It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Answer to All of Our Problems: Love

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Me,



What do you consider a human connection?


You,




Love, companionship, family, for instance.


So, here you say that they are human connections. You didn't say that human connections aren't really connections, or that I have assumed wrongly that a metaphor is literal.

Only after I confronted you with an earlier comment creating a paradox for you you moved the goalposts yet again and now you are saying this,




a "human connection" is not a connection.


Whatever guy.




posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Love cannot exist on its own. You need other things to know that love exists. If everyone loved each other you would soon not realise that you are loving because there is nothing to compare it to. People would start measuring love: She loves him more than she loves me. Jealousy will start to rear its head and then and only then will people remember what love is. And so the cycle continues. If that doesn't make sense, think of eskimos. Where they live it is always snowing so they have tens of words for different kinds of snow. They don't have a word for heatwave or Indian summer. They just focus on seeing different types of snow.



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave




So, here you say that they are human connections. You didn't say that human connections aren't really connections, or that I have assumed wrongly that a metaphor is literal.

Only after I confronted you with an earlier comment creating a paradox for you you moved the goalposts yet again and now you are saying this,


The assumption was on your part. You asked a question, I answered it. Sure, I moved the goalposts a bit, but its only because I feel somewhat bad that you're a bad shot, guy.

So far your argument is "levels of understanding" (assuming you know what that means) are connections. Care to show how this connects two objects?



posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Wow.

So human connections don't exist, and so I was right that your point is that human connections don't exist.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave

No you are wrong, as I explicitly stated human connections exist. Two people, in love, in a relationship, exist. Is that not a human connection to you? If not, what is? "Levels of understanding"? Some mysterious tether?



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




No you are wrong, as I explicitly stated human connections exist.Two people, in love, in a relationship, exist. Is that not a human connection to you?


Ok, here we go again,




a "human connection" is not a connection.





A human connection is not a connection in any sense.





Relationships are not connections.





A “human connection” is a relationship, not a connection.





You've assumed a "human connection" is a connection. It isn't.






I'll repeat—a "human connection" is not a connection.


Give it up man. You are all over the place, constantly contradicting yourself. What a joke.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
As I've said before, love is not a solution to anything. It is just a motivator. Why do we overpopulate? Why do we spend so much money and time and resources keeping our dying relatives alive? Why do we buy huge, gas-guzzling SUVs to take the kids to school? Why do we build large armies to protect our families and country?

It's because we love them. Yeah, love will be the death of us.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Sorry friend, it looks like you are a bit confused.

We overpopulate because we are lazy, lustful and irresponsible.

We keep relatives alive when we know they are in pain and want to die out of selfishness.

We buy huge vehicles as an exercise of too much self pride.

We build great armies out of fear and greed.

None of this is love.



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave

I'm not sure I understand what your issue is here, but perhaps it's comprehension. Because koala bears are not bears does not mean koala bears do not exist. Because head cheese is not a cheese does not mean head cheese does not exist. Because a jellyfish is not a fish does not mean jellyfish do not exists. Because human connections are not connections, does not mean human connections do not exist. Do you get it?

What a waste of time.
edit on 6-10-2015 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
It may sound cliché but it is the truth. Love is the answer to all of our troubles today.

I believe you could be right...


Many of those who have had an NDE come back with an identical message as well.

Love not only matters in this life but also in the next.


He asked me a question: "What did you do for your fellow man?" www.youtube.com...

Jesus asked: "Have you learned to love?" www.youtube.com...

"It was ALL about the love..." www.youtube.com...

"Have you ever loved the way youve been loved here?" www.youtube.com...

"The message I brought back from my nde, or near death experience, was to love myself and others unconditionally." www.youtube.com...

Tom Severson said, He saw himself standing before God’s judgment throne and he could see Jesus looking at him as if to say, “How much love did I pour out on You? How much of it flowed out of you to others.” That experience has changed Tom Severson for the better he said. He has dedicated his life to serving others. To being more open in his love and expressive. It’s not easy sometime to give up the persona you kept a lid on for all your years, but when realize that God has lavished His love on you for so long, you have to let it flow out to others.

www.sermoncentral.com...



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




Because human connections are not connections, does not mean human connections do not exist. Do you get it?


No there is no getting that, because it is contradicting nonsense.

If you say human connections are not connections, then how can you say that they do exist. If you say that human connections do exist, then how can you say that they are not connections?

if human connections are not connections, then human connections can't exist, since they are not connections.




Because koala bears are not bears does not mean koala bears do not exist. Because head cheese is not a cheese does not mean head cheese does not exist. Because a jellyfish is not a fish does not mean jellyfish do not exists.


