What would perfect love consist of?
- Thread starter Jenyar
- Start date
You say it's simple, black and white.
But is that the reality of it?
Perfect love comes when you find a nice icepick and have your partner drive it through an eye with a hammer, then wiggle the icepick around until they seriously destroy your neocortex.
Then have them feed you a tab of E every 10 hours.
That's perfect love. Believe me, you'll love every asshole on this planet if you find someone willing to do this for you.
"The urge towards love, pushed to its limit, is an urge towards death"
--The Marquis de Sade
Then have them feed you a tab of E every 10 hours.
That's perfect love. Believe me, you'll love every asshole on this planet if you find someone willing to do this for you.
"The urge towards love, pushed to its limit, is an urge towards death"
--The Marquis de Sade
Eh?
Now.. put down the icepick Xev.. Nice and easy..
Anyways back OnT..
Perfect love couldn't exist.. Since love is only an illusion in the first place.
Therefore, I would give an example of Perfect Hate: Somebody sees you and would do anything to destroy you. Even sacrifice themselves, just so they destroy you. Now that is true perfect love in my eyes!
Now.. put down the icepick Xev..
Nice and easy.. Anyways back OnT..
Perfect love couldn't exist.. Since love is only an illusion in the first place.
Therefore, I would give an example of Perfect Hate: Somebody sees you and would do anything to destroy you. Even sacrifice themselves, just so they destroy you. Now that is true perfect love in my eyes!
Love is Desire. i wrote this essay for my class.
I think this might be useful, I was typing something else but i lost it. And it was too long to retype. but I can commit further on my logos of desire. which could lead to "perfect love".
Eros: My Defined Opinion
We have studied something of the logos of desire, love, and eros in Barrico's novel Silk, but what is my own experience of this logos? Do I experience a difference between desire and love? If so what is it that I experience? What are the other dynamics of desire, love and eros that are not connected to another human being or are just "appreciation"? good questions
Human beings such as I are a contradiction to our own worlds that we have created. They seem to be related in the sense we know what desire, love or eros is but to explain or fully understand the totality of those three, we are often lost or vague to articulate those terms which makes us alien to each other Georges Bataille expresses this in The Accursed Share Vol. 2 & 3. I used to consider that a naked women is undoubtedly the most erotic desire, but as I learn more about humanity and my individual self, nudity at one time had no particular significance. It is through discourse we learn that the cultural particularities are only superficial. We as humans, used to be asleep or unconscious like an "animal" or creature of nature. We have moved far from that of nature. We created sovereignties to collectively function, we have lost all our animal roots and most are unable to re-grasp those roots that we lost. I think because of this loss of our unconscious the Freud's "id" or "Jausance" has developed a deep oppression that is sometimes released in special circumstances. On these special circumstances that are subjective to the individual are uncontrollable and over powering. Forcing the individual into a state of a sort of unconsciousness, often temporary. I think we see what is so beautiful about "Love" but at the same time we are terrified and overwhelmed by the emotional upraise or sublimate of Eros. The power of emotional or unconsciousness is part of the mind which is also sublime because of its comprehension of what is sublime. I have had some situations in life that have over take me, placing me in a state of uncontrollable, "Awe". I presuppose that love can do the same thing to others, like Aphrodite being not just the want of man, but being the absolute uncontrollable desire by man. She creates an absolute erotic need by men. I think we can't leave all control behind since it is too animalistic and nature like which is too overwhelming for us to leave.
Passion and desire can be sexual but also felt without being sexual in both having control and not having control. In the film "Pushing Tin" we have two men standing on a landing strip, the actor Billy Bob Thornton tells actor John Cusack, "It's a 747 coming at you, you can wiggle your ears and clap your Tinkerbelle it wouldn't make a lick of difference". They are flung uncontrollably off the ground by the jetlag of a landing plane. They lay battered and bruised, John thanks Billy and they laugh in a feeling of incredible fleeting joy or erotic pleaser. At this moment they appear to be in touch with something that had been released or lost some sort of part of themselves in that experience but at the same time gained a new grasp on reality that John did not have before. I think we can hold the same desire for losing our grasp on control or in turn gaining more control. Many people do extreme sports that are life threatening. What would compel an individual to undertake such activities, unless they had some sort of passion or passivity to them. Georges Bataille The Accursed Share (Pg 141,142) "The essence of loss is this intense consumption that exerts a dangerous fascination, that prefigures death and finally attracts more and more." The Bacchae supposes that Eros is violence from constraint, a "dangerous fascination". I understand that the build up of the unconscious could lead to a transgression to my animal or nature self. This would not occur if there was not some sort of oppressive force to create a build up that could explode.
