Can you teach someone to love?

[JHK]

I guess this is a strange question but do you think it is possible to teach someone to learn how to love? Is there a point where on is hopeless? Like an old dog, new trick scenario?

This got brought up in a completely random conversation at work. I said something similar and my co-worker disagreed, saying it just is, but I don't believe it is natural. I think it is something we are taught.

So, for those that have lost out on that lesson, do you think there are ways to teach someone? Are there people out there that would take the time and dedication we'd need, or were we doomed from the start?

 

[Mouse]

The love I have for my children is demonstrated in a language of actions, attention, anticipation, caring, sharing and joy. The strongest feeling I've ever experienced is to love someone more than myself, and this comes from being a young parent who sometimes finds parenting so difficult and mystifying that I have to make it up as I go along.

The only way to teach someone how to love or what love is, is to teach by example. Rule Of Mouse, that's how I go along. Show them what love is, and as a guide for teenagers for example, how people in love treat each other. The issue can be knowing if the person wants to be taught, and/or is willing to learn. If someone doesn't want to be taught, or is unwilling to learn, no amount of effort is going to make a difference. For you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

 

[JHK]

I think that it is where it is supposed to come from. But what if parents didn't teach you any of that? How do you learn as an adult?

 

[SophiaGrace]

My father was neglected as a child by cold rich parents who bought him everything and left him alone.

Turned into a sociopath unable to love anybody.

Has no conscience.

Guess there's your answer...

 

[Tealeaf]

I don't think it's impossible, no, but I think love is a combination of mindful action and emotion. Someone who's been emotionally stunted in some ways might have trouble feeling, displaying, or acting in love.

But it's also a choice to act well, cherish, and express emotions, so you can't force them or simply make it happen. It starts with nothing more than value, and some people don't value anything but themselves. Can't make them feel things they don't feel for either personal or neurological reasons, either, so either they find the motivation and the means or they don't.

I don't believe in fixing people. Maybe the world would suck less if everyone just fixed themselves first. The most that can be done is to try to make people understand the difference between love and lust or just being afraid to be alone.

 

[Sci-Fi]

I think it's a bit of both, taught and something that comes natural. We have no concept of what love is when we're born, what anything is. We learn as we grow as people and develop these feelings. All depends on your environment and what you go through in life. Some who aren't shown love can still learn to love if it is something they have within them, then there are some who grow up in very loving homes but don't have that capacity within in them to express it in the same way. I knew a guy who'd hug everyone he came in contact with, grew up in a loving home, yet he had a sister who was the opposite.

Teaching someone to love can be hard to do, if they have it in them to love and just need help in bringing it out and showing it sure, if not it would be like trying to get blood from a stone. Just ain't gonna happen.

 

[PenDragon]

Can we teach someone to love? I say Yes but that depends on lots of things. Surroundings, childhood, understanding. Like in my case. I was sort of outcast kind of kid you know. For a time being I thought I would be like my parents sort of cold hearted but it changed over the course of life. I met few people who really changed me. It's not like that they force this teaching love thing in me, I just watched them and adapt it, the way of expressing love and care and I think that's the most important part of teaching someone. The willingness, the desire to learn something, the yearning. Without it one can teach nothing. So,they sort of teach me that thing cause I think I never learn from my parents that much, may be I learned a little from my sis too.

Bottom line is, yes, we can teach but only If someone is willing to learn provided you have patience and desire to teach someone something so precious as Love.

 

[lonelyfairy]

Maybe, but we can always learn. So yes, I think it can be possible.

 

[TheRealCallie]

In my opinion, you can teach someone to be LOVING, but not how to LOVE. You can give someone lessons on how to act, but not really how to feel. I believe that runs true with every emotion. You can tell someone how to be happy, but it won't automatically make them happy, they have to find that on their own, through their own hard work and emotions.

 

[Peaches]

I think the only way you can teach that is by example, by modeling it yourself, but the impulse need to come from them

 

[JHK]

I know some people just don't have it. If you can commit certain crimes for example. I don't think there is much hope for those sorts.

I guess I meant more of someone who doesn't know what to do with it, as opposed to finding out wether they have it or not, if that makes sense.

 

[Despicable Me]

The only way to teach someone how to love or what love is, is to teach by example. Rule Of Mouse, that's how I go along. Show them what love is, and as a guide for teenagers for example, how people in love treat each other. The issue can be knowing if the person wants to be taught, and/or is willing to learn. If someone doesn't want to be taught, or is unwilling to learn, no amount of effort is going to make a difference. For you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

Mouse's advice is excellent, as usual.

Every horse gets thirsty eventually. The trick is the timing, and the waiting.
Sometimes the horse simply just does not want to wait at the water, so what can you do but let it go? So timing is necessary.

