Posted by IMO on October 02, 2004 at 00:48 [12.159.67.115]
In Reply to: Re: Wot Is Luv? posted by WingZ on October 01, 2004 at 10:02
“This is preposterous! Rationality is a product of the mind, not the heart.”
LOL......Your statement is preposterous!
Your statement very clearly indicates, that you have not had to deal very much with the rationality of most women (no disrespect to the fairer sex intended here), not to mention some men.
“The mutual fulfillment of needs does not require love.”
Couldn’t disagree with this statement more! While not all needs of another requires love to fulfill them, certain needs defiantly do require love to fulfill them.
“I've already defined love as being nothing more than an emotional impulse (and thus not existing in the conventional sense).”
Applying your definition of ‘love’ to the converse, ‘hatred’ would then be defined as only an impulse, as one can not exist without the other. Further, the denial of the existence of ‘profound love’ (being in love), is to deny the existence of ‘profound hatred’.
“That's quite offensive if you think about it. I'd like to believe women are capable of offering more than just 'love' or 'friendship’.”
Most everyone knows that women ARE capable of offering more than just 'love' or 'friendship’. But that was not the question put to YOU. The question was not what you believe, but to name ONE thing of importance a woman could offer apart from friendship or love? I find your answer far more ‘offensive’ than the question, since your response had no substance, and was nothing more than what you would ‘like to believe’.
You have argued that ‘being in love’, is non existent over the long term, and that ‘love’ is nothing more than an ‘impulse’. Yet, you have been unable to produce any evidence that supports your claims, other than what you believe. However, there is tons of evidence that can be produced that profoundly refutes your claims (beliefs). As an example, if you were to take a poll on the street, asking the simple question of the common folk, “Do you believe that ‘being in love’ is something real and capable of lasting?”, I have no doubt that the overwhelming response would be, ‘YES’, as the short answer.
You have posted that you are going to college and that you are majoring in Journalism. And that you are inspiring to be a good Journalist. Is not two of the good qualities of a, ‘good Journalist’, to be open minded and objective, regardless of his or her beliefs? I have seen neither of these traits in you, in this entire thread.
This is one debate that you can’t possibly win. And I say this for two reasons;
1. It is very clear that you have never felt the true feeling of ‘love’, or experienced a state of ‘being in love’.
2. And this is probably the MOST resounding reason; You are in a very small minority with regards to your beliefs on this subject.
For you to understand what has been said here, would be like you, or me for that matter, trying to understand the feelings felt by those that have scaled Mount Everest. Until you have been there and done that, there is no way that you could ever truly understand.
Of course, I guess you could say that the feelings that were felt by those that have scaled Mount Everest, were nothing more than impulse feelings, and those feelings only lasted up to the point when they started their decent.
I certainly can understand why you have such core beliefs. It’s easier to dismiss and deny the existence of something, when it is so strongly desired, and yet, so fleeting.
Try working on your capitulation skills. Sometimes it’s better to admit you are wrong, even if you feel that you are right. This works especially well with the fairer sex.
Email: