Whats your thoughts on love Veeky Forums ?

Since I've read seventy self-help books in the last few years, I am qualified to comment. You'll be better off reading books on self-compassion (they were my favorite). I read about six on this specific topic, but here are the few I'm most grateful I read.

> The meaning of nice: how compassion and civility can change your life (and the World); Berkley paperback ed. Oliver, Joan Duncan.
> A short course in kindness: a little book on the importance of love and the relative unimportance of just about everything else. Forrest, Margot Silk.

Civility books are also excellent: It was such a relief to see there are a few civilized people in the world, among the ignorant, barbaric masses who are little better than dirty animals (or are animals...rapists and killers).

> A world waiting to be born: civility rediscovered. Peck, M. Scot.
> Choosing civility: the 25 rules of considerate conduct; 1st ed. Forni, P. M.
> Modern civility: etiquette for dealing with annoying, angry, and difficult people. Lett, Cynthia W.
> Why manners matter: the case for civilized behavior in a barbarous world; 1st American ed. Holdforth, Lucinda.
> Rules of civility: the 110 precepts that guided our first president in war and peace. Washington, George.
While he was an ignorant classist, I nevertheless chose to learn and even inspired myself to write my basecode (core beliefs).

Best choice I made was to focus on female writers (I'm male) because most guys have guy-ego-chips on their shoulders that they're superior to women, so their opinions are twisted, distorted and tainted. You have your own male-chip to deal with.

I checked all of them but I made few to zero notes on the books on Love. FYE[dification], love is NOT being one of the ignorant masses who have lustful urges but lack love, civility and manners. When you understand/have love, you can say "I love me." People who have only "urges to rut" can't say it because they see only their own lust in the word so they hate their ignorant selves...people can't deny their feelings of inadequacy, incompetence and cowardice).

Love is real. "It's just a chemical con job" is 2010 Reddit tier rhetoric and sort of implies that literally all experience isn't "just chemicals in the brain." So what? That is what human experience is. That doesn't rob it of its value.

of course it's real it's just thoroughly misunderstood.
love is strongly related to power which is why it's also very frightening. power games tend to happen in many (especially modern) relationships and love is when you say fuck the game i'm going to put a blindfold on myself. but can you trust the other person to do the same?
it's tricky. i think the best kinds of relationships are when you fight a lot and then fuck a lot.

also go read up on the relationships of different animals. that's way more informative about the nature of love then some contextual/self-help bullshit.

I spent several years of my life with someone, during which time we were off and on relationship wise but never went more than a week without meeting, hurt each other in different ways, traveled, experienced and grew a lot together.

I ended things and moved across the continent to get away, have seen tons of other people since then. We still talk once a week and I still get the same feelings. I still routinely fantasize about going back and building a life together, and I probably will.

I don't pretend to understand it, it's beyond me. It's beautiful, though.

is that guts?

The point isn't that "it's all chemicals", the point is that
a) that it's a chemical reaction with a primal, purely biological purpose as opposed to all the delusions we have come up with
b) that it's literally just chemicals you barely have any control over, which results in 95% of all relationships to turn from love to "love" after a few years, aka comfort, companionship and a lot of nice things but definitely not the stuff you felt in the first year

There's more to it but whatever.

>chemicals you barely have any control over
What control do you have on any of your brain chemicals, exactly ?

People need to learn about integrated information theory.

Literally all experience is chemical interaction in the brain. If love is illusory for being such, what is it illusory compared to? This is just hmm rly makes you think pleb tier rhetoric 13 year olds who think they've really figured the world out regurgitate.

>Is it a basic primal instinct blown out of proportion?
This.
It is basically a purely biological thing. Chemical reactions brought out by the right stimulus (that being interactions with your partner).
However if you've ever been in love with someone you would call me an edgelord for what I just wrote.
Love is an emotion. It's not something to approach with logic.

Our love is reserved for Carli Chan.

It's a projection of your unconscious identity onto a real person. You associate them with the parts of yourself you've been suppressing, and therefore get the feeling they "complete" you.

This is why opposites attract. And usually why love falls apart over time. The illusion can't hold up forever.

It's a real phenomenon for sure

unintelligent attraction for even more unintelligent people

Mr OP, trip and dub, you all know that the concept "value" is kept with "chemicals", right?

Either everything is as it is, or isn't.
The good thing is that everything as it is, in this reality can grow in complexity.

So listen everyone of you, everyone who is sad for their situation.

Just gain complexity, just study, think, reason with humility (Is there a better way of studying, thinking, reasoning?)

Argue everything, is even a concept worth reasoning upon? What can I think of if not thinking itself? Maybe thinking as an exercise then, by focusing on quantity rather than definitions, because my ability to define is limited by the quantity of my relation.

A good way to say this:
In order to synthesize you need complexity.
The more the complexity the better.

What is love?
Love is a word that applies to certain people in certain ways.

I am myself, I can say love, but I will never mean anything else but what I am feeling and it makes very little sense to call it love.

Does love exists then?
Yes, love with certain patterns, unintelligent patterns, love based on the simplicity of charm and attraction is one of the common love.