The tension between the two worlds of Freedom(irrational) and Constraint(rational) could provide for each other. A sovereign collective would use a pressure release to maintain it's sovereign order, a such example is "The Carnival". I learned this lesson from the death of the King in the Bacchae, by allowing the relief or transgression from rationality, authority and rule we maintain a balance between those two worlds.
The dead object or "dead point" of an outburst of passion, Georges Bataille explains my feelings towards passion and desire more accurately. On page 143 "It is necessary... that an individual be regarded as a thing if desire is to compose the figure that corresponds to it. This is an essential element of eroticism, and not only must the figure have been passive in order to have received this or that form and to have been associated with particular objects, but passivity is in itself a response to desire's insistence." The object or thing becomes a dead point, no longer living for itself or for its own desires, but for the other's(subject). We have two worlds the subject or living who lives to its own end, and the static figure, or dead object that is separate from the regular world. We have to break what is regular to become unconscious rather then conscious to find that desired object (static or dead object). This brings me back to The Bacchae with the intoxicating world of Dionysius that creates a dimmer on the consciousness or regular world freeing the individual from the symbolic.
The Divine love I have learned was far from erotic or eros in any form. I was raised in Baptist, Reformed Church, and Pentecostal. The closest to the ritualistic or a reaching of desire for God was the Pentecostal Church. In the Pentecostal Church we danced with the music and opened ourselves to the object or "God". They even spoke in tongues of unfamiliar languages which is an example of the Dionysius ritual of the God entering the body of the individual creating a moment of "Eros". There wasn't any encounter with horror, anguish or death like that Bataille expresses in the chapter of "From the "Song of Songs" to the formless and Modeless God of the Great Mystics". I like to consider that God is the object of my desire just like anything that I find erotic. I am the living subject and God is the static object. God is the being that is to fulfil my desires and to be the means to my end. I agree with Bataille that we have lost touch with the experience of God that is only kept alive through sacrifice. I think the passion for God or the divine should be more then a feeling of Agape or Philia, but of immense Eros.
I think Eros "love of the body" is passionate love, with sensual desire and need, it holds a different level of desire then Agape, Philia, Storage and Xenia. explain?.
Agape means love in Greek. There are still gray sections that I find tough to determine between those Greek words for love. The word agapoé is the verb I love, often refers to a "pure," ideal type of love, rather than the physical attraction suggested by eros, on the other hand, there are some examples of agape used to mean the same as eros. It has also been translated as being the "love of the soul."
The Greek word erota means in love. Most experience with eros is initially felt for a person, with contemplation it becomes a gratification of the beauty within that individual or "object", or even becomes admiration of beauty itself. Eros helps the spirit or soul recall knowledge of beauty and contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth. Lovers and philosophers are all inspired to seek truth by eros.
Philia a dispassionate virtuous love, was a concept developed by Aristotle. It includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality, and familiarity. Philia is motivated by practical reasons; one or both of the parties benefit from the relationship. It can also mean "love of the mind."
Storge is natural affection, like that felt by parents for offspring. This is expressed in "The Bonds of Love" pg 4-29. The love they experience is almost instant. Even though their union is also determined on the Mothers emotional state. This is a love that is almost agape "unconditional pure love". At the same time it could be erotic to the mother to desire that child as her own since it has not yet woken to the world of consciousness. The mother is the subject and the child is the object of desire by the mother.
Xenia, hospitality, was an extremely important practice in Ancient Greece. It was an almost ritualized friendship formed between a host and his guest, who could previously have been strangers. The host fed and provided quarters for the guest, who was expected to repay only with gratitude. The importance of this can be seen throughout Greek mythology—in particular, Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. This form of love was very much sort of a honour ritual. Often practiced because they feared that the guest could be a God in disguise. This also ties into the agape form of love but I am not sure if it ties into being Eros. The guest uses the goods and sources of the host, consuming his resources. The fact that the host honours and fears the divine is the possible gratitude he feels for the Gods.
