Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


Does True Love Exist?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
22 replies to this topic

#16    Lottie

Lottie

    The Nappy Ninja !!

  • Member
  • 7,516 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • "I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me." - Noel Coward

Posted 27 February 2006 - 02:03 AM

A reminder that your next posts will be a conclusion.  thumbsup.gif


#17    Yelekiah

Yelekiah

    Calcinatio des Königs

  • Member
  • 10,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2005

Posted 27 February 2006 - 02:59 AM

Conclusion

Quote


Oy vey...You said I agreed that True Love exists, and I do not agree that True Love, as you define it, exists.  Is that clear enough for you?

Yes, however, either way you look at it, you are agreeing that it exists. Which contradicts with your initial post that it didn't.

Quote

I hope so.  Up to this point, I have only seen the same thing; you giving your definition and claiming that it is the correct one.  

No, I've stated earlier that many definitions have a theme so that they are comparable. And when you compare the data, you can come up with a conclusive universal definition of what love is.

Quote

I haven't yet seen why an alternative definition of True Love, for instance that of Selfish Love, like the one I gave, couldn't also be considered a valid definition.  

Selfish as in...self love? In that sense it would agree with the love of a soul mate, because essentially you are loving a part of yourself.

Quote

True Love, as defined in the subjective, romantiziced version you are promoting

No I said soul mate does NOT have to be romantic in origin. That was in my second post, and I am not promoting a *romanticized* version.

Quote

Simply saying that you disagree with it isn't quite enough.

I see you doing that here:
QUOTE
In other words, True Love has nothing to do with Soulmate and Chakras

According to the book Kundalini and the Chakras by Genevieve Lewis Paulson, it does.
When the heart chakra is open toward a soul mate, the feeling of love permeates the kundalini.
QUOTE
Are you serious?

Yes.
QUOTE
By saying "Not Deniable", you have not explained any of the terms.

But it is still defined is it not? Because it's in the dictionary. Therefore, defined, which again, conflicts with what you said.
QUOTE
It might be because you subconsciously found him unsuitable as a mate, it might be because you consciously decided they were a jerk.

But you *consciously* decide to break up with someone. yes.gif
QUOTE
I just don't find it relevant to the debate.

You did bring it up though. I was just responding.
QUOTE
Unfortunately, Dr Masaru Emoto has elected to not publish his findings in scientific journals

This doesn't take away any validity to his experiments. Just because he's a very spiritual individual does not mean that he doesn't take the science seriously. hmm.gif I suggest you read his book.
Furthermore, other scientists and scholars find his studies to be valid.
"Half of the earth is water; our body is three-quarters water. Water represents the interface between the 4th dimension in which we live and the 5th dimensional sphere of our soul. Many studies have shown subtle effects of healers upon hydrogen bonding and infrared absorption of water. None of these scientific studies can compare with the beauty and clear messages shown by Dr. Emoto's elegant work. The impact of thought and beauty has never before been demonstrated so well."
C. Norman Shealy, M.D., Ph.D.

(Founding President, American Holistic Medical Association
President. Holos University Graduate Seminary
Author of 295 publications, including Sacred Healing)

Also, what I find fascinating is that you didn't dispute Love and Survival, the Scientific Basis for the Healing Power of Intimacy, by Dean Ornish, M.D. I'm going to assume that you thought that he had validity. original.gif
Because he showed plenty of factual evidence, spirituality aside. yes.gif

