The Violent Spirit of Love

[propellerbeanie]

propellerbeanie wrote:

pb: I will agree that sex without love is violence. Sex with love is not.

DQ: On the contrary, any activity that is performed without love is sublime, glorious, enlightened and pure.

pb: Some conclusions are their own punishment.

A cute response, but I don't think you understand where I am coming from. What do you think I meant by the above?

What I think you mean with your statement is that you believe I am so thick I will bother much with nonsense I know to not to be true. If you wish to live without love, and feel this purifies your life, our somehow denies another, then enjoy that which you choose. You deny no one but your own self in denying love.

DQ: By contrast, any activity performed with love is always selfish, hateful, sadistic and violent. For the latter is always is performed with some kind of personal gain in mind.

It is no coincidence that in our war-ravaged, violent, misery-ridden world, people everywhere constantly praise love. The two are very much intertwined.

pb: People do not love because it is bad for them, or because they expect no benefit, but the best benefit as I see it is that it brings us out of ourselves, and teaches us to care, and without this transformation we would all be forever egocentric children.

And yet you will happily kill others for the sake of your "love". Can one be any more selfish and egocentric than that?

Sir, would not happily kill myself if I wakened tomorrow and found I was adolf hitler. It is not possible for me to kill with happiness. You should try to understand that when people risk their lives for their loves, and, or attack others in defense of their loves, it is because their sense of self has merged. Love changes the focus of self, and the identities of those who feel it. Death is everyones enemy, and love is our friend.

pb: Sexuality plays a significant, though not an over riding part in every love with reproductive mating as a goal or prize.

DQ: If your wife refused to sleep with you anymore and started openly having sex with your neighbour, would you continue to love her?

pb: Would this not be evidence that she did not love me, just as her sexuality as a prize shared only with me is proof of love?
Love is a form of relationship, and like all relationships suffers under its rules. People in love can make rules to suit themselves, but the best love relationships are exclusive.

Shouldn't you continue to love your wife no matter what she does? Are you saying that your love for her is conditional on her behaving in a certain way? Does it all hinge on what sort of benefits she happens to bring you?

To try to find conditions, or shoulds, and shoudn'ts for a relationship in advance especially, but always is a limit to the scope and life of the relationship. If it is possible to imagine an organism with two legs as many have, but two head as well, and four arms, able to work together or apart toward a mutual survival then you can grasp the essentials of a love relationship. A relationship is not a vise holding a piece of work. If it is good it is like salt and sugar in the same bowl: it is hard to tell where one leaves off and the other takes up.

It would seem that the entire basis of your love for your wife is narcassistic and egocentric to the core.

I certainly identify with her, and identify myself with her.

pb: I don't know where you are from or where you have been; but the thought that you can extract anything from a relationship is childish.

DQ: If a person couldn't extract anything from a relationship, he would have no reason to enter into it. I dare say that you had initially entered into your relationship with your wife, and continue to remain in it, because you're able to extract excitement, companionship, sexual pleasure, children, emotional comfort, feminine approval, relief from loneliness and boredom, etc, from it. If you weren't able to extract these things from her, I'm pretty sure you would soon divorce her.

pb: I recieve what my wife gives as a gift, and all the benefits of the relationship. But the notion that I could extract, or just reach in a grab some part of what I want without putting my whole life on the line for good and bad is foolish. I thought when I was young that I could extract pleasure from women, and I doubt that those women have ever thought twice about me. But I have often thought of them. Not sexually. As much as I wanted sex without caring, the very thought that I could get so intimate with so many without caring gnaws at me as a wrong I cannot make right, and even the fact that I cannot care about them now with sincerity fills me with self loathing.

You're either very stupid or you're deliberately being a troll.

I'm not a troll. I am a Gnome. Like Vulcan, I work with Iron.

The "pleasures" of love aren't just confined to the sexual realm. There are the emotional pleasures as well, which are probably even more significant - for example the pleasure of being cared for by another human being, and receiving their praise and approval. If you weren't able to receive these things from your wife, you would have no reason to be with her and you would soon divorce her - especially knowing how vain and selfish you are.

Love is what people feel. Caring is what you give and get.

pb: Relationships are like life, that you can only get out what you put in, and don't believe you can trade dirt for gold, or the injury is your own.

DQ: Listen to yourself - "putting in" and "getting out" are both violent, intrusive activities.

pb: Intrusive, yes. Intrusive is nature, born between shit and piss and covered with blood. But, in love not violent. All violence toward people has their objectification in mind. Love does not objectify people, it personifies people.

If you found out that your wife has been sleeping with another man, would you fly off into a rage and hit her? One gets the impression that you would.

There's more than a whiff of "serenity now" in your posts. This is an allusion to the Kramer character in "Seinfeld" who, in one episode, kept chanting "serenity now" as a way of keeping calm - which seemed to work for a while until he suddenly exploded into a great rage.

I would not ask anyone to be serene. What I give to life, and even to my wife is passion. I get what I give, and I love it!

DQ: There is a world of difference between the spiritual man who pulls his ego out by the roots, and permanently discards it, and the lover who leaves his ego intact and uses other people for the purpose of forgetting its existence every now and then. The former activity is noble and good, with endless beneficial conseqences for the world; the latter is evil and base, causing endless wars, violence and misery to be perpetuated everywhere.

pb: The spiritual person does not pull up his ego and discard it. Like the lover, he finds a new center for his consciousness. Children are called ego centric. They think their world revolves around them. Love and hate are two emotions that change the focus of ones existence. In love and hate we cannot think of ourselves. Whether this is called exocentric or eccentric I don't know. Some people do not bond, and some cannot. For those who do bond, there is a change in self. Food does not satisfy if one is left hungry, and if one is sick, then all suffer. Love is caring, and what is extracted is taken from self- self consciousness, selfishness, impatients, emnity, and as in catharsis we are made human by our ability to care.

Yep, sure. Serenity now.

Don't get it, can't feel it, forget it, and be passionate for something else. Our love is where our life is; keep it warm.

DQ: The horrific consequences of heroin-addiction are plain for all to see, which is reason enough to not want to get involved in it. Likewise, the consequences of love are simply too horrific for any person of sound mind to willingly engage in it.

At bottom, your only defense of love seems to be: it feels good. You cannot seem to find any other justification for it. It is the mindless defence of a drug-addict.

pb: Rather, it is good; and often feels terrible.

