Is love really just the worship of a material object

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by NotAnAspie
 





I think it's a two way street and is extremely complex.


yes agree, it can be complex. Im not the best one to break it down, im sure there are others on Ats who can explain this all better.




posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
Is love when it boiled down really just the worship of a material object. That object could be inorganic or organic. IIf so then isnt love just an obsession. Isnt an obsession just a form of maddness. Are the only sane ones the ones who dont hold possessions of the heart?
edit on 29-9-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)

If you are referring to Eros (romantic love), then Yes, it is a type of materialism and worship because it is a "want" type of love.

Otherwise, I say No.

Unconditional love doesn't need possession to exist. It just is. Agape is the name for this. It is not materialistic because it is the type of love where you don't mind if the other person is free or in a relationship with someone else, proximity doesn't matter, time doesn't matter, and social constraints don't matter. You feel love, so you let yourself love.

I don't know any other way to explain it.

There are several different types of love, though, and many combinations possible therein. But, it is possible to love and not be obsessed or possessive. Thus, love and materialism are not synonyms.
edit on 9/30/12 by ottobot because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
Is love when it boiled down really just the worship of a material object. That object could be inorganic or organic. IIf so then isnt love just an obsession. Isnt an obsession just a form of maddness. Are the only sane ones the ones who dont hold possessions of the heart?
edit on 29-9-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)

No because love always see much more than just a material object, for love that would be just the tip of the iceberg. Love is not love if its possessive, love is liberating. If it is not it is not love.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   
I like this thread.


I thought about this subject many years ago myself. How does love start? Why do we love some people and not others? Are there different kinds of love? And finally, what does it mean to love someone?

I like to answer questions such as these by using opposites. If we are talking about the ordinary relationship where two people meet and fall in love, I think mutual sexual attraction is a requirement for this.

So who is most likely to not be in a sexual relationship?

1) People who are not physically attractive (disfiguration of face). These people do have the best souls on the planet however in my experience. Life on that level is the hardest difficulty level you can pick. I feel so much admiration and love for these people. You have to live one of these lives to fully understand it. And some of you have and some of you will.


2) People in wheelchars (chance of being in a sexual relationship is much higher than in the above group since the face is more important than the body. But the body must function sexually, and sometimes it doesnt.).

Without physical attraction, you become friends with the person instead.

Thats a different kind of love, and its possible for any human being to have. I have seen very deep friend relationships and they can be magical and make the persons truly happy. Some people say these relationships are better than sexual ones.


So to answer the question... love is attraction to someones personal attributes. If the attributes are physically satisfactory, it becomes a sexual relationship, and if they are not, it becomes a friend relationship (if the people like each other, naturally).

Both sexual love and friendship love are a form of addiction, because they make you feel a certain way that you really like. The other person makes you like yourself better because he or she sees certain things they really like in you). Its an ego boost.

When relationships end, people sometimes turn pretty evil towards each other, because its a big blow to the ego to fail at a relationship, and it needs to defend itself. So ego is definently involved in relationships. And that is part of this human experience here. We all have the ego as part of the physical body but we should learn to control it so it doesnt control us.


Im rambling a bit... and I will stop now.
edit on 30-9-2012 by Bodhi911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


My wife isn't a material object. I am not a material object. You are not a material object. Yet all these people have something in common. They are all loved by someone.

People mistake 'the joy of possession' with love. "I love my car." "I love my new smart phone." No you don't - you just enjoy it. You feel proud of it. It makes you happy (And lets face it, there is not a lot to feel happy about often nowadays) So all over the world people are mistaking love for possession. This is very sad.

You can go further too. Because people these days have made this mistake, this mix up of love and possession, real love with another human being becomes mixed up too. People start feeling like they can posses another person in the name of love. Love and possession - possession and love. Even I did this at the top of this response. MY wife. MY girlfriend. MY mum. MY cat, My car. My iPhone.

There is no doubt that this new generation, well instructed by their parents it must be said, have made the worship of material objects - possession - ownership - accumulation - the new form of love. But it isn't real love. It is just big business mind washing you into thinking that owing all these things, and even each other, is the route to happiness. And we all fell for it. So to be happy, to know love, to even find love, you have to have the latest fashion, the latest phone, the sexiest car, the flashy bling! And we buy into it - literally! And they get richer and we get poorer, financially and spiritually. So men think it is OK to posses women, to own them and direct them and abuse them. Just another possession to be used and discarded. Relationships become about getting not giving. Our love become conditional on what we are getting out of it. And every day we die a little bit more inside.

Real love empowers. It gives. It lifts up, it shares and enriches. It builds families, homes, communities. But most of all it makes us realise that above everything else, it is not possessing. You can't love anything you possess, and you can't possess anything you love. There is a difference. When we all learn this simple lesson, we might at last be able to prioritise our relationships, with things and with other people, in our lives.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Agree. Long before we actively participate in relationships we develop an idea of what we want in life: we want a spouse, kids, dog, little white house with a picket fence... And then we hunt down that unknown, future significant other that will turn our idea into reality.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Agree.


Dude, that's really sad. Stop and think a moment just exactly what you are saying........



Long before we actively participate in relationships we develop an idea of what we want in life: we want a spouse, kids, dog, little white house with a picket fence...


A lovely list of possessions to make your life complete. Who sold you that idea?



And then we hunt down that unknown, future significant other......


You make it sound like shopping for a new car.



.....that will turn our idea into reality.


Because I am not capable of making my dreams a reality myself, so I will make it your responsibility for all of my dreams to come true.

