As opposed to what? False love?
idk, I think the word "love" has an infinite number of definitions, and different people are capable of different levels of love at different points in their lives. Most of the time it's all about them... how this person makes them feel or influences their lives or whatever. People search for an object for their love or affection. The unconditional acceptance that you mention is something I've considered recently and decided that this means accepting someone for who they are instead of how they make you feel or what they do for you.
Wouldn't that be part of intimacy though?According to Michael Sternberg, true love has three components:
- intimacy
- passion
- commitment
I don't think the triangle is complete, because it doesn't include a sense of harmony.
Eh, that just sounds like duality. It's not necessarily romantic. And there are only 16 types and a whole lot of people in the world, so it's not exactly a "soul mate" sort of thing.Love is not just about being there for each other. No, real love is about enjoying being there for each other, about not being bothered about doing things for another because helping that person is a natural inclination. Soulmates feel a sense of genuine reward for helping each other, so much that they want to do more of it. It's about learning to live for someone else, where one need not worry about one's own needs because one's partner has them covered already.
love is like an anticipatory play. To get my blood moving nowdays it takes the prospect of completely devouring the female. Only then am I interested. I think I pushed the amusement of love too far and now I'm bored with the idea. There's no anticipation left in it. A person has to be really incredible to strike my interest
creepy...Originally Posted by crazed
this is the reason you remind me of baudelaire
Removed at User Request
I hope I don't get that way. Sigh.love is like an anticipatory play. To get my blood moving nowdays it takes the prospect of completely devouring the female. Only then am I interested. I think I pushed the amusement of love too far and now I'm bored with the idea. There's no anticipation left in it. A person has to be really incredible to strike my interest
Anyway, I've stopped analyzing for "themes" in Shakespeare (so has Harold Bloom, although he probably wouldn't admit it). Instead, I look for "what is represented". And what is represented in Romeo and Juliet is love ("my bounty is as boundless as the sea, my love as endless. The more I give to thee the more I have"). There are lessons from Shakespeare's plays in the exact same way as there are lessons from life. No one would say that you don't learn lessons by thinking about your life. But the same experience teaches different people different lessons. That's how I feel about Shakespeare's plays.
I don't know how much I believe in love. But I do know that I'm probably going to fall in love fairly soon (next two or three years tops), and I'm not excited about it, because I don't have any more room in my life for emotional headaches. I'm certainly screwed up enough already. Romance, not the drama, is the arena in which we play out our wounds from childhood in preparation for getting another set of children to wound.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
No... it's just impossible to go through life without getting a little bruised. And yes, I did eff up myself through excessive introspection. And some intentional prolonging of internal crises. If I have children, I'll do my best to be a good parent of course... but I know that I won't be perfect, and even if I were, I think a perfect childhood just doesn't happen, and that imperfections that happen in childhood tend to affect you a lot because you're still developing; they tend to become part of you a lot more than things that happen when you have a more solidified self/ego/persona and more data about life to compare to.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
Yeah true.. but scar tissue is tough. :-p I think that if you can manage to understand why you are the way you are, then that's all you really need to do. Being hurt arms you with more knowledge in regards to yourself and other people - ideally making you more aware and competent. Doesn't have to be a bad thing imo.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
there's no such thing as a perfect childhood because there are no perfect parents or children. you just do your best and love them. Shit happens, all kinds of it!
IEI-Fe 4w3
"True love comes quietly, without banners or flashing lights. If you hear bells, get your ears checked." ~ Erich Segal
Those who don't believe in love will NEVER find it, so good on you for believing again.
I am in love and it does hurt, and it does take a lot out of you, and it does consume the whole person but really I wouldn't have it any other way.
I really don't think your description of harmony is needed for love though, because I do think that describes duality which does not necessarily constitute love... I mean it's just psychological comfort. Of course two people must be compatible, but duality does not equal love by any means... it's just preferable.
People argue, and they love each-other... you work through things and that's love.
It's not a cry that you hear at night, it's not somebody who's seen the light. It's a cold and it's a broken Hallelujah.
So the IEI gives meaning the the SLE's life, and the SLE keeps the IEI interested and in love.
Have to say that the 'scorched and salted' description makes me think of peanuts.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Almonds rather.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."