Rather, it is evil; and often feels good - to the evil.

Just as patriotism is the virtue of the vicious, love is the virtue of evil people.

Patriotism considered as love and not ploy is like any love, and evil people are that because they know not virtue.


-

[David Quinn]

alex wrote:

Oh I thought it was money dominating our culture.

Yes, but what underlies this domination?

Probably birth control elevated love in our culture.

I think it is mainly due to the rise of the feminine in our culture. People are becoming less insightful, less conscious and more aimless. Love is increasingly becoming the only thing they recognize.

Love gives aimless people some structure and purpose in their lives. It provides them with an emotional rollercoaster to go up and down on. It gives them something to do while they are waiting for death.

You call raising a family a narcissistic indulgence. Well, perhaps it is. And what would you have people do?

Value rationality and truth, abandon all falsehoods, and become enlightened about the nature of reality.

In other words, become sane.

The way society has handled this problem in the past was to encourage people to become renunciates. But everyone can't be a renunciate. Or the Hindus, they encourage sanyas in middle age. Gets the worst of the lust out of your system, then concentrate.

Through various techniques, such as gene splicing, microbiology, and nanotechnology, we will be able to shape humanity in any way we want. All those restrictions from the past will be meaningless. We will have the means to produce humans who are perfectly suited to a life of wisdom - physically, emotionally, and psychologically.

The only trouble is, hardly anyone in the human race values wisdom.

But you didn't answer my question - isn't a certain amount of mutually agreed upon mutual narcissistic indulgence unavoidable unless yer a hermit?

There is a big difference between rational, clear-headed individuals working together for a common aim, and people emotionally bonding together, becoming hysterical at the drop of a hat, and constantly losing their perspective.

Is enlightenment at odds with physical survival? It seems so.

Not at all. Traits such as rationality, sanity and the absence of delusions are very compatible with the task of physical survival. We don't have to rely on the blind, out-of-control forces of emotion any more. That's all in the past. We easily have enough intelligence and foresight to survive comfortably without them.

But people are like children. They don't want to give up their glittering toys. They can't conceive of life without them.

-

[propellerbeanie]

.
[Speaking of Nietzsche] Some posts above remind me strongly of the following aphorism (The Gay Science, 14) wherein the "selfless" nature of love is called out to stand beside its bedfellow avarice (greedy possessiveness):

Sexual love betrays itself most clearly as a lust for possession: the lover desires unconditional and sole possession of the person for whom he loves; he desires equally unconditional power over the soul and over the body of the beloved; he alone wants to be loved and desires to live and rule in the other soul as supreme and supremely desirable. If one considers that this means nothing less than excluding the whole world from a precious good, from happiness and enjoyment; if one considers that the lover aims at the impoverishment and deprivation of all competitors and would like to become the dragon guarding his golden hoard as the most inconsiderate and selfish of all "conquerors" and exploiters; if one considers, finally, that to the lover himself the whole rest of the world appears indifferent, pale, and worthless, and he is prepared to make any sacrifice, to disturb any order, to subordinate all other interests -- then one comes to feel genuine amazement that this wild avarice and injustice of sexual love has been glorified and deified so much in all ages -- indeed, that this love has furnished the concept of love as the opposite of egoism while it actually may be the most ingenuous expression of egoism . . . .

Perhaps propellerbeanie remembers a little incident (with me) at TalkPhilosophy to which this aphorism makes substantial address. If you do, pb, and if you make the right connections, you might start cracking a window of air and light onto what some of these people are saying.

No, I'm not onto the slaughtering side of this, but it is true that I have not been able in my lifetime to (sexually, familial-ly) love without the pain and confusion of (probably hardwired) exclusion. I question that sort of love (all the way to virtual non-participation in it). I question it seriously against another, cleaner vision of love that thus far, for me, exists only as idea.

.

Friend,
If you are expecting a reply I hope you are not expecting a quick one. I would not consider a reply short of a good look at what you say. Exploitation and violence are love only as ruse. Conquest is not love, but love conquers. I think if you look at the relationships of stage and legend, like Anthony and Cleopatera, Romeo and Juliet, Babars and Pearl Spray, Popeye and Oliveoil you get the sense of two people made equal in love, and no one saying me first, but both saying us together. There is some one for everyone. And if the person you find is like myself -very poor at love, then perhaps he can like myself learn to adore.

[David Quinn]

Or better yet, he can learn to adore Nature itself.

-

[alex]

Beanie babie,

Men love their wives more than vice versa.

I believe you would be hard pressed to prove this point. Most men are poor at love and rich in excuses.

Sez the women's magazines. When I was lurking, someone talked about a sports figure whose father and uncle becamed suicidally depressed over the death of their wife, and this guy expected the same for himself, I could tell.

Do women kill themselves when their husbands die? Or walk out?

The love we feel for another must be translated into something to be felt by the one you love.

Yeah, that's true but a lot of women are dense. They expect a man to say I love you every day.

Love has to be turned into deeds of some description to benefit another.

Coming home every night and making her life easier doesn't register.

Oh I thought it was money dominating our culture.

Yes, but what underlies this domination?

Um, the Catholic church?
Greed from spiritual lack, spiritual lack from lousy religion, basis of lousy religion in the west, which leads to current capitalist consumerism, comes from Catholicism which morphed into protestantism. materialistic religion.

I think it is mainly due to the rise of the feminine in our culture. People are becoming less insightful, less conscious and more aimless. Love is increasingly becoming the only thing they recognize.

The feminine might be rising because we are out of Kali Yuga. There are 4 yugas, and male and female dominance switches. According to Yogananda we left Kali Yuga 300 years ago, hence our scientific leaps.

But I don't think people are less insightful. I talk to young people who are far wiser than I was at their age.

You call raising a family a narcissistic indulgence. Well, perhaps it is. And what would you have people do?

Value rationality and truth, abandon all falsehoods, and become enlightened about the nature of reality.

Yeah, but I meant how should people raise kids, and that sort of thing. I keep wondering if I believe in marriage. But what the hell. I can't think what else would work.

Through various techniques, such as gene splicing, microbiology, and nanotechnology, we will be able to shape humanity in any way we want. All those restrictions from the past will be meaningless. We will have the means to produce humans who are perfectly suited to a life of wisdom - physically, emotionally, and psychologically.

