot properly distinguish love from other things?

JB0704 · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
But, would you say that anytime those characteristics are displayed it's always love? OR may one person have those traits but not be in love?

Not sure. I would think a person's "lov" would be demonstrated by those characteristics. But, I recon a person could do those things and hate somebody at the same time.....it just wouldn't make a lot of sense.

stringmusic · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
Would you agree that it is a poor definition if it cannot properly distinguish love from other things?

No, because love has a multi-definition does not mean that the biblical definition is poor. The words used in the bible can be used to describe or define other things, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't give a(I would say "the") definition of love.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

stringmusic said:
No, because love has a multi-definition does not mean that the biblical definition is poor. The words used in the bible can be used to describe or define other things, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't give a(I would say "the") definition of love.

I'm not even saying that it's a poor description of what love looks like, only that it's a somewhat ambiguous definition.

What i mean to say is.. if i told you the definition of an apple was round and red, and you found a round and red object that wasn't an apple (lets say a red tennis ball, or red rock) That would mean i gave you a fairly poor definition of apple, right?

I will however admit that using something that exists physically is easier to defined / identify than a concept.

stringmusic · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
I'm not even saying that it's a poor description of what love looks like, only that it's a somewhat ambiguous definition.

What i mean to say is.. if i told you the definition of an apple was round and red, and you found a round and red object that wasn't an apple (lets say a red tennis ball, or red rock) That would mean i gave you a fairly poor definition of apple, right?

I see your point, but, I see the biblical definition as a little stronger than your above definition. If you added to the two worded definition of the apple, say, it is edible, describe the taste, and that it has seeds in the middle, then I could probably bring you an apple.

I will however admit that using something that exists physically is easier to defined / identify than a concept.

I agree, and that is possibly why it is describe that way.

JB0704 · Aug 30, 2012

BTW, most Christians either have that definition read at their weddings, or, have it inscribed on their wedding rings....I'm guilty to both....

gordon 2 · Aug 30, 2012

Four said:
Because it was getting a bit rude to be posting in that other thread, and it's an interesting discussion.. lets move it over here.

I define love as such:

Love is our involuntary response to virtue... for good or for bad. I feel we recognize virtues in other people, that we hold important in ourselves... it means love might be brought on by different virtues by different people.

For instance to some, spirituality might be a big virtue that one might involuntarily respond to...

So saying that, i don't think you can love someone you've never met or know nothing about, its hollow. It sounds nice when you say it, but when you think about it it doesn't mean much.

So.. what is your definition of love?

Your definition is very interesting.

He's mine using your ideas. Love is the acting out of what we deem virtuous and therefore, once more love can be voluntary.

For example, a husband who takes back his cheating wife several times is doing a definate voluntary act. ( I'm think in this case or example the cheating spouse is bi-polar and for reasons deemed virtuous, she can do no wrong from principles and concepts deemed virtuous by her husband.)

To forgive and forget is not involuntary. To work for peace and justice is not involuntary. And especially voluntary if done and in so doing to forgo greater interest of personal and immediate gain.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

gordon 2 said:
Your definition is very interesting.

He's mine using your ideas. Love is the acting out of what we deem virtuous and therefore, once more love can be voluntary.

For example, a husband who takes back his cheating wife several times is doing a definate voluntary act. ( I'm think in this case or example the cheating spouse is bi-polar and for reasons deemed virtuous, she can do no wrong from principles and concepts deemed virtuous by her husband.)

To forgive and forget is not involuntary. To work for peace and justice is not involuntary. And especially voluntary if done and in so doing to forgo greater interest of personal and immediate gain.

Hmm i think you misunderstood. I believe love itself is a reaction to virtue, and it's involuntary. Virtuous actions themselves are voluntary, but our "love" for them isn't. So in that respect i don't believe in unconditional love.

hobbs27 · Aug 30, 2012

I wonder how or why love evolved into us humans.From the standpoint of an atheist ofcourse.

Four · Aug 30, 2012

hobbs27 said:
I wonder how or why love evolved into us humans.From the standpoint of an atheist ofcourse.

given we're communal animals we need to be able to form bonds for survival. I imagine at first those that showed no empathy or compassion died off faster than others as survival of a lone individual is harder than in a group. In order to recognize virtue in another was helpful in building tribes / communities.

BTW, that's me just talking i havent looked up any sources

edit: not to far off the mark i guess

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_basis_of_love

1gr8bldr · Aug 30, 2012

Those who claim to love everyone are fooling themselves. The bible says we are to love one another, so what would we expect them to say? But the truth is, even the church is a poor reflection of love. Love is involuntary. It comes from the heart. It is not a discipline, and no one can rightfully claim to love everyone just because they say so. Spouse and family is as far as love usually goes. If we loved our neighbor as ourself, we would all be middle class. No poor and no rich. What is yours would be mine and what is mine would be yours. For those of you thinking that I'm wrong, that you do love everyone as yourself, I'm sure that there are plenty of homeless that you can give it all to or at least let them live with you since you love everyone

ambush80 · Aug 30, 2012

1gr8bldr said:
Those who claim to love everyone are fooling themselves. The bible says we are to love one another, so what would we expect them to say? But the truth is, even the church is a poor reflection of love. Love is involuntary. It comes from the heart. It is not a discipline, and no one can rightfully claim to love everyone just because they say so. Spouse and family is as far as love usually goes. If we loved our neighbor as ourself, we would all be middle class. No poor and no rich. What is yours would be mine and what is mine would be yours. For those of you thinking that I'm wrong, that you do love everyone as yourself, I'm sure that there are plenty of homeless that you can give it all to or at least let them live with you since you love everyone

That's an astute observation.

Love

Senior Member

I Gots Goats

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

I Gots Goats

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

I Gots Goats

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

I Gots Goats

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Share this page