What a ridiculous comparison. It doesn't apply at all.





What a waste of time.


I agree, of space too, lol.




edit on 7-10-2015 by RogueWave because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave




If you say human connections are not connections, then how can you say that they do exist. If you say that human connections do exist, then how can you say that they are not connections?


If you say koala bears are not bears, then how can you say that they do exist[?] If you say that koala bears do exist, how can you say they are not bears?

In short, because its a misnomer. It's a metaphor.

Right its a bad comparison, but I bet you couldn't show how that is the case. We're just blurting out whatever comes first to our minds without much thinking at this point. Isn't that so?



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




If you say koala bears are not bears, then how can you say that they do exist


Because it is a given that these animals that are known to us by that name, exist.





If you say that koala bears do exist, how can you say they are not bears?


Because it is a fact of nature that they are not.

These were easy to answer. You couldn't answer mine and had to come up with a comparison that doesn't apply.


So what you say now, is that what people refer to as "human connections" are not really connections. So what then are "human connections" really, according to you, if they are not connections?

If we are arguing about semantics, it is because you keep using the term "human connections" without qoutation marks.





We're just blurting out whatever comes first to our minds without much thinking at this point. Isn't that so?


Speak for yourself.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave


Because it is a given that these animals that are known to us by that name, exist.

Because it is a fact of nature that they are not.

These were easy to answer. You couldn't answer mine and had to come up with a comparison that doesn't apply.


It applies perfectly. You yourself prove that is the case:

“Because it is a given that these relationships that are known to us by that name (human connections), exist.”

“Because it is a fact of nature that they are not (connections). “

Easy questions to answer, but its more fun watching you slowly figure it out.

So how do these not relate? Another point you’ve asserted yet will never explain. In other words, not a valid argument. You say it doesn’t relate yet it seems to relate perfectly, contrary to what you say.


So what you say now, is that what people refer to as "human connections" are not really connections. So what then are "human connections" really, according to you, if they are not connections?

If we are arguing about semantics, it is because you keep using the term "human connections" without qoutation [sic] marks.


I’ve already answered this question a while back, in case you’ve keeping track.


Speak for yourself.


I always do. If I spoke for you we’d be done with this quite some time ago.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Ahh humanity: Where even the intricacies of love and relationships become a point of contention.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So what you going to say next, is that "human connections" are not really connections but relationships. Like you did here,




A “human connection” is a relationship, not a connection.


And you said this,




Relationships are not connections.



The definition of relationship,


1. The condition or fact of being related; connection or association. 2. Connection by blood or marriage; kinship. 3. A particular type of connection existing between people related to or having dealings with each other: has a close relationship with his siblings. 4. A romantic or sexual involvement.


See, we can't even say that semantics is causing the problem. No matter how you spin this, what you say makes no sense at all.

www.thefreedictionary.com...
edit on 7-10-2015 by RogueWave because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




“Because it is a fact of nature that they are not (connections). “


I already figured it out way ahead of you. Can you back up this "fact of nature" with proof, like I can prove that Koala bears are not bears.?




I’ve already answered this question a while back, in case you’ve keeping track.


I know, I wanted to give you a chance to reply first, but then I got impatient, hence the crossing of posts.
edit on 7-10-2015 by RogueWave because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: RogueWave


See, we can't even say that semantics is causing the problem. No matter how you spin this, what you say makes no sense at all.


Aah yes, an appeal to the dictionary. The dictionary records popular usage according to how a term is used by speech community; it doesn't offer the veracity of definitions. Yes, it even records definitions that have no truth value at all, so long as they are popular. The notion that the universe revolved around the earth was popular too, and a dictionary would have defined the earth as the center of the universe. An appeal to the dictionary is a fallacy.

So a computer gets its power from an outlet because of a relationship with the power outlet? I thought they were connected by a cord. A fetus gets its nutrition through a relationship, and not through an umbilical cord. This is the nonsense you are implying.
edit on 7-10-2015 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bleeeargh
None of this is love.

I guess it all depends on your point of view. Whether it's you or the other guy.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

It would have to be an all or nothing gig. You know how many people loved the person that abused or killed them? How about all the people who steal from and lie to the people they 'love'? So if can't get everyone to the party, it's the same ole same ole. I also believe there are some people who truly can't feel agape. I would almost consider it a mental health issue.

And even in the new testament of the bible, the amount of people possessed by demons was unbelievably huge imho. And with Jesus there to rid them of all the evil spirits, they would have been lost. The possessed people of today are hopeless.

Yikes, I think I digressed but oh well. Love doesn't conquer all, doesn't solve all. It is nice though to be around.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join