What is love?

Iferlyf

New member
Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more... Sorry ^^'

So on a more serious note, I was wondering what love is exactly (duh!), what makes it different from friendship. The only thing I think makes it different is feelings. There's that "living together and having babies" thing that people tend to do with lovers and not with friends, but you can love someone and not want to do this with them, so I wouldn't make it part of the definition...
 
It isn't really any different from very close friendships to me. I love my best friend. She's at that same level as my partners. The only difference is I don't want to have sex with her and I do want to have sex with my partners. If I didn't, I would see them as close friends that I love.
 
Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more... Sorry ^^'

So on a more serious note, I was wondering what love is exactly (duh!), what makes it different from friendship. The only thing I think makes it different is feelings. There's that "living together and having babies" thing that people tend to do with lovers and not with friends, but you can love someone and not want to do this with them, so I wouldn't make it part of the definition...

For me it's attraction & commitment levels. I have had close friendships turn into a love relationship & then back to the again.
 
Hi Iferlyf,

According to Wiktionary, love is ...

  • a profound and caring affection towards someone.
  • a feeling of intense attraction towards someone.
  • a profound feeling of trust and security towards a person or a deity.
  • a feeling of care and mercy towards people or living beings in general.
  • a deep or abiding liking for something.
Regards,
Kevin T.
 
It would be like saying, "I love chocolate." Or, "I love D&D!" :)
 
We can "love" many people, animals and things, in many ways, including family members and platonic friends. There is no ONE definition or "right" way to love.

Therefore, I assume the OP is talking about the difference between other forms of love and the feeling of "being in" romantic love.

For me, the feeling is a unique one. My whole being responds to that person, whether they're physically present or not. We connect. And that connection can be felt on many planes: mental, emotional, physical, sexual, metaphysical/spiritual.

My body craves theirs, yearns for contact in a way that isn't necessarily or always sexual. It can even feel like we've merged or share a body on occasion. I never feel like that with "just good friends" no matter how close they are, how much I love them, or how long I've known them.
 
According to Wiktionary, love is ...
... a rather vague term, commonly defined using other vague terms. ;) It's got so totally stretched out of shape that lots of people feel free to stretch it even more to suit their whims & vagaries.

It's accreted some questionable implications. For instance, if all forms of "love" aren't permanent, then "love is forever!" is not just an empty sentiment but an outright falsehood.

Both abusers & abusees credit love as a major motivating factor in their relationships.

A much better term for what people mean when they invoke "Romantic love" is limerence --
a state of mind which results from a romantic attraction to another person and typically includes obsessive thoughts and fantasies and a desire to form or maintain a relationship with the object of love and have one's feelings reciprocated.

Limerence, which is not exclusively sexual, has been defined in terms of its potentially inspirational effects ... "an involuntary potentially inspiring state of adoration and attachment to a limerent object (LO) involving intrusive and obsessive thoughts, feelings and behaviors from euphoria to despair, contingent on perceived emotional reciprocation".

... "many of the most intense emotions arise during the formation, the maintenance, the disruption, and the renewal of attachment relationships" ... "the state of limerence is the conscious experience of sexual incentive motivation" during attachment formation, and "a kind of subjective experience of sexual incentive motivation" during the "intensive ... pair-forming stage" of human affectionate bonding.
Tennov coined the term, in part to separate the sexual-attraction component of "love" (as welll as the obsessive "head over heels" stuff) from the "loving affection" we have for our children (& as well some of our family & friends). Tennov also pointed out that long-lasting intimate relationships have generally transitioned from limerence to abiding affection.

Unlike any flavor of "love," there are some noted physiological symptoms of limerence:
The physiological correlations of intense limerence can include seizure-like trembling, pallor, flushing, heart palpitations, pupil dilation and general weakness. Awkwardness, stuttering, shyness, and confusion predominate at the behavioral level. Less common effects include insomnia, loss of appetite, and passing out.

... sustained alertness, a heightening of awareness and an enormous fund of energy to deploy in pursuit... . The sensation of limerence is felt in the midpoint of the chest, bottom of the throat, guts, or in some cases in the abdominal region. This can be interpreted as ecstasy at times of mutuality, but its presence is most noticeable during despair at times of rejection.
Limerence might be endlessly renewed, or possibly turn into unhealthy obsession (in a clinical sense), but usually it fades away. Tennov says this might happen for three reasons:
  • "as the certainty of reciprocity grows" or "a limerent object professes similar feelings"
  • starvation, "the onslaught of evidence that LO does not return the limerence"
  • shifting of the obsessive/romantic feelings to a new object
But because most people cart along unquestioned Romantic nonsense from their Monogamist upbringing, they find the notion that True Love is commonly transient to be too much to bear, & so "limerence" as a concept hasn't gained wide popularity. In reality, Romance is even flimsier, but Romanticism is built upon such self-serving lies:
According to David Sack, limerence lasts longer than romantic love, but is shorter than a healthy, committed partnership. Dorothy Tennov estimates that limerence can last from a few weeks to several decades, with the average being 18 months to three years.
That "three (or so) years" is regularly mentioned by couples who decide to "try poly" to "put the spark back in our marriage" by manufacturing a new fantasy object ("our third"), unwilling to believe the limerence might be much briefer (weighted down with fantasy expectations)
 
Last edited:
I did a ton of research on the question a few years ago and never found an answer that deeply resonated with me.
It is very interesting to read the various ideas and attempts to capture the wide range of emotions and feelings. It's a spectrum.
My love for my children is the strongest love for me.
 
A reason to use limerence rather than a Romantic form of love:

We've had discussions here about what the word/concept "love" means. One thing we've all probably experienced with the monogamous is the notion that love is a scarce resource. That is of course absurd to us, because the same people will often blather on about how "love is limitless!!!" & they loooove all their kids & relatives & friends & neighbors & churchmates & Decent People Everywhere. :rolleyes:

In short: choose either "love is limitless" or "love is only for ONE." If the latter, then tell us about the people you've cut loose, like how you stopped loving your spouse when the baby was born.

Right? :confused:

So maybe they have it half-right: if not actually infinite, love CAN encompass quite a few people. That (to me) says that "love" is being used in at least two incompatible definitions.

(And, being a symbolic interactionist, I see where maintaining this muddiness helps keep people from looking too closely at the concept "love" & therefore serves to protect both Romanticism & Monogamism from intellect.)

Establishing a longterm partnership depends on the sort of "love" associated with "best friend" status (& maybe a familial/experiential element as with closest sibling).

Limerence, though, is obsessive -- there's that "one & only" component. :eek: It's impossible to be "100% focused" on more than one project at a time (so you can maybe obsess about twins, or a pop band, or something, but NOT each of the involved individuals).

One factor that can cause limerence to fade is increasing realization that the obsessive object isn't making moves to run away. But IME, the Romanticism in which we've been raised has made clear all along that IT'S NOT LOVE unless there's that sweaty, clammy, nervous, fearful component.

So, people really do go out & have affairs in order to "renew the spark" with their spouse. :( Their infidelity brings back the uncertainty.

I believe that some who decide to "try poly" are doing much the same thing.

The problem, though, is what happens if they succeed in finding a new object for limerence? That means that the partner can't be the LO. And if half of a dyad finds a new LO, that means this partner becomes the LO for their extant partner AND maybe for their LO.

The cult of Romance is silent on how to handle these situations. :eek: The casualties show up here, & expect us to rationalise their "marriage+" through a lens of actual polyamory.

Separating limerence out from "love" is a big step toward discussions that are both sane AND empathetic.
 
Back
Top