I can't deny the fact there are different worlds between Love and Desire but there are of course some communality connecting them together. I have noticed that love, eros and desire all have in common is the consumption of all the resources of the individual being. This is different to the desire we have to eat, cause we want to be filled, it is actually the opposite. We want to lose our own identity to the desires, love and eros.
I think this might be useful, I was typing something else but i lost it. And it was too long to retype. but I can commit further on my logos of desire. which could lead to "perfect love".
Eros: My Defined Opinion
We have studied something of the logos of desire, love, and eros in Barrico's novel Silk, but what is my own experience of this logos? Do I experience a difference between desire and love? If so what is it that I experience? What are the other dynamics of desire, love and eros that are not connected to another human being or are just "appreciation"? good questions
Human beings such as I are a contradiction to our own worlds that we have created. They seem to be related in the sense we know what desire, love or eros is but to explain or fully understand the totality of those three, we are often lost or vague to articulate those terms which makes us alien to each other Georges Bataille expresses this in The Accursed Share Vol. 2 & 3. I used to consider that a naked women is undoubtedly the most erotic desire, but as I learn more about humanity and my individual self, nudity at one time had no particular significance. It is through discourse we learn that the cultural particularities are only superficial. We as humans, used to be asleep or unconscious like an "animal" or creature of nature. We have moved far from that of nature. We created sovereignties to collectively function, we have lost all our animal roots and most are unable to re-grasp those roots that we lost. I think because of this loss of our unconscious the Freud's "id" or "Jausance" has developed a deep oppression that is sometimes released in special circumstances. On these special circumstances that are subjective to the individual are uncontrollable and over powering. Forcing the individual into a state of a sort of unconsciousness, often temporary. I think we see what is so beautiful about "Love" but at the same time we are terrified and overwhelmed by the emotional upraise or sublimate of Eros. The power of emotional or unconsciousness is part of the mind which is also sublime because of its comprehension of what is sublime. I have had some situations in life that have over take me, placing me in a state of uncontrollable, "Awe". I presuppose that love can do the same thing to others, like Aphrodite being not just the want of man, but being the absolute uncontrollable desire by man. She creates an absolute erotic need by men. I think we can't leave all control behind since it is too animalistic and nature like which is too overwhelming for us to leave.
Passion and desire can be sexual but also felt without being sexual in both having control and not having control. In the film "Pushing Tin" we have two men standing on a landing strip, the actor Billy Bob Thornton tells actor John Cusack, "It's a 747 coming at you, you can wiggle your ears and clap your Tinkerbelle it wouldn't make a lick of difference". They are flung uncontrollably off the ground by the jetlag of a landing plane. They lay battered and bruised, John thanks Billy and they laugh in a feeling of incredible fleeting joy or erotic pleaser. At this moment they appear to be in touch with something that had been released or lost some sort of part of themselves in that experience but at the same time gained a new grasp on reality that John did not have before. I think we can hold the same desire for losing our grasp on control or in turn gaining more control. Many people do extreme sports that are life threatening. What would compel an individual to undertake such activities, unless they had some sort of passion or passivity to them. Georges Bataille The Accursed Share (Pg 141,142) "The essence of loss is this intense consumption that exerts a dangerous fascination, that prefigures death and finally attracts more and more." The Bacchae supposes that Eros is violence from constraint, a "dangerous fascination". I understand that the build up of the unconscious could lead to a transgression to my animal or nature self. This would not occur if there was not some sort of oppressive force to create a build up that could explode.
The tension between the two worlds of Freedom(irrational) and Constraint(rational) could provide for each other. A sovereign collective would use a pressure release to maintain it's sovereign order, a such example is "The Carnival". I learned this lesson from the death of the King in the Bacchae, by allowing the relief or transgression from rationality, authority and rule we maintain a balance between those two worlds.
The dead object or "dead point" of an outburst of passion, Georges Bataille explains my feelings towards passion and desire more accurately. On page 143 "It is necessary... that an individual be regarded as a thing if desire is to compose the figure that corresponds to it. This is an essential element of eroticism, and not only must the figure have been passive in order to have received this or that form and to have been associated with particular objects, but passivity is in itself a response to desire's insistence." The object or thing becomes a dead point, no longer living for itself or for its own desires, but for the other's(subject). We have two worlds the subject or living who lives to its own end, and the static figure, or dead object that is separate from the regular world. We have to break what is regular to become unconscious rather then conscious to find that desired object (static or dead object). This brings me back to The Bacchae with the intoxicating world of Dionysius that creates a dimmer on the consciousness or regular world freeing the individual from the symbolic.