I'd say everyone wants to learn how to love, they just don't always realize it. They get confused by what love is because they were never taught it to begin with. It would be like expecting someone to learn to read without even knowing the alphabet.
People can learn to love but you must teach them through example and that may take a very, very long time. You basically have to start all over with them, you have to teach them the alphabet, and most importantly you must be patient with their mistakes. Not everyone has that kind of strength.

 

[JHK]

The only way to teach someone how to love or what love is, is to teach by example. Rule Of Mouse, that's how I go along. Show them what love is, and as a guide for teenagers for example, how people in love treat each other. The issue can be knowing if the person wants to be taught, and/or is willing to learn. If someone doesn't want to be taught, or is unwilling to learn, no amount of effort is going to make a difference. For you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

Mouse's advice is excellent, as usual.

Every horse gets thirsty eventually. The trick is the timing, and the waiting.
Sometimes the horse simply just does not want to wait at the water, so what can you do but let it go? So timing is necessary.

I'd say everyone wants to learn how to love, they just don't always realize it. They get confused by what love is because they were never taught it to begin with. It would be like expecting someone to learn to read without even knowing the alphabet.
People can learn to love but you must teach them through example and that may take a very, very long time. You basically have to start all over with them, you have to teach them the alphabet, and most importantly you must be patient with their mistakes. Not everyone has that kind of strength.

I do that sometimes - I have a habit of acting like a jackass a d throwing their... whatever it is, compassion I guess, back in their face. I don't really want to, but I get retarded anxious.
I lost someone I really cared about that way. I guess you can only try so long before you get tired of seeming like you're not being appreciated and you move on. I see it happening and I try not to act like a selfish dick I just can't seem to help it even though it's the last thing I want. Then I start over again because what good am I anyway? Obviously not a very quick study.

 

[Regumika]

I do that sometimes - I have a habit of acting like a jackass a d throwing their... whatever it is, compassion I guess, back in their face. I don't really want to, but I get retarded anxious.
I lost someone I really cared about that way. I guess you can only try so long before you get tired of seeming like you're not being appreciated and you move on. I see it happening and I try not to act like a selfish dick I just can't seem to help it even though it's the last thing I want. Then I start over again because what good am I anyway? Obviously not a very quick study.

I'm assuming that this thread is referring to yourself and if you can learn how to love. What you described here though... I'm feeling that it's not a problem of "know how to love." Like what Callie said, there is a difference between being loving and love. Though I feel it's a problem of personality/habit.

I believe that we all know what love. If our childhood was brought up poorly (with lack of love) then we instinctively know that it was bad/unhappy. [He] might assume that the rest of the world is that way too (unloving) but that's not the same as saying "he grew up not knowing what love is." He might not know how to love but he knows the lack of love, and therefore knows love because he knows what love isn't.

So JHK, you know what you want, right? You know how you want to be treated to feel happy - loved. If you didn't know what you want then you wouldn't be sad for not having (yet) what you want. What's that saying.. "you can't miss what you never had." Not the exact situation, but the concept is the same.

 

[Despicable Me]

I believe that we all know what love. If our childhood was brought up poorly (with lack of love) then we instinctively know that it was bad/unhappy.

I completely disagree. I believe that everyone is born knowing absolutely nothing about love and that they learn it only from what they are taught. If they are taught wrong, they act wrong.

It's the simplest principle for things like serial killers and such. If you look into the history of pretty much any serial killer in history - it always goes back to the parents. There are exceptions, but not many. The parents only abused them and never taught them what love is. Growing up in abuse, without love, teaches them that abuse is love, so when they get older they act the same way - abusive and destructive. They faced destruction, as the only form of love they ever knew, so in return they want to destroy the world.
This principle obviously extends much farther than just serial killers - they are merely the most extreme example as proof.

The same can even be said with animals. If you raise an animal in an abusive and destructive environment then it will become vicious. It will want to destroy everything and it does so long as it has freedom to do so. Kept confined and alone - they will become extremely meek and timid. But as some have learned with animals - they can also be taught to love, even after the abuse. They just need the opportunity.
Even many wild and normally vicious animals, like lions and tigers, can be tamed and learn to show affection. They can overcome their instinct to kill.

Love is not an instinct, it is something learned and something which can overcome the most primitive instinct. That is why it is so appreciated, why it is desired and glorified. Love is the greatest virtue, and no one is simply just born with virtues.

 

[Regumika]

It's the simplest principle for things like serial killers and such. If you look into the history of pretty much any serial killer in history - it always goes back to the parents. There are exceptions, but not many. The parents only abused them and never taught them what love is. Growing up in abuse, without love, teaches them that abuse is love, so when they get older they act the same way - abusive and destructive. They faced destruction, as the only form of love they ever knew, so in return they want to destroy the world.
This principle obviously extends much farther than just serial killers - they are merely the most extreme example as proof.