The problem is, we will f*ck it up before we really know what we're doing. Very dangerous ground. And who gets in? should it be a secret project? We could use improvement. We're too stupid.

The only trouble is, hardly anyone in the human race values wisdom.

Well, we'll fix that!

There is a big difference between rational, clear-headed individuals working together for a common aim, and people emotionally bonding together, becoming hysterical at the drop of a hat, and constantly losing their perspective.

Oh, well in that case...you've almost taken my angst away. I certainly have an emotional bond with my wife but there's almost none of that. What little does occur, is a mutual embarassment.

When I say angst, I mean that I went to see Ammachi (yeah, the hugging saint). In her little speech she talked about what you said. People are in it for the gratification. She says she learned this as a child because her mother mistreated her and used her as a servant in the family. So she thought about love. Her bag is unconditional love is the only real kind. She's right. The rest is conditional. Remove the conditions and remove the love. What the hell is love?

Is enlightenment at odds with physical survival? It seems so.

Not at all. Traits such as rationality, sanity and the absence of delusions are very compatible with the task of physical survival. We don't have to rely on the blind, out-of-control forces of emotion any more. That's all in the past. We easily have enough intelligence and foresight to survive comfortably without them.

I agree but I was thinking about sexual love, jealousy, and fear on the other conversation. We fear because we value our body. Sexual jealousy is the opposite of enlightenment, but why did it evolve?

[David Quinn]

Some witty aphorisms on love:

-

No one in love is free - or wants to be.


Love makes time pass, and time makes love pass.


The first sigh of love is the last of wisdom.


We love someone for what they are not, and quit them for what they are.


Falling out of love is very enlightening; for a short while you see the world with new eyes.


Because women can do nothing except love, they've given it a ridiculous importance.


Man loves where he must; women must love - somewhere.


If you wish to be loved, show more of your faults than your virtues.


If a woman wants to hold a man she has only to appeal to what is worst in him.


A man is given the choice between loving women and understanding them.


You have to live with a woman to really misunderstand her.


When a man has a vacant look, it's usually because a girl is occupying his mind.


Courtship begins with a man fishing for a girl, and ends with her making the catch.


A man always chases a woman until she catches him.


It's better to go broke than never to have loved at all.


When one is in love, one always begins by deceiving oneself, and always ends by deceiving others. That is what the world calls a romance.


Many a girl spoils a perfectly good romance by falling in love with the man.


The fickleness of the women I love is only equalled by the infernal constancy of the women who love me.


No woman is wholly convinced that a man really loves her until he buys her something she doesn't need at a price he can't afford.


A lover who reasons is no lover.


To love is to suffer, to be loved is to cause suffering.


If love is judged by its visible effects it looks more like hatred than friendship.


In love, victory goes to the man who runs away.


Those who are faithless know the pleasures of love; it is the faithful who know love's tragedies.


The girl who thinks she has broken her heart has only sprained her imagination.


The punishment for love is love.


There is no difference between a wise man and a fool when they fall in love.


When a woman makes a fool out of a man, she seldom does it without his cooperation.


Men want to be a woman's first love. Women want to be a man's last romance.


Love is the need to escape from oneself.


Love is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own.


Love is being stupid together.


Love is a game that always begins with courting days and ends with days in court.


Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence.


Love is a game in which both players always cheat.


Love is what happens to a man and a woman who don't know each other.


Love is the emotion that a woman feels always for a poodle dog and sometimes for a man.


Love is a mood - no more - to man. And love to woman is life or death.


Love is the whole history of a woman's life, it is but an episode in a man's.


Love is the delusion that one woman differs from another.


Love is the last and most serious of the diseases of childhood.


Love is a fever which marriage puts to bed and cures.


Love is a disease which begins with a fever and ends in pain.


Love is a wretched masking of egotism, lust, masochism, and fantasy, under a mythology of sentimental postures, a welter of self-induced miseries and joys, blinding and masking the essential personalities in the frozen gestures of courtship, in the kissing and the dating and the desire, the compliments and the quarrels which vivify its barrenness.


Love is an ocean of emotions entirely surrounded by expenses.


A girl may love you from the bottom of her heart, but there's always room for some other guy at the top.


Jealousy is the only true measure of love.


Jealousy is always born with love, but does not die with it.


A man in love thinks that nothing is good enough for her except himself.


Courtship is that period during which the female decides whether or not she can do any better.


What is puppy love? The beginning of a dog's life.


The trouble with blind love is that it doesn't stay that way.


If I loved as much as others I would hate as much as they.


The purpose of love is to ensure that even the strongest reproduce.


He who loves never, lives best.


Men always hate the woman they love. Women always love the man they hate.


Love is a crutch that breaks when you lean on it.


Love: hating together.


If a man is pure it is nearly always because he has not chanced upon the right woman.


Woman loves the man who thinks, but the man who thinks does not love woman.


Nothing spoils a romance so much as honesty in a man.


I cannot love any woman who is so unsure of herself as to feel love.


If a woman loves me, how can I ever trust her again?


To be loved you must give love, which explains why only fools are loved.


There is no love without humiliation.


To win a woman's affection is nothing to be proud of because women are motivated by love.


If your happiness depends on a woman's approval then your life is as insubstantial as her judgement.


A man cannot reason with the woman he loves: he cares about her too much.


If you must fall in love, do so with a woman you can't talk to.


Love is about fiddling fantasies. One does not fall in love with a person because they are truly good, but because they are good at stimulating one's imagination. With a stimulated imagination one can believe anything is good.


Love is something you like to feel once a week, but it demands that you feel it every dreadful minute.


You love the best in someone and bring out the worst in them.


The problem with love is that marriage takes root in it.


I hate to see a couple quarrelling because I know it is keeping them together.


She feels like she's going down in a lift.
He feels like he's going up.
She is swept off her feet.
He finds his.


-


:) Taken from Wit for Wisdom.

[David Quinn]

alex,

DQ: I think it is mainly due to the rise of the feminine in our culture. People are becoming less insightful, less conscious and more aimless. Love is increasingly becoming the only thing they recognize.

a: The feminine might be rising because we are out of Kali Yuga. There are 4 yugas, and male and female dominance switches. According to Yogananda we left Kali Yuga 300 years ago, hence our scientific leaps.

That might be one explanation. But it's probably due more to things like overpopulation, overcrowding, a lack of frontiers, the rise of democracy, faster-paced lifesyles, more distractions and entertainments, men losing faith in themselves, the end of noble ideals, etc.

But I don't think people are less insightful. I talk to young people who are far wiser than I was at their age.

Young people are certainly more knowledgeable than they used to be, due to advances in technology and communication. But wiser? I don't see any evidence for this.

Apart from anything else, young people these days suffer from being distracted too much. They no longer have the time to deepen their minds through reflectiveness and solitude. So while they are becoming more knowledgeable via their various distractions, their minds are actually becoming a lot shallower.

a: You call raising a family a narcissistic indulgence. Well, perhaps it is. And what would you have people do?

DQ: Value rationality and truth, abandon all falsehoods, and become enlightened about the nature of reality.

a: Yeah, but I meant how should people raise kids, and that sort of thing. I keep wondering if I believe in marriage. But what the hell. I can't think what else would work.

We can cross that bridge when we come to it. As we become wiser and more rational as a species, we will find different ways of solving these practical problems. The first priority is to actually start becoming wiser and more rational.

DQ: Through various techniques, such as gene splicing, microbiology, and nanotechnology, we will be able to shape humanity in any way we want. All those restrictions from the past will be meaningless. We will have the means to produce humans who are perfectly suited to a life of wisdom - physically, emotionally, and psychologically.

a: The problem is, we will f*ck it up before we really know what we're doing. Very dangerous ground. And who gets in? should it be a secret project? We could use improvement. We're too stupid.

Yes, unfortunately, our skills in science and technology far outstrip our skills in philosophy and wisdom. I don't think there is much we can do about it, at this stage. The cat is already out of the bag. Genetic powers in the hands of seriously deluded people is our coming reality.

When I say angst, I mean that I went to see Ammachi (yeah, the hugging saint). In her little speech she talked about what you said. People are in it for the gratification. She says she learned this as a child because her mother mistreated her and used her as a servant in the family. So she thought about love. Her bag is unconditional love is the only real kind. She's right.

What is unconditional love, in your view?

a: Is enlightenment at odds with physical survival? It seems so.

DQ: Not at all. Traits such as rationality, sanity and the absence of delusions are very compatible with the task of physical survival. We don't have to rely on the blind, out-of-control forces of emotion any more. That's all in the past. We easily have enough intelligence and foresight to survive comfortably without them.

a: I agree but I was thinking about sexual love, jealousy, and fear on the other conversation. We fear because we value our body. Sexual jealousy is the opposite of enlightenment, but why did it evolve?

Obviously, because it aided our survival as a species. Having the males, who are wilder and more adventurous by nature, emotionally tied to their females and offspring is good for the community because it persuades the males to direct their aggression and skills to the protection of the women and children in that community. Jealousy is simply a by-product of this dynamic.


-

[Kevin Solway]

Beanie,

Do you think a serial rapist is immortal if he manages to reproduce through his raping?

And does the saint remain merely mortal if he doesn't have sex?

[propellerbeanie]

Beanie,

Do you think a serial rapist is immortal if he manages to reproduce through his raping?

And does the saint remain merely mortal if he doesn't have sex?

In a sense both of these are immortal because the good and evil we do survives us. But, of concieving and raising children, teaching them, and sharing with them, I must say, is the greatest good. Immortality is the life we share. Mortality is the life we have.

[alex]

Love is a mood - no more - to man.

Could this be why a man kills himself when his wife dies? His brain suddenly lost its heroin?

Jealousy is the measure of love.

I said jealousy is the opposite of enlightenment. Interesting.

That might be one explanation. But it's probably due more to things like overpopulation, overcrowding, a lack of frontiers, the rise of democracy, faster-paced lifesyles, more distractions and entertainments, men losing faith in themselves, the end of noble ideals, etc.

Details. Derivitive of larger forces perhaps. Growing pains perhaps. There is a story, chinese. The old man gets misfortunes, and his friends are sorry for him. but the old man always waits to see if it is really misfortune. His son breaks a leg. How sad. But then the king's soldiers come for his son, and they can't take him.

But wiser? I don't see any evidence for this.

I do. They understand concepts, spiritual things. I can't tell if they are right about the quickening (new age idea- heard of it?). Or maybe it is a consequence ofbreaking the hold of christianity. The ideas of the east have come to america. They grow up with it.
I don't mean about how they know computers and cellphones.

Genetic powers in the hands of seriously deluded people is our coming reality.

Hell then. They will make a slave race, not increase our IQ as I want done.

What is unconditional love, in your view?

That's not hard. What's hard is to understand if what we call love is related to it. Unconditional love is a kind of primal mood or energy of God or Brahman. It is universal. A force that animates all things. Takes no sides, supportive of all, no questions asked.Tao, Holy Spirit, maybe Shakti, the Presence, the Friend, The Force. It has no boundaries, but we can feel it within our ego bound existence. It is like air. I breathe and you breathe, but neither of us can own it or capture it or contain it.

Obviously, because it aided our survival as a species. Having the males, who are wilder and more adventurous by nature, emotionally tied to their females and offspring is good for the community because it persuades the males to direct their aggression and skills to the protection of the women and children in that community. Jealousy is simply a by-product of this dynamic.

This is what I mean. A male must be jealous. He has no choice. A male must desire sex as a primary value. He has no choice. But I am unsatisfied to leave it at that. I am not a materialist. I must think.
Thank you for your comments.

[Kevin Solway]

Do you think a serial rapist is immortal if he manages to reproduce through his raping?

And does the saint remain merely mortal if he doesn't have sex?

In a sense both of these are immortal because the good and evil we do survives us.

Since you think that both of these opposites are immortal, it is meaningless for you to say that any particular person is immortal.

You don't have to have children to have a good influence on the world. In our world, the people who have had the most positive influence are often childless. That is in fact the philosophy behind the idea of Catholic priests remaining celibate.

[propellerbeanie]

Some witty aphorisms on love:

-I got to have some fun.

No one in love is free - or wants to be.

Love frees everyone, and hate builds a portable jail.

Love makes time pass, and time makes love pass.

Love changes our perception of time, but so does fire.

The first sigh of love is the last of wisdom.

The only wisdom is love.

We love someone for what they are not, and quit them for what they are.

Love sometimes carries two bags, but sometimes one bag carries two jewels.

