Subscribe: Comments on Bibliophile Stalker: Love Isn’t Happiness
http://charles-tan.blogspot.com/feeds/2372275994532071232/comments/default
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
birthday  charles  commitment  disagree  duty  happiness  happy birthday  love  marriage  people  point  read  semantics  things  truth 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on Bibliophile Stalker: Love Isn’t Happiness

Comments on Bibliophile Stalker: Love Isn’t Happiness





Updated: 2017-07-21T17:39:11.449+08:00

 



Sorry, missed a word. Just because you do Action ...

2006-09-22T08:35:00.000+08:00

Sorry, missed a word.

Just because you do Action A doesn't necessarily means it's love, but it's an example used to illustrate my point.



I'll agree that there could be other factors for d...

2006-09-21T21:51:00.000+08:00

I'll agree that there could be other factors for doing the actions I mentioned (such as duty, truth, justice, etc.). I have two points regarding that. One is that well, take the essay into context. Just because you do Action A means it's love, but it's an example used to illustrate my point. Could Action A have other root causes other than love? Yes. And the second point is that virtues, any virtue, nonetheless involves one form of love or another. We can talk about duty but duty is one form of love either way. The same goes for justice, and truth; it's simply a more encompassing type of love (an ideal) than a specific one (i.e. a person).

I think the problem here is that you're confining love to an emotion. I'm speaking of love in terms of many levels. Yes, it's an emotion. But love can also become a choice, as hard as that might be for you to imagine.

I'll also agree that decisions have to be tempered by other factors, but I'll disagree that love isn't conducive to them. Why bother with justice when there is no love? Why speak of truth when there is no love? There needs to be a certain level of love (not necessarily towards a person specifically, but at humanity in general) to value those virtues.

The problem is how I used the word love, for it encompasses a lot of things, but right now, you're thinking of it in a very specific definition that doesn't necessarily fit all of my suppositions.



Well, sure. it could be a matter of interpretation...

2006-09-21T20:19:00.000+08:00

Well, sure. it could be a matter of interpretations. But my point is that those things you mentioned can just as easily have had other courses. Sure people can do it out of love, or what they think is love. Who's to tell? they could do it out of a hundred other different things. And in the end love is one emotion out of many, a contributing factor to what makes things work. It's kind of like the Bill Gates of relationships: you think Microsoft, you think Bill Gates, but there's a million other contributors, down the the janitors and the shipment companies.

So what I'm saying is that you have to consider love, yes, but you have to consider other things too. Like rightness. Or justice. Or truth. Because love isn't always conducive to any of those things. And decisions ought to be tempered with them as well.

So I would say that it's not just semantics, but actualities. Because if we say semantics, then we're saying "love" is a word, and thus a symbol for what's there, that can be misinterpreted with other symbols and words. But we're not. Or at least I'm not. I'm saying that what that symbol represents is different from the other "symbols" such as trust and commitment, that you have used.



Liana: mostly a semantics issue, but my main point...

2006-09-21T14:43:00.000+08:00

Liana: mostly a semantics issue, but my main point (since we both have precious time to spend doing other things on) is that we do it out of love. Obviously, waiting in the rain is not love itself; love has no physical manifestation in itself. But rather the actions we do, the commitments we make, our done out of love (or "true love" as the case may be).

For me, it's about not really being able to separate the love from terms like "friendship" or "marriage" (in the sense of a loving marriage, because you can have a marriage done for duty). But as I said, it's an issue of semantics or interpretation of what love is.



I have to say... I disagree with most of your poin...

2006-09-21T14:34:00.000+08:00

I have to say... I disagree with most of your points.

I agree that love is not happiness. I don't think anyone ever seriously believes that love is happiness. Love is a condition that CAN lead to happiness. It can also lead to intense misery and fucked-upness. The people who believe love is happiness are the people who believe it makes the world go round... I'm not going to point out why love making the world go round is an entirely faulty concept.

However, I disagree that love is a commitment. Or that it is waiting in the rain, or driving your girlfriend home after a long day. Because a commitment is a commitment. It can be founded on love or guilt or duty. It can be founded on a delusion of altruism. When you love your friends, that's nice. but LOVE is not the commitment. FRIENDSHIP is the commitment. Love is not the commitment in bf/gf relationships or marriage. the relationships/marriage are the actual commitments.

Love is not actions or decisions. You can call it an emotion, or, if speaking of being IN love, then you can call it a condition. And as such you can act or decide on things based on your emotions or condition, but your acts and your decisions are NOT love, only symptoms of it. Moreover they would be the symptoms of how you understand/interpret that love.

Anyway time is short gotta go. Long and short of it is... I disagree.



-gasp- People actually read my blog! Thanks for th...

2006-09-20T20:21:00.000+08:00

-gasp- People actually read my blog! Thanks for the greetings, from both of you. ^_^



that's a wonderful post you've got there, i really...

2006-09-20T20:08:00.000+08:00

that's a wonderful post you've got there, i really liked reading it :)

happy birthday, charles!



interesting read! Happy Birthday!

2006-09-20T17:05:00.000+08:00

interesting read! Happy Birthday!



My, uh, birthday is today so that would make me a ...

2006-09-20T14:03:00.000+08:00

My, uh, birthday is today so that would make me a Virgo... Dog if you're asking for the Chinese Zodiac. =P



i really liked this entry charles. read it twice a...

2006-09-20T10:50:00.000+08:00

i really liked this entry charles. read it twice already. will probably read it again after i type this comment. :p (stalker-ish personality becoming more apparent with each comment 'no? hehe)

i especially liked the first two paragraphs. and the one which said love is giving the other person the ability to hurt you. it's the scary truth. (my biggest phobia is pain, emotional and physical, so... yes, agreeing to that part was scary for me)

lest my comment be confused with another entry because of sheer length, *cut*

- estelle :)
omg you put me on your blogroll! i am so touched hahaha! *hugs* can i ask you a silly question, what's your zodiac?



grabe charles. made me think. i shall share this...

2006-09-20T10:13:00.000+08:00

grabe charles. made me think. i shall share this with my friends k? haha i know some people who have to read this :)