The same can even be said with animals. If you raise an animal in an abusive and destructive environment then it will become vicious. It will want to destroy everything and it does so long as it has freedom to do so. Kept confined and alone - they will become extremely meek and timid. But as some have learned with animals - they can also be taught to love, even after the abuse. They just need the opportunity.
Even many wild and normally vicious animals, like lions and tigers, can be tamed and learn to show affection. They can overcome their instinct to kill.

Love is not an instinct, it is something learned and something which can overcome the most primitive instinct. That is why it is so appreciated, why it is desired and glorified. Love is the greatest virtue, and no one is simply just born with virtues.

I believe you misunderstood me. The behavior is taught by the parents (how to love) not the concept (what love is). If I'm following your reasoning though, you are saying that by being treated abusively growing up (learned as love) then destroying the world once they have grown up means that they love the world (since that's how their parents did it), right?

Parents love me by hitting my face.
If I kill someone, I love them. If I destroy the world, I love the world.


Which is... not true. Well shoot, going by that logic, serial killers are the most loving people on the planet. As I said, how to love and knowing what love is are different. The reason serial killers are serial killers (for those that are raised abusively) behave this way because they never got the love that they know they want to receive and they are taking out this bottled up pain on others.

Your animal examples are not talking about the same things either. Animals becomes vicious after being abused because they are trying to protect themselves (they wouldn't have a need to protect themselves if they thought the abuse was good - love). They become loving (notice it's loving) when someone comes along and show that they won't abuse. It's a matter of trust, not a matter of love. Lions are aggressive because they don't know who to trust. You don't see wild lions hunt their own (unless of a different group), but it's not about love, it's about protecting their own tribe from outside sources that you can't trust.

Which none of the above (including yours) talks about how any of know don't know what love is, they all know what love is and what love isn't.

Let's use gangs for example. Gangs are violent, right? Yet they protect each other of the same gang like family - sometimes with their life. They love their gang family and treat them different than those outside. Just because they lie and steal, kill and are violent, doesn't mean they don't know what love is.

 

[Despicable Me]

I believe you misunderstood me. The behavior is taught by the parents (how to love) not the concept (what love is). If I'm following your reasoning though, you are saying that by being treated abusively growing up (learned as love) then destroying the world once they have grown up means that they love the world (since that's how their parents did it), right?

Parents love me by hitting my face.
If I kill someone, I love them. If I destroy the world, I love the world.


Which is... not true. Well shoot, going by that logic, serial killers are the most loving people on the planet.

No, I think it's you who is misunderstanding me.
I'm not stating that these people know what love is, it's just that everyone has their own idea of what love is and that this differs between individuals and depends on how they have grown up.

Obviously serial killers and the like don't know how to love. They were taught something different than real love, they were taught something that they think is love and act on that because that is their reality.
Essentially, they have literally been taught wrong. What they believe is love is not love. And in some ways they know that, but they don't know what it really is and don't know how to correct that.

It's sort of like if I said I wanted "the perfect cake". The idea me and you have of "the perfect cake" is different. So if I'm having a party and you bring your idea of that cake, it might be nothing as I had pictured it.
But someone else may not even know what a cake is, so they bring a Pancake, or maybe they bring a screwdriver. And the dude bringing the screwdriver might know it's not really a "cake", but he doesn't know what else to bring because he doesn't understand the situation at all. He would need someone to show him what a cake is, and for someone to give him a piece of cake so he can taste it himself, before he understands.

As I said, how to love and knowing what love is are different.

I'm not disagreeing with you there, I'm trying to indicate something else. You also stated that all people naturally know what love is. I disagreed because I don't believe it's something that we're all just born with. It's something we have to learn, and we all learn different things and we learn them differently.

The reason serial killers are serial killers (for those that are raised abusively) behave this way because they never got the love that they know they want to receive and they are taking out this bottled up pain on others.

Yeah.... Well, that's a bit too simplistic of an explanation.
You're not really asking the hard questions. What makes the bottled up pain come out as murder? How does pain and not getting love turn into murder?
If you think about, possibly study some psychology, I think you'll find my explanation sums up the situation a lot better.

Your animal examples are not talking about the same things either. Animals becomes vicious after being abused because they are trying to protect themselves (they wouldn't have a need to protect themselves if they thought the abuse was good - love). They become loving (notice it's loving) when someone comes along and show that they won't abuse. It's a matter of trust, not a matter of love. Lions are aggressive because they don't know who to trust. You don't see wild lions hunt their own (unless of a different group), but it's not about love, it's about protecting their own tribe from outside sources that you can't trust.