Falling out of love is very enlightening; for a short while you see the world with new eyes.

usually not so pretty as the old eyes.

Because women can do nothing except love, they've given it a ridiculous importance.

Women can do anything a man can do and usually better.

Man loves where he must; women must love - somewhere.

No one loves out of must, but out of want.

If you wish to be loved, show more of your faults than your virtues.

If you want eseex show more of your false than your true.

If a woman wants to hold a man she has only to appeal to what is worst in him.

Would you peal for a feel?

A man is given the choice between loving women and understanding them.

Love doesn't offer a choice, she delivers an ultimatum.

You have to live with a woman to really misunderstand her.

The key to a misunderstood woman is found in the pocket of a misunderstanding man.

When a man has a vacant look, it's usually because a girl is occupying his mind.

That vacant look is a man trying to plan a stupid fight because he fears one more moment of sex will prove fatal, and he is afraid to admit it.

A man always chases a woman until she catches him.

A woman is chaste until caught.

It's better to go broke than never to have loved at all.

And if ignorence were free and the lineup started at midnight I would know where to find you.

When one is in love, one always begins by deceiving oneself, and always ends by deceiving others. That is what the world calls a romance.

People lie and love tells the truth.

Many a girl spoils a perfectly good romance by falling in love with the man.

Many a girl burns the beans because a quicky can't hold a spoon.

The fickleness of the women I love is only equalled by the infernal constancy of the women who love me.

Men love women because a woman cannot love them.

No woman is wholly convinced that a man really loves her until he buys her something she doesn't need at a price he can't afford.

A goddess favors sacrifice.

A lover who reasons is no lover.

Too much reason frosts the season of love. Too much thought wrangles what love has wrought.

To love is to suffer, to be loved is to cause suffering.

Love causes one pain, and not love causes the rest.

If love is judged by its visible effects it looks more like hatred than friendship.

Looks are decieving, and seeing is believing.

In love, victory goes to the man who runs away.

In love, victory waits for a three legged race.

Those who are faithless know the pleasures of love; it is the faithful who know love's tragedies.

Love without faith is pasta without paste.

The girl who thinks she has broken her heart has only sprained her imagination.

A girl without heart worries not about sprains.

The punishment for love is love.

No love is the punishment and self hate is the crime.

There is no difference between a wise man and a fool when they fall in love.

Love is the difference between a wise man and a fool.

When a woman makes a fool out of a man, she seldom does it without his cooperation.

A woman makes a foal of cooperation.

Men want to be a woman's first love. Women want to be a man's last romance.

And everyone settles for seconds.

Love is the need to escape from oneself.

Love escapes all but the dilligent.

Love is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own.

Or essentially your own.

Love is being stupid together.

And sometimes apart.

Love is a game that always begins with courting days and ends with days in court.

Love is a game that is bored to death and is spoiled as soon as it dies.

Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence.

Love is the triumph of humankind.

Love is a game in which both players always cheat.

Love is a game best hunted in the dark.

Love is what happens to a man and a woman who don't know each other.

Love is forbidden to those who know not themselves.

Love is the emotion that a woman feels always for a poodle dog and sometimes for a man.

Men are harder to paper train.

Love is a mood - no more - to man. And love to woman is life or death.

Love is food no more to a man than to a woman.

Love is the whole history of a woman's life, it is but an episode in a man's.

A life does not a history make nor crap a happy marriage take.

Love is the delusion that one woman differs from another.

Hate is the delusion that all women are the same.

Love is the last and most serious of the diseases of childhood.

Love is a youth cured only by death.

Love is a fever which marriage puts to bed and cures.

Love is a fever if you're a believer.

Love is a disease which begins with a fever and ends in pain.

If love is a disease you can keep the cure.

Love is a wretched masking of egotism, lust, masochism, and fantasy, under a mythology of sentimental postures, a welter of self-induced miseries and joys, blinding and masking the essential personalities in the frozen gestures of courtship, in the kissing and the dating and the desire, the compliments and the quarrels which vivify its barrenness.

Flush for chrisake.

Love is an ocean of emotions entirely surrounded by expenses.

Love is an ocean of emotion and I'm a seaman in a submarine.

A girl may love you from the bottom of her heart, but there's always room for some other guy at the top.

Men are like fish in a barrel. They all stink and some of them are rotten.

Jealousy is the only true measure of love.

Jealousy is love's last known address.

Jealousy is always born with love, but does not die with it.

Jealousy beats being bored with love because he knows how to cheat.

A man in love thinks that nothing is good enough for her except himself.

That man is a realist who puts his love at the top of his list.

Courtship is that period during which the female decides whether or not she can do any better.

Periods don't count during courtship. Like your mother in law, you get to know them after you are married.

The trouble with blind love is that it doesn't stay that way.

Blinds always let enough sunlight in to see the moon.

If I loved as much as others I would hate as much as they.

If you knew how to live on fire would you ever let anyone put you out?

The purpose of love is to ensure that even the strongest reproduce.

Love has no purpose that a man can't find surplus.

He who loves never, lives best.

Love not, live not.

Men always hate the woman they love. Women always love the man they hate.

Men often hate women and call it love, and women can sometimes love any man they don't find impossible.

Love is a crutch that breaks when you lean on it.

Without love most men would not possess the backbone of a worm.

Love: hating together.

Love is hating together what you once hated apart.

If a man is pure it is nearly always because he has not chanced upon the right woman.

If a man is pure it is because the God of nonsense has washed his brain.

Woman loves the man who thinks, but the man who thinks does not love woman.

If thought makes you real then think and not feel.

Nothing spoils a romance so much as honesty in a man.

Honesty in a man comes in new and old, neither of which has anything in common with truth or real honesty.

I cannot love any woman who is so unsure of herself as to feel love.

To feel love was the first baby step of humanity.

If a woman loves me, how can I ever trust her again?

If a woman loves you get her head checked.

To be loved you must give love, which explains why only fools are loved.

To be loved one must care, and fools never learn to care.

There is no love without humiliation.

Love has no shame.

To win a woman's affection is nothing to be proud of because women are motivated by love.

A woman's affection is proof positive I am no asshole.

If your happiness depends on a woman's approval then your life is as insubstantial as her judgement.

A substantial life lacks spirit.

A man cannot reason with the woman he loves: he cares about her too much.

A man cannot reason without a judgement determined in advance. She is right, a man cannot reason.