Perhaps this excerpt of the letter of Paul of to Corinthians (Chapter 13) can give insight to what true love really is.
"4 Love is patient,
is full of goodness ;
love has no envy,
has no pride,
5 Love is honest,
does not look for its interest,
does not irritate,
does not think of badness,
6 it does not have joy in injustice,
but of truth,
7 it excuses all,
believes all,
hopes all,
support all.
8 Love will never end..."
True love is patient because it can be tempered by time. Love is full of goodness because when there is total love, there is no room for hate. Love has no envy because unlike infatuation, love cannot "see" race, creed, sex, age. It is the highest form of spiritual expression. And to human perception, births joy and feelings of well-being, according to Dr. Ornish. Love will never end, because it transcends time, from back to the original soul, prior to the split (resulting in soul mates).
I have previously shown many times over that the intake of aphrodisiacs only mimic the feeling of love (they are not love itself). In fact, more than one of my sources say the same thing on phenylethylamine and serotonin.
"Certainly the data would suggest that endorphins are involved" when we feel love. Endorphins are known not only to create a positive, bliss-like feeling -- which we definitely associate with love."
-Candace Pert, Ph.D., research professor at Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and author of Molecules of Emotion, Why You Feel the Way You Do (Scribner, 1997)
Again, these feelings are associated with love. They are not love itself, only a mere product, as I have pointed out earlier.
It cannot be disputed that there is a Mr. or Ms. Right, because probability dictates that there are people out there in the world that are compatible to you. The loving bond that you share with these individuals, have a literal affect on your health, according to the many studies.
Love is a positive high frequency that can literally heal and help many to overcome obstacles. To watch true love between two soul mates, is like watching a miracle. With true love, you do not have to forsake your character, because unconditional love does not judge. And it is as real a substance as the person that you love unconditionally.


Posted Image

#18    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 21,226 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 27 February 2006 - 03:31 AM

The notion of True Love as a metaphysical force is a powerful and subtle one.  At its very core, it represents a synergistic manifestation of something that we are quite unable to pin down.  When all is said and done, the only way most people can define True Love is with Faith.  "This is True Love."

Unfortunately, too many times, what was once thought to be True Love turns out to be temporary.  To call such a thing an infatuation would be premature.  As my opponent pointed out, plenty of couples have proclaimed their undying love with each other, yet not succumbed to physical passion, the basis for infatuation.  Similarly, many couples who have proclaimed this exact same emotion have proceeded to a happy life.  No, the simple fact of the matter is that it is impossible to define what True Love is in terms of what a person thinks of it when they are throughly immersed in the feeling; it is subjectivity at its best!  If True Love cannot be defined by what the people are feeling until such time as they no longer feel it, then True Love must have some other means to be defined.

The existance of other forms of love complicates the issue.  The love between a husband and wife and the love between parents and child are still defined vaguely, though confidently, as love, but again, defining them becomes a matter of personal opinion.  What one culture considers love is entirely different than what another culture considers love.  We have, then, a situation in which we can not define love throught the physical expression of it either.  Again, it becomes subjective.  Everyone agrees that it is love, but no one can decide exactly what it is.

Ultimately, there is only one thing that is universal among all humanity.  Not actions, not feelings, not reactions, no, the only thing that is common to all these acts that we refer to as love is the same chemical reactions that occur to cause them.  Like all the other emotions in the human body, they are the product of increasing or decreasing amounts of different elements.  They are activated by the body's natural instinct to pass on genetic information, and can all be untimately be traced down to that objective.

A man finds a women who shares all the qualities he deems necessary for healthy offspring.  His body, to ensure that this mate remain available, proceeds to trigger the chemical reactions that make him feels happiness, comfort, even lust, in her presence.  These feelings lead to social actions such as dating, such as commitment, and eventually, to sex.  Offspring are born, and the same reactions that lead to their occurance again lead the man to provide shelter, to provide stability, to ensure that his offspring will survive to the age where they too will pass on their genetic information.

This is not a matter of opinion.  Every human action is the result of chemical reactions within the mind and body.  Some scientists may argue as to which chemical at which time cause which emotion, but none argue that the emotions are caused by the chemicals.  What a person decides to define these reactions as depends entirely on the society itself.  What one culture would determine to be love, another culture would condemn as rape.  What one culture considers protection, another considers abuse.  There are cultures in which the idea of love is one-sided, in which, generally speaking, the only option the woman has is to show her love through her devotion, essentially creation a selfish definition of love for males only.  In American culture, the idea of love being a transient thing is so well established that our divorce rate is at about 50%.