I think we're looking at this very differently.
You're looking at 'love' as some sort of metaphysical concept, something not related to physical instincts, learned traits, and etc.
If you're bent on that sort of definition... then sure, nothing I've said is true or applicable. However, I would completely disagree with such metaphysical properties. You can't prove a metaphysical existence to anything and there is no real argument to be had there.

Disregarding metaphysics:
If you'd notice, I pointed out that abuse in the form of ignorance and apathy leads to meak and quiet creatures. But if, as you say, they are only trying to fend for their lives then it is those very creatures whom must be the loudest and most violent, to survive and so as to get food and attention, because no one is giving it to them. They have been ignored so they should be lashing out at everything.

Likewise, a creatures abused violently should learn only to be quiet and meek, so as not to disturb or get attention. To get the attention they don't want to get. They would be quiet so as to go about their lives without harm. But no, instead they usually do the opposite, they act violently as they have been taught. They are indeed defending themselves, but from what? These creatures, if free, will often lash out at people or other creatures not because the others are an actual threat but simply because they are there - because the abused animal wishes to do harm to others as it has been done to them.

This is the hidden reality of the situation that we call 'love', behind all the metaphysics, behind all the apparent feelings we have, and behind all of the ways in which we feel them.

Which none of the above (including yours) talks about how any of know don't know what love is, they all know what love is and what love isn't.

No, I very specifically pointed out how serial killers don't know what love is because they weren't taught love, they weren't given love, and they only learned abuse.
I used animals as another example to demonstrate this point. Those animals aren't loving because they hadn't received or seen love before.

They understand their own concepts of what love is, twisted and mutilated, and they probably know it is hate, too, but this is exactly the problem. To them they learn that love is hate, that they are the same thing.

Let's use gangs for example. Gangs are violent, right? Yet they protect each other of the same gang like family - sometimes with their life. They love their gang family and treat them different than those outside. Just because they lie and steal, kill and are violent, doesn't mean they don't know what love is.

You're using an entirely different scenario now.
Gangs are faced with reality in a different situation. They feel abuse from the external world so they find love within their own gang as the only way to seek it. The only way they feel they are cared for. The violence and actions on the external world are not externalized through thoughts of love, but actual hate and actual survival. Knowing love doesn't somehow overcome your environmental circumstances. You still have to survive, love doesn't feed you. It doesn't protect you from bullets, either.
Just because something knows what love is doesn't mean that they don't still understand hate and survival. Likewise, just because something shows hate and survival does not necessarily mean they don't know how to love or what love is. I even pointed out how love can overcome instincts. So someone can overcome their instincts for survival to protect those they love.

You'll also notice that gangs are not generally destructive just to destroy. As a whole they are destructive only for purposes of personal gain and survival. They are acting against the world in ways to protect themselves, to provide for themselves, and essentially just to survive in harsh circumstances.

I'll also point out that there is also tons of non-love in gangs, so we shouldn't be looking at this superficially. The relationships there are very complicated. People ratting each other out to save themselves, in-gang violence, pressure and force to stay, peer pressure, scapegoating, Etc. Things which contradict this noted 'love' within gangs.

Inevitably someone can be a very violent person and still know what love is, even if he never shows any.

We should not confuse circumstances and survival with knowing or not knowing love.

 

[TheRealCallie]

Not all serial killers are incapable of love. Also, I know quite a few people who were brought up in loveless households and some that were raised in foster care/state houses and they are very capable of love. Now, if love is TAUGHT, how did they learn? Who taught them when no one was there to show them what it was?

I suppose this is something people will always agree on, but IMO, we are all born with the capability of love, with knowing how to love, it just takes finding the right person/people to make you realize that you do have love inside you, that you don't need to be taught.

 

[Despicable Me]

Not all serial killers are incapable of love.

This is rather irrelevant. Read below.

Also, I know quite a few people who were brought up in loveless households and some that were raised in foster care/state houses and they are very capable of love. Now, if love is TAUGHT, how did they learn? Who taught them when no one was there to show them what it was?

Blood relationships are not the only means of learning, they are usually just the ones with the most effect. When those people are not there (because of apathy or literally not there) a more social aspect usually takes over for their upbringing.
The old saying goes: "It takes a village to raise a child."
As I explained, everyone can still learn. It's not like you stop learning when you hit 18 or anything like that. People continue learning their entire lives, they never stop. The old expression "You can't teach an old dog new tricks" is entirely BS and has been proven wrong so many times. Perhaps for many learning things becomes harder due to age, but that's entirely circumstantial and irrelevant, it can still be done.

And make no mistake, I'm speaking in generalizations on purpose. There are always exceptions. Everyone is unique, every circumstance is different. Every individual is truly unique and irreplaceable.

IMO, we are all born with the capability of love, with knowing how to love, it just takes finding the right person