If you must fall in love, do so with a woman you can't talk to.

People do not fall in love. Love is an honorary position one works for ones entire life and is granted as a testimonial to a good name.

Love is about fiddling fantasies. One does not fall in love with a person because they are truly good, but because they are good at stimulating one's imagination. With a stimulated imagination one can believe anything is good.

How does a blind man know when he is done wiping?

Love is something you like to feel once a week, but it demands that you feel it every dreadful minute.

If its dreadful it is not love and you are no lover. Find something else to be bored with, and quit messing with her life.

You love the best in someone and bring out the worst in them.

Loser!

The problem with love is that marriage takes root in it.

No guts no glory. Quit pretending to manhood, flipboy.

I hate to see a couple quarrelling because I know it is keeping them together.

So you hate to see a couple together? I like to see people working out the details every way they can, and better so when everyone has a voice and a mind and knows how to use them.




:) Taken from Wit for Wisdom.

[Kevin Solway]

Beanie, you are in the wrong forum. This forum is about reason and enlightenment. There are countless other forums devoted to the subject of love, but this is not one of them.

[propellerbeanie]

Beanie, you are in the wrong forum. This forum is about reason and enlightenment. There are countless other forums devoted to the subject of love, but this is not one of them.

I know this is your home address, but if you think you can have reason and enlightenment without love you are not thinking. I know it is talked out, and I have never been good at it, but I make you guys look like beginners. And what you can say of love as an emotion goes for many other emotions as well; and what you can say of love as a concept it true of other concepts as well. If your crew can't handle the heat they should not talk such trash about women and love, and without seeing women as equals should give up the idea of enlightement and wisdom altogether. Some people are not cut out for it. You need more than a high Iq to have a together life, which is where love fits.

[Kevin Solway]

if you think you can have reason and enlightenment without love you are not thinking.

You need to provide some argument that love has anything whatsoever to do with reason and enlightenment. So far you have failed to do this.

We have provided ample evidence and argument that love is evil, and has nothing at all to do with reason and enlightenment. If you think otherwise, then you should attempt to demonstrate it.

and without seeing women as equals should
give up the idea of enlightement and wisdom altogether.

Do you believe all things should be seen as equals, or only women? Are we the equals of chimpanzees, fish, bacteria, etc? If men are equal to women, then why are we not equal to all these other things as well? And if we are equal to all things, then it doesn't mean anything to say we are specifically equal to women.

Your thinking is extremely wishy-washy, and I sense that you yourself have no idea what you mean. You are making it up as you go along.

[David Quinn]

propellerbeanie wrote:

I know this is your home address, but if you think you can have reason and enlightenment without love you are not thinking. I know it is talked out, and I have never been good at it, but I make you guys look like beginners.

All of us here are beginners when it comes to Oprah-speak. You alone are the expert in this.

I agree with Kevin that this forum is inappropriate for you. You are effectively spamming the forum with a fixed dogma that is uninteresting and has no philosophical value. For most of us, it is like having to wade through endless spam on knitting or homeopathy. This is not the place for it.

You've made your one point. Now I think it's time for you show some respect towards this place and what it values, and leave.

-

[propellerbeanie]

if you think you can have reason and enlightenment without love you are not thinking.

You need to provide some argument that love has anything whatsoever to do with reason and enlightenment. So far you have failed to do this.

Let me offer you one word, recognizing that it has no value to you, that, while a composite word with the second part sometimes in dispute, the meaning of the part I direct your attention to is not in dispute: Philosophy.
Love of knowledge. Love of wisdom. Yet, where is the understanding of love? To pretend to do philosophy without an understanding of the common meanings of the word love is childsplay without the instructive value of play to children.

We have provided ample evidence and argument that love is evil, and has nothing at all to do with reason and enlightenment. If you think otherwise, then you should attempt to demonstrate it.

Some of you have demonstrated enough self hate to forever forbid yourselves love, but more than this feeble tautalogy that love is evil, you have not even raised a valid definition. What is love? Can you love concepts? Can anyone love even knowledge. Can you love gold? Is it possible that some people are incapable of love, even love of knowledge, so that in advance of their first step their quest for wisdom is doomed?

and without seeing women as equals should
give up the idea of enlightement and wisdom altogether.

Do you believe all things should be seen as equals, or only women? Are we the equals of chimpanzees, fish, bacteria, etc? If men are equal to women, then why are we not equal to all these other things as well? And if we are equal to all things, then it doesn't mean anything to say we are specifically equal to women.

Men are only the approximation of women, but then gorrillas are the approximation of us for sharing over 98% of our genes. So if we are not perfectly equal -as Lincoln said of Black and white people, then we are equally necessary. If you have a rip in your drawers, and you need to sew, is the thread more important than the needle? If you love life and cannot keep it but by sharing it how do you say you are more equal than the woman who makes it possible?

Your thinking is extremely wishy-washy, and I sense that you yourself have no idea what you mean. You are making it up as you go along.

There is nothing wrong with my thinking here, or my feelings. And rather than descend into that movie scene where father and son are telling each other that -you got something wrong with your head, I will just say it: You want to shoo me off even though I am being decent, because you can't beat what I have to say as children, and to grow up demands some acceptance of what I say, and you don't want to grow up. I bother you because I pick at your tinsel covered wisdom and call it by its true name: selfism.

[Matt Gregory]

Propellerbeanie,

Damn, your posts make the page take forever to load.

Anyway, I found your comments on the meaning of the word "philosophy" to be quite contadictory with the things you say. You haven't displayed any love of wisdom or knowledge whatsoever. If you actually cared about these things, you would be curious about them and the different views people have of them, but you're not interested in that. You're interested in pushing your views on people. Which is fine, I mean, if that's what you want to do, knock yourself out. But turning around and saying that you love is wisdom is laughable.

What you love is love itself, which is a feeling. One of your own personal feelings that is inside you. Nowhere else does this love exist. So, basically, no one cares. Just face it why don't you? As a father, husband, and family man your job is to put food on the table, not harp on and on about some feeling you have in your stomach. So if you really loved your family, then working and earning money is what you would be primarily concerned with, but this doesn't appear to be the case, since posting on this board doesn't give you a paycheck, it doesn't do anything to advance your career, it doesn't do anything to advance your status in society, so I just don't understand what you think you're accomplishing here.

