K: have you ever been in love with actual, real living human being,
not an inflatable doll, because if you have been in real, actual love
you would know your description is a joke…
really, is Emcu post really a logical description of love?
an affinity for? you really believe that is love? that suggests
you have never been in love because love in not just an affinity for…
love, true love is something you really can’t describe and you certainly
can’t use logic to describe love… but hay, give it a try…
use logic to describe love…
Love is an emotion evolved, as all emotions, to be automatic reactions to particular stimulation.
Its first function is to facilitate mother, child, bonding necessary in species where the offspring are born still immature and unable to survive independently.
Its second function is to deal with the fight/flight mechanism so as to make heterosexual reproduction possible.
Its third evolved function is as a bonding mechanism making cooperative groupings possible, and herding, which is a method of confusing predators and increasing survival possibilities.
Triggering is based on similarity.
Observer associates other with self.
Tolerance, self-repression, inebriation caused by chemicals the body produces are part of the mechanism.
K: it is impossible because it is impossible to use logic to describe love and the fact you are
running away from any attempt suggests I am right…
as for Emcu, attempt to use logic to describe love, it is a joke…
it doesn’t use logic and it certainly doesn’t describe love…
it is a childish attempt to describe love… I have an affinity for my mother…
is that really love? As love has several different aspects, love of mother, love of family,
love of ice cream, love of baseball, you have several different loves you can approach
and yet, he missed them all…
You have some personal definitions of “logic” and “love” and I’m supposed to guess what they are and to respond to your challenge. You’re going to use those definitions to claim that “I didn’t use logic to describe love”, no matter what reasoning or examples I use.
I’m walking away because past experience has shown that it’s a waste of time trying to talk rationally to you.
Declare victory if you want. You and Iambig should start a club - the “Everyone is Afraid and Running Away From Me” club - for all those who thrive on shifting philosophical foundations, foggy definitions and fuzzy thinking.
Logic defines. So what you’re saying is that love can’t be defined. Of course it can, that’s why you made this thread… You think it’s an affinity of ineffable quality.
You’re still defining it as an affinity!
I gave a perfect answer Peter.
Some people: love is dying instantly forever; they looked at the cosmos and all it’s splendor, and decided what they lust for in love… Death.
Others fight for the contexts within life.
I’m not trying to make an evolutionary argument… I’m showing you the breadth of love.
K: I have zero interest in victory… it doesn’t appeal to me in any way, shape or form…
I am searching for the truth… I don’t believe that logic can show me
the truth… it is a TOOL and nothing more… by having people trying to
show me logic as a tool to discover what love is, will force people to understand
the limitations of logic…I know what love is having felt it myself… but I can’t
explain what love is to me or to you or to anyone… Love, perhaps the most
profound and important aspects of any human being life is not describable
by logic and not even describable by language and certainly not describable by
philosophy… and yet, it is the most important part of any human being life…
babies not nourished/loved by an adult will die in the first year of life…
love is so important that babies need it to survive in their first year of life…
and what is a life without love? empty and lonely and perhaps, not worth living…
so walk away from the most important aspect of my life, your life, every single
human being life…it isn’t about winning or losing, it is about understanding
the most important thing in your life… love…
K: that last sentence “how can one understand if both logic and language are
inadequate” is perhaps the most profound thing you have ever said…
indeed how can you understand if logic and language is inadequate?
Logic doesn’t explain things, it analyzes relationships between propositions. Virtually nothing interesting can be said on the basis of logic alone. I don’t understand the question.
K: “how can you understand if both logic and language are inadequate”
this in a nutshell exactly where I am in philosophy… man, I couldn’t have
come up with a better answer if I tried… son of fucking bitch…
that is so perfect where I am right now…how can you understand if both
logic AND language is inadequate"… man, I…don’t believe how this
so describes me right now in philosophy…
thank you for that perfect description of where I am right now…