Oh, I don't know, maybe I am being unfair. Look at the way they have taught us to speak. In terms of how I get my happy in life. Make a list, aim for a goal, aspire to this or that, and if you don't make it - you fail. You are a failure. Walk your path, be responsible for your own emotions, be happy. If a life partner and a family and home come to you then that's what you should be doing with your life and and you will be happy. Make all that happen when life wants you to be something else and you could end up the unhappiest person on the block. Life makes you - you don't make life.
edit on 30-9-2012 by nothingwrong because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by nothingwrong
 


Well said.
Expectation and blame are the result. However, this does seem to be the human condition.
Happiness does not come from 'out there'. But if it is believed to be 'out there' by those who have forgotton.
edit on 30-9-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   
The definition of "Love" I like and believe the most, is that your happiness depends on the happiness of someone else.
It fits my wife and I quite well. Not because when she's down she's grouchy and I just want it to stop, because I truly hurt when she hurts. Maybe not in a physical way, but I just can't stand it when something has happened to upset her. Not the everyday little stuff, like the dog having an accident on the new carpet, big events.Some will know exactly what I mean. When she hurts and you just can't fix it, it hurts you too.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by nothingwrong

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Agree.


Dude, that's really sad. Stop and think a moment just exactly what you are saying........



Oh, it's sadder than sad. Why do dominating men marry submissive women? To dominate them, not love them.

How many times have you heard women say, "Why do I keep getting involved with the same kind of abusive guy?" It's because they are conditioned to be attracted to abusive guys. It has nothing to do with love.

Why do children of alcoholics have a tendency to grow up and marry an alcoholic? It's not because of love.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by DAVID64
The definition of "Love" I like and believe the most, is that your happiness depends on the happiness of someone else.
It fits my wife and I quite well. Not because when she's down she's grouchy and I just want it to stop, because I truly hurt when she hurts. Maybe not in a physical way, but I just can't stand it when something has happened to upset her. Not the everyday little stuff, like the dog having an accident on the new carpet, big events.Some will know exactly what I mean. When she hurts and you just can't fix it, it hurts you too.


awww...

It's not just about expecting happiness and satisfaction in life to come from another, is it... but it is about being able to comfort another and share close, personal, intimate things with another, building trust and helping one another through things that other people or ideas can't alleviate. Not being able to fix things is not as bad as having no one to console you.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Is existing just an obsession? Since you exist, does that make you mad?

You exist, and there's nothing you can do about it except kill yourself. So either kill yourself, or enjoy (love) it while it lasts.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


Even killing yourself will not stop your "Existence". Existence is eternal. You can stop "Living", but not "Existing".

Existence just IS - it doesn't matter the "Form" (or Formlessness).

Love attaches you to another "THING" whether it is a "human", "spirit" or "object".

Hate does the same - except it is destructive
(so it attracts TO destroy - like a person looking for an enemy for revenge)

Apathy just sees things as they are without caring...
(So a "thing" is just a "thing" - no hate, love, or any emotion towards it)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 




Love attaches you to another "THING" whether it is a "human", "spirit" or "object".

Hate does the same - except it is destructive
(so it attracts TO destroy - like a person looking for an enemy for revenge)

Apathy just sees things as they are without caring...
(So a "thing" is just a "thing" - no hate, love, or any emotion towards it)



Love is what drove our heart. Hate is what isolated our soul. And Apathy is what remained after it all.
Im not a fatalist, although i think thats how they view it.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 

Love is the putting aside of your own needs to fulfil the needs of another...
...love is not a feeling but an action.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Does anyone in this thread have children?

The OP's definition seems a fairly narrow and immature view of love... I'm kind of surprised to see so many people in agreement?



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
Does anyone in this thread have children?

The OP's definition seems a fairly narrow and immature view of love... I'm kind of surprised to see so many people in agreement?


I must admit i am a bit shallow and immature and i was surprised so many people were in agreement.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
Does anyone in this thread have children?

The OP's definition seems a fairly narrow and immature view of love... I'm kind of surprised to see so many people in agreement?

I do and I also happen to agree with the OP, even if he/she is "a bit shallow and immature".

While I do know love and I think I understand how precious it is, I also understand that there seems to be a skewed obsession with it. It seems to be artificially elevated above all other human emotions. Everywhere we look it takes center stage and at the same time it is made to look like the most elusive thing. It's seems to be the carrot dangled in front of us to keep us pulling the load.
edit on 1-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
Does anyone in this thread have children?

The OP's definition seems a fairly narrow and immature view of love... I'm kind of surprised to see so many people in agreement?

I do and I also happen to agree with the OP, even if he/she is "a bit shallow and immature".

While I do know love and I think I understand how precious it is, I also understand that there seems to be a skewed obsession with it. It seems to be artificially elevated above all other human emotions. Everywhere we look it takes center stage and at the same time it is made to look like the most elusive thing. It's seems to be the carrot dangled in front of us to keep us pulling the load.
edit on 1-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


How so?

It seems to me you have a weird understanding between love, and "romantic" love (and/or lust).

The western media promotes the latter, and promotes the former as disgusting. I really can't fathom how you could see your own children as "objects"?

Sorry. I'm really not trying to troll here. I'm just completely lost on how anyone with a child could:

A) Consider that child a material possession (as opposed to a person)

B) Conceive of love in such a primitive way, having had a child.


I suppose my synapses aren't firing in your direction.



posted on Oct, 1 2012 @ 02:17 AM
link   
As simple as it sounds, I think the best description I've ever heard is, "The ceaseless desire to see another survive".

Sure, I like all my stuff, but my family, friends, pets...

so...

Is love really just the worship of a material object? I'd have to go with no.






top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join