True Love cannot be defined as a romantic notion, nor as a physical act.  It certainly cannot be defined as things which themselves have not even been shown to exist.  When all is said and done, if we wish to define something, if we wish to truly explain what we can of it, we must, by sheer necessity, limit ourselves only to the hard, objective, universal, evidence, and that evidence all points to True Love being defined as nothing more than a complex chemical interaction caused by the instinctual desire to pass on the genes.


Now, having said all that, I wish to add one more thing:  There is nothing wrong with living within a Fable.  I do not believe in St. Nick, however I happily recount this story to my Godchild every Christmas, without the slightest pretense of doubt.  There is nothing wrong with believing in the glory of love as something stronger, more powerful than our physical bodies will allow.  Will Love move mountains?  Will Love conquer all?  It doesn't matter.  Machines move mountains.  Armies conquer all.  Love will always be the beautiful cover story.  Love will always make the story worth reading.  True Love may be nothing more than a chemical reaction, but I happily promote the Fable, the Wonder, the Glory of Love because I will happily believe in it...

regardless of what the facts tell me.


#19    AztecInca

AztecInca

    Martian

  • Member
  • 9,013 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

  • All it takes for evil to triumph, is for good people to do nothing.

Posted 27 February 2006 - 07:55 AM

Thank-you to both our debaters who both did an amazing job.I shall now hand this over to our very talented debate judges.

Note:Qarrah only debate organisers and debate participants may post during a debate.




#20    Irish

Irish

    “The Mod Father”

  • Member
  • 4,935 posts
  • Joined:17 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta

  • Practice Random Acts of Kindness, they return to you!

Posted 27 February 2006 - 05:32 PM

Great debate both of you I really loved it (pun intended) thumbsup.gif
It’s a tough one to judge as you both presented a good strong case for and against. Being a romantic at heart and a realist of mind you guys had me jumping back and forth over the fence like a love struck jack rabbit. wink2.gif

Debator 1: Yelekiah
Relevancy: 9
Countering: 8
Style: 9
Persuasiveness: 8
Total: 34

Debator 2: Aquatus1
Relevancy: 9
Countering: 8
Style: 9
Persuasiveness: 7
Total: 33


Most people do not want to know the truth they only want confirmation for what they think is truth.

#21    Kryso

Kryso

    Always watching...

  • Member
  • 3,943 posts
  • Joined:21 Sep 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

  • Truth titillates the imagination far less than fiction.

Posted 27 February 2006 - 07:23 PM

Like Irish has already said, a very close debate – the closest I have judged, in persuasiveness and ability. Great debate!

(On a personal note, I loved this bit – “Sometimes you gotta say the baby's ugly.” Lol.)

Debator 1: Yelekiah
Relevancy: 9
Countering: 8
Style: 9
Persuasiveness: 8
Total: 34

Debator 2: Aquatus1
Relevancy: 9
Countering: 8
Style: 8
Persuasiveness: 9
Total: 34



#22    TooFarGone

TooFarGone

    Blissfully Chaotic

  • Member
  • 3,682 posts
  • Joined:21 Sep 2004

  • I am chaos at its finest


Posted 28 February 2006 - 01:49 PM

Amazing job to one and all.

Debator 1: Yelekiah
Relevancy: 9
Countering: 10
Style: 9
Persuasiveness: 9
Total: 37

Debator 2: Aquatus1
Relevancy: 9
Countering: 9
Style: 9
Persuasiveness: 10
Total: 37

I know it's kind of a cop out having you both tie, but damn....you both did so well tongue.gif

Too / FarGone
TooFar_Gone
TooFa/ rGone
TooFarG_one
T_oo/FarGone
Too/Far_Gone
Too_Far_Gone

#23    Lottie

Lottie

    The Nappy Ninja !!

  • Member
  • 7,516 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • "I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me." - Noel Coward

Posted 28 February 2006 - 02:00 PM

Thanks to our lovely judges thumbsup.gif

Wow! This was a fabulous debate guys and the scores prove this! Incredibly close!!

Yelekiah (35)[W] vs Aquatus1 (34.6)








0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users