The Divine love I have learned was far from erotic or eros in any form. I was raised in Baptist, Reformed Church, and Pentecostal. The closest to the ritualistic or a reaching of desire for God was the Pentecostal Church. In the Pentecostal Church we danced with the music and opened ourselves to the object or "God". They even spoke in tongues of unfamiliar languages which is an example of the Dionysius ritual of the God entering the body of the individual creating a moment of "Eros". There wasn't any encounter with horror, anguish or death like that Bataille expresses in the chapter of "From the "Song of Songs" to the formless and Modeless God of the Great Mystics". I like to consider that God is the object of my desire just like anything that I find erotic. I am the living subject and God is the static object. God is the being that is to fulfil my desires and to be the means to my end. I agree with Bataille that we have lost touch with the experience of God that is only kept alive through sacrifice. I think the passion for God or the divine should be more then a feeling of Agape or Philia, but of immense Eros.
I think Eros "love of the body" is passionate love, with sensual desire and need, it holds a different level of desire then Agape, Philia, Storage and Xenia. explain?.
Agape means love in Greek. There are still gray sections that I find tough to determine between those Greek words for love. The word agapoé is the verb I love, often refers to a "pure," ideal type of love, rather than the physical attraction suggested by eros, on the other hand, there are some examples of agape used to mean the same as eros. It has also been translated as being the "love of the soul."
The Greek word erota means in love. Most experience with eros is initially felt for a person, with contemplation it becomes a gratification of the beauty within that individual or "object", or even becomes admiration of beauty itself. Eros helps the spirit or soul recall knowledge of beauty and contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth. Lovers and philosophers are all inspired to seek truth by eros.
Philia a dispassionate virtuous love, was a concept developed by Aristotle. It includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality, and familiarity. Philia is motivated by practical reasons; one or both of the parties benefit from the relationship. It can also mean "love of the mind."
Storge is natural affection, like that felt by parents for offspring. This is expressed in "The Bonds of Love" pg 4-29. The love they experience is almost instant. Even though their union is also determined on the Mothers emotional state. This is a love that is almost agape "unconditional pure love". At the same time it could be erotic to the mother to desire that child as her own since it has not yet woken to the world of consciousness. The mother is the subject and the child is the object of desire by the mother.
Xenia, hospitality, was an extremely important practice in Ancient Greece. It was an almost ritualized friendship formed between a host and his guest, who could previously have been strangers. The host fed and provided quarters for the guest, who was expected to repay only with gratitude. The importance of this can be seen throughout Greek mythology—in particular, Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. This form of love was very much sort of a honour ritual. Often practiced because they feared that the guest could be a God in disguise. This also ties into the agape form of love but I am not sure if it ties into being Eros. The guest uses the goods and sources of the host, consuming his resources. The fact that the host honours and fears the divine is the possible gratitude he feels for the Gods.
I can't deny the fact there are different worlds between Love and Desire but there are of course some communality connecting them together. I have noticed that love, eros and desire all have in common is the consumption of all the resources of the individual being. This is different to the desire we have to eat, cause we want to be filled, it is actually the opposite. We want to lose our own identity to the desires, love and eros.
Love is a way of interacting in a caring way with other people.
Unconditional just means you don't predicate your caring on the other person's performance. An example would be parents who continue to care for their children even after they screw up.
Perfect is just marketing hype.
Unconditional just means you don't predicate your caring on the other person's performance. An example would be parents who continue to care for their children even after they screw up.
Perfect is just marketing hype.
True.