[propellerbeanie]

All of us here are beginners when it comes to Oprah-speak. You alone are the expert in this.

I can agree that you are beginners to philosophy, and that you do not have the education and the mental discipline to make philosophy a reality in your lives. If you want a circle jerk for the high Qs, invitation only, I understand. You don't want the old bull to teach you nothing, so you refuse to learn anything. I ain't always grinnin, and I got the same pains as any other hard working old man, but I have an understanding that makes my pain and my age slip from me at times. So I share it with you. Not to beat, because you show you cannot, but to file away as the secret of a happy life. The path to wisdom is straight, but that path is desregarded as not scenic enough, or of too sharp an incline.

I agree with Kevin that this forum is inappropriate for you. You are effectively spamming the forum with a fixed dogma that is uninteresting and has no philosophical value. For most of us, it is like having to wade through endless spam on knitting or homeopathy. This is not the place for it.

I can tell you what reality is but I can't make it any more exciting than it is, and since that is at time terrifying, that is about the best I can do. When Galileo first tried to explain the Copernican universe to the church fathers do you believe he could have gotten them to accept what he said if he could have thrown in some siege lights, fireworks, and a marching band? Our universe is less complex than Ptolemy's, and in a sense that is a hard sell because it is a let down. The pure crap you spin rests upon some sinister explaination of reality. I can tell you how it is. You have to provide your own excitement.

You've made your one point. Now I think it's time for you show some respect towards this place and what it values, and leave.

If I have made my point, then tell me what love is, whether it is possible to love concepts, or objects, and whether love and hate are opposites. Perhaps you can offer a better method of immortality than children or a reason to want immortality without children. I have answered your questions and even responded to some of your nonsense. If you can't hang with the beaner, what will you do when a real philosopher shows up?

[Kevin Solway]

Love of knowledge. Love of wisdom. Yet, where is the understanding of love?

If you want to argue that love has some value, then you need to specify exactly what you mean by the term - otherwise it is just wishy-washy words of no meaning. Don't confuse things like spiritual love with human emotional love.

Do you believe all things should be seen as equals, or only women? Are we the equals of chimpanzees, fish, bacteria, etc? If men are equal to women, then why are we not equal to all these other things as well? And if we are equal to all things, then it doesn't mean anything to say we are specifically equal to women.

Men are only the approximation of women, but then gorrillas are the approximation of us for sharing over 98% of our genes. So if we are not perfectly equal -as Lincoln said of Black and white people, then we are equally necessary. If you have a rip in your drawers, and you need to sew, is the thread more important than the needle? If you love life and cannot keep it but by sharing it how do you say you are more equal than the woman who makes it possible?

You don't say anything in that paragraph, except for some vague idea that all things are equal - which I anticipated above. And as I say, if all things are equal then it doesn't mean anything to say that we are specifically equal to women. It is just a waste of space.

With regard to equality, it is important to define what exactly you are talking about. It is meaningless to say that, for example, an orange is equal to, say, a compact disk. You need to specify a context. Is it equal in weight? Storage capacity? Nutritional value? Or is it equal in its value of taking up space?

I assume you are saying that all things are equal because they are all equally necessary to reproduction? Who knows?

Woman may currently be one of the factors that make reproduction possible, as may viagra, a fat wallet, or a nice car, but in the near future (the next few centuries) women will probably not be necessary for reproduction.

I bother you because I pick at your tinsel covered wisdom and call it by its true name: selfism.

To date you haven't even addressed the subject of wisdom, and you haven't attempted to relate it to anything you have said.

If you think think the wisdom presented on this forum is really selfishness, then you need to present reasons as to why you think this. Is it because we are against the evil of ordinary human love? You haven't made it clear.

P.S. Use the "preview" feature to make sure you quotations display correctly, otherwise your posts are difficult to read.

[propellerbeanie]

Love of knowledge. Love of wisdom. Yet, where is the understanding of love?

If you want to argue that love has some value, then you need to specify exactly what you mean by the term - otherwise it is just wishy-washy words of no meaning. Don't confuse things like spiritual love with human emotional love.

Love has some value. More than value, it has an identity. Love equals love. Before you jump to conclusions let me clarify. A line equals another line in being a line, and differs as to length. We say Platonic love, or Romantic love, or puppy love to define the conditions of the love, but if a love is not always love it is not love. The essentials of love are always the same: a spiritual connection that often motivates our actions in a positive sense.

Do you believe all things should be seen as equals, or only women? Are we the equals of chimpanzees, fish, bacteria, etc? If men are equal to women, then why are we not equal to all these other things as well? And if we are equal to all things, then it doesn't mean anything to say we are specifically equal to women.

Things not named the same rarely have the same identity, so they share nothing by which they can be equated. The concept of identity introduces a stable equality by which all differences can be compared meaningfully. No apple is the equal of any other apple except as an apple, and each apple of all apples is one, as an equality of identities under which small apples can be weighed against large, and etc.

Men are only the approximation of women, but then gorrillas are the approximation of us for sharing over 98% of our genes. So if we are not perfectly equal -as Lincoln said of Black and white people, then we are equally necessary. If you have a rip in your drawers, and you need to sew, is the thread more important than the needle? If you love life and cannot keep it but by sharing it how do you say you are more equal than the woman who makes it possible?

You don't say anything in that paragraph, except for some vague idea that all things are equal - which I anticipated above. And as I say, if all things are equal then it doesn't mean anything to say that we are specifically equal to women. It is just a waste of space.

In the matter of necessity one needs a needle as much as a thread to sew, so each is equal of necessity. Whether to reproduce or to know happiness women are as necessary to men as men are to women. Social and economic inequality are not based upon mental ability, but are the result of fundamental divisions of labor in prehistory. The division between men and women on the basis of tasks is the beginning of class division today. Now, very little of the excuse for the original cleavage between men and women is justified.

With regard to equality, it is important to define what exactly you are talking about.

I assume you are saying that all things are equal because they are all equally necessary to reproduction? Who knows?

Men and women are equally necessary to reproduction, Equally necessary to a complete and happy existence. Equal in all the abilities that are really essential to survival in this world.

Woman may currently be one of the factors that make reproduction possible, as may viagra, a fat wallet, or a nice car, but in the near future (the next few centuries) women will probably not be necessary for reproduction.

Why are you not more careful about revealing your prejudices: Fat Wallet, Nice Car.. That ain't what girls want, and if they do they are suffering their own prejudices. Girls are looking so far as I know, for men who can relate to them as equals and help them to success in life, who can be good and honorable husbands, and who can, if they cause children, have the courage and fortitude to do whatever it takes to see those children raised up right.

I bother you because I pick at your tinsel covered wisdom and call it by its true name: selfism.

To date you haven't even addressed the subject of wisdom, and you haven't attempted to relate it to anything you have said.

You are not paying attention, or you turn a blind eye. Love is wisdom, and not cupidice, or avarice, nor emnity, nor anger. If what you call wisdom builds a wall between you and God however concieved, or nature, however concieved, or humanity in its largest or smallest part; it is not wisdom. Fools cannot love, or they seek for the objects of their affections that which troubles them not. I love the sea, but the sea scares me to death; but do I run from the sea I love and from my fear that I hate? No. I sail so my love can have all the excitement and reality of life.

If you think think the wisdom presented on this forum is really selfishness, then you need to present reasons as to why you think this. Is it because we are against the evil of ordinary human love? You haven't made it clear.

The hatred of women on this forum is a denial of the primary wisdom and understanding we are born with. The unnatural condition of society is something you and others believe is the norm. When a society cannot reproduce itself it cannot defend itself. Look at Gibbon's Rise and Fall and his descriptions of the empty housholds of the Greeks. These men hated their women, and stripped them of rights, and exposed their girl babies to the weather, to die. A consort was a thing of value, but a wife or daughter had no value, so that, in the end a simple thought like the valuation of human beings based upon sex destroyed the whole society. That is what I see in you. A trend you can find no way out of.

P.S. Use the "preview" feature to make sure you quotations display correctly, otherwise your posts are difficult to read.

I am working on it, but better at readin then writin.

[David Quinn]

Again, you are just spamming. There is no attempt to listen to others on this forum, no attempt to interact with them in an intelligent manner, no attempt to understand a different point of view. There is only the endlessly repeated dogma, which everyone here has already heard a thousand times before.

I could go to any bookstore in town and pick up one of those cute little quote books with ribbons and kittens on the front and flick through their little homilies on love, and it would virtually replicate my experience of trying to have a discussion with you on this forum. I would never dream of picking up one of those books. It would be the last thing I would do, so why should I or anyone else have to be subjected to this kind of thing daily on a spiritual forum?

DQ: All of us here are beginners when it comes to Oprah-speak. You alone are the expert in this.

pb: I can agree that you are beginners to philosophy, and that you do not have the education and the mental discipline to make philosophy a reality in your lives. If you want a circle jerk for the high Qs, invitation only, I understand. You don't want the old bull to teach you nothing, so you refuse to learn anything.

I'm reminded of something Chuang Tzu had to say:

If one is ahead of others in age, but does not have a grasp of the root and branch of things which is commensurate with his years, then he cannot really be said to be ahead of others. An old man who has not grasped the Way deserves to be looked on as a mere stale remnant of the past.

If you had taken the time to understand what this forum is about, what it values, who it is trying to reach, what its aims are, you would know that it has nothing to do with academia or high IQs. Again, your lack of respect for this place and everyone here is palpable. It's not exactly a shining advertisement for the quality of your "love". If this is what "love" does to a person, then, I for one, want nothing to do with it.

In any case, I've personally had enough of this bozo. Can anybody think of a reason why he should stay?

-

[Kevin Solway]

Love has some value. More than value, it has an identity. Love equals love.

Once again, you haven't defined what it is you are talking about, so anything you say on the subject is meaningless.

The essentials of love are always the same: a spiritual connection that often motivates our actions in a positive sense.

All of those quotes about love that David posted earlier in this thread demonstrate that what people call "love" is in fact a negative thing. So are you saying that what all people and poets call love is in fact not love at all? Who knows?

In the matter of necessity one needs a needle as much as a thread to sew, so each is equal of necessity. Whether to reproduce or to know happiness women are as necessary to men as men are to women.

So you think women are necessary for happiness?

I wonder why all the wise men of history never taught as much? I wonder why the Buddha didn't have a woman by his side when he was sitting under the bodhi tree, to make sure he was happy?

You sound like a drug addict saying that heroin is necessary for happiness, and that life isn't worth living without it.

Men and women are equally necessary to reproduction, Equally necessary to a complete and happy existence. Equal in all the abilities that are really essential to survival in this world.

That's like saying, "Heroin provides everything that is necessary for a complete and happy existence in this world. Heroin is our equal for this reason."

Why are you not more careful about revealing your prejudices: Fat Wallet, Nice Car. That ain't what girls want

Then you don't know anything about women.

Stand two men side by side, one is dressed in rags, lives in a cave, has no car and no money whatsoever - but is wise and would help a woman to become an enlightened Buddha. The other is well dressed, has a nice car and plenty of money. Who do you think the average woman will think is better husband-material?

Even Oprah would outshine you on this score.

Girls are looking so far as I know, for men who can relate to them as equals and help them to success in life

The only success in life is to become enlightened. There is probably no woman on earth who wants her husband to help her to become enlightened. She doesn't get married because whe wanted to become enlightened.

Love is wisdom

It's no good just saying that love is wisdom when it can be easily demonstrated that it is stupid and extremely evil. You need to give some reasons as to why you think it is wise, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

If what you call wisdom builds a wall between you and God however concieved, or nature, however concieved, or humanity in its largest or smallest part; it is not wisdom.

It doesn't.

The hatred of women on this forum

We don't hate women. That is a projection on your part. If we hated women we would probably ban them from joining the forum.

Nor am I against reproduction and the survival of the human race.

[kjones]

If one is ahead of others in age, but does not have a grasp of the root and branch of things which is commensurate with his years, then he cannot really be said to be ahead of others. An old man who has not grasped the Way deserves to be looked on as a mere stale remnant of the past.

I've personally had enough of this bozo. Can anybody think of a reason why he should stay?

Perhaps he could try to find out what he wants to value, what he is aiming for. Then he'd know what his purpose is.


----

[propellerbeanie]

Love is wisdom, because it is all that is protecting our lives. It is not laws or morals or religion apart from love, but love mainly along with people who love that keep the human race alive and some steps short of murder. And if you donnot hold that as a positive goal, this survival through love, then you are immature and underdeveloped.