There are many love.
I am sorry, you of Veeky Forums are very focused on words, you need to learn more languages in order to consider words just words, people just refer and use them.
There is no much of it. If you fell in love with a 13yo cute girl that was kind, it's just a kind of love that comes with unawareness.

I know there are many ways to feel attracted and in love and many people who are charming, I am not being an edgy kid and saying they are not.

Everyone could be loved for anything really, Hitler did nothing wrong kind of meme.

But you need the humility to recognize your level of intelligence. If you had a button with written "after this you will love much more complex entities", would you press it?
Of course you would, it doesn't mean you don't love the 13 yo old cute girl, you just happen to love someone that holds more singularity.

The world is constructed with comparison and comparison is often seen as negative, I am sorry if it is so for you. I wasn't unhappy to be a stupid 4 years old boy. I was just stupid and that's what it is.

It's good to be suspicious of it even when you find the real thing. The most depressing thing ever is when it just slowly fades into being fucking roommates with some doughy 33 year old bitch who gave up on life and expects you to be cool with it and do the same.

[Edited because I sounded negative]

(OP)
Mr OP, trip and dub, you all know that the concept "value" is kept with "chemicals", right?
(Inb4 gtfo reddit because I used Mr)

Either everything is as it is, or isn't.
The good thing is that everything as it is, in this reality can grow in complexity.

So listen carefully everyone of you, this is for everyone who is sad for their situation.

You just have to gain complexity, just study, think, reason with humility (Is there a better way of studying, thinking, reasoning?)

Argue everything, is even worth reasoning upon a single concept? What can I think of if I don't think abotu concepts, if I don't think in words i? The answer is simple: thinking as an exercise, by focusing on quantity rather than definitions, because my ability to define is limited by the quantity of my relation.

A good way to say this:
In order to synthesize you need complexity.
The more the complexity the better.

What is love?
Love is a word that applies to certain people in certain ways.

I am myself, I can say love, but I will never mean anything else but what I am feeling and it makes very little sense to call it love.

Does love exists then?
Yes, love with certain patterns, both intelligent and unintelligent patterns, for instance love based on the simplicity of charm and attraction is one of the common love.
(I am using intelligent as synonym of complex, I am not being negative)

There are many kinds of love between a man and a female that implies an interest of sexuality. (There are also other kinds of love, between family members and friends and for all those kinds there are different kind of love as well, that is for everything that is)

I am sorry, you of Veeky Forums are very focused on words, you need to learn more languages in order to consider words just words, people just refer and use them.
There is no much of it. If you fell in love with a 13yo cute girl that was kind, it's just a kind of love that comes with unawareness, but it is love.

I know there are many ways to feel attracted and in love and many people who are charming, I am not being an edgy kid and saying they are not.

Everyone could be loved for anything really, Hitler did nothing wrong kind of meme.

But you need the humility to recognize your level of intelligence. If you had a button with written "after this you will love much more complex entities", would you press it?
Of course you would, it doesn't mean you don't love the 13 yo old cute girl, you just happen to love someone that holds more singularity.

The world is constructed with comparison and comparison is often seen as negative, I am sorry if it is so for you. I wasn't unhappy to be a stupid 4 years old boy. I was just stupid and that's what it is.

I just realized I made a shitload of typos and English mistakes.

> The ability to define is limited by the quantity of relations you can make in your reasoning.

This is the only thing that is worth correcting, I don't bother for typos or other grammar mistakes.

here, not even OP or the trips guy. English is not my native language (French is, for the record), and it is obviously not yours either. It seems to me like you are attempting to reason outside of any consistent logical frame, by throwing buzzword after buzzword, in a language the grammar of which you do not completely master. Some of your insubstantial rants, however, do communicate an unambiguous meaning, and the tone is not quite that of an elaborate troll ; I will therefore try to clear things up for you, in the hopes it helps you better your future contributions to this persian carpet-weaving community.

You are approaching the concept of love from a postmodern point of view, that is you apply a process of deconstruction to it to the point where no coherent structure of ideas can be extracted from the sum of your statements.

The point of this thread, at least as far as I understand it, was to discuss the ontology of love. This does not mean we need not define every concept and its properties, but it does require us to agree on a common framework of thought beforehand.

I, being a med student, am more of a Veeky Forums poster. I subscribe to a material monist world view ; while I do not reject every other cosmology, I see it as the simplest way to consider the world without making unnecessary assumptions, which would only weaken the value of any statement derived from them. This stance is implied by my namedropping of Integrated Information Theory, a very materialist idea closely linked to hard determinism.

In this framework, human experience and therefore love are subsumed by the larger concept of consciousness, which is itself an epiphenomenon of the central nervous system. Without speculating on what exactly are the neural correlates of consciousness and how much we can infer from the current data available, it is safe to consider love to be the result of an interaction between archaic instincts and more refined cognitive processes.

My point was that since consciousness is an "output" of the brain, free will does not exist and therefore you have no more control on love than you do on anything.

From best to worst:

1. Numinosity

2. Societal and Environmental love

3. Love of Humanity

4. Love of Ideas

5. Sexual ("Romantic") Love