I agree there is no such thing as perfect. But that answer is just another way to close a statement. Like saying two things are completely different.therefore there is no point in explaining them any further. Same for the other way around. There is nothing absolute, until it happens. The only thing I do know is a triangle is a triangle no matter where you are. Cause we all have been taught a 3 sided figure is a triangle. There must be a theory that comes close to a idea of love or perfect love that everyone can relate to. And I don't think it can be shorter then 2000 words. But I like to see someone come up with a well thought out answer. And maybe I will give my own. Anyways. I am off to work. In my mundane world. Ciao
I agree there is no such thing as perfect. But that answer is just another way to close a statement. Like saying two things are completely different.therefore there is no point in explaining them any further. Same for the other way around. There is nothing absolute, until it happens. The only thing I do know is a triangle is a triangle no matter where you are. Cause we all have been taught a 3 sided figure is a triangle. There must be a theory that comes close to a idea of love or perfect love that everyone can relate to. And I don't think it can be shorter then 2000 words. But I like to see someone come up with a well thought out answer. And maybe I will give my own. Anyways. I am off to work. In my mundane world. Ciao
Challenger78
Valued Senior Member
Perfect love does not exist.
It is empty, unfufilling, an illusion that sucks men and women into a world that seem vibrant and happy, but is in fact, a dream, gone in the midst of the night.
Also, Love never got anyone anywhere.
It is empty, unfufilling, an illusion that sucks men and women into a world that seem vibrant and happy, but is in fact, a dream, gone in the midst of the night.
Also, Love never got anyone anywhere.
Challenger78
Valued Senior Member
What you will want is an illusion.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
i think that perfect love and communion go hand in hand. a complete sharing of oneself in absolute truth, coupled with a complete acceptance. there is something within us that hinders this sharing and true love at this time, but i don't think that hinderance will remain forever, and i believe that without it, we will experience perfect love. i believe that to be the idea that is represented in the bible. the purpose of christ being a way to remove that hinderance and restore communion amongst us and with the universe. we would all instinctively and inherently act in accordance with the greater good. no slavery needed, no lies, no oppression, but complete freedom to be exactly who you are and to be appreciated.
The word love has no true meaning. Considering that some languages have 8 different ways to say love. It makes the meaning of the word weak in the English language since Love only has one meaning. Unless you can expand on it's affiliations. We all agree that love is something superficial, or beyond true understanding. I do not agree that it is a "Jesus" thing, but it is somewhat super natural. It is the Oceanic feeling.
* Oceanic feeling is a term used by Sigmund Freud in his book The Future of An Illusion to criticize the psychological feeling of religion.
* Oceanic Feeling is The Prayer Boat's first full-length album, released in 1991 on BMG/RCA records.
Save you from looking up the word.
Anyways, it is applied to the moment that over takes you. Most experience it as hot lust (sex). or some other relations. But I think the can take part in this feeling through and with other people. Look at what happens at a concert, it could be the worst band ever for one person, but he will loss himself in the actions of the other people. Jumping and screaming...etc.
* Oceanic feeling is a term used by Sigmund Freud in his book The Future of An Illusion to criticize the psychological feeling of religion.
* Oceanic Feeling is The Prayer Boat's first full-length album, released in 1991 on BMG/RCA records.
Save you from looking up the word.
Anyways, it is applied to the moment that over takes you. Most experience it as hot lust (sex). or some other relations. But I think the can take part in this feeling through and with other people. Look at what happens at a concert, it could be the worst band ever for one person, but he will loss himself in the actions of the other people. Jumping and screaming...etc.
Ruminative
Registered Member
Title
What kind of love are we talking about here? Relationships with couples? Friends? Family? Or are we trying to cover all spectrums with one answer?:shrug:
What kind of love are we talking about here? Relationships with couples? Friends? Family? Or are we trying to cover all spectrums with one answer?:shrug:
buttsex
Obviously it's the ability to accept someone the way they are, despite their flaws, and yet to still want them for life and to be closer to them than anyone. This is conditional on the fact that they don't substantially hurt you and damage the relationship.
This of course is called realism, and sticking with the theme of realism too many people are far too selfish to make such a thing work. Also thanks to hallmark and hollywood people are too busy looking for greener grass to realise when they have someone.
Continuing with that thought, I suggest you're better looking for someone attractive, wealthy, and good in bed, who doesn't make you want to smash their face with a hammer.
This of course is called realism, and sticking with the theme of realism too many people are far too selfish to make such a thing work. Also thanks to hallmark and hollywood people are too busy looking for greener grass to realise when they have someone.
Continuing with that thought, I suggest you're better looking for someone attractive, wealthy, and good in bed, who doesn't make you want to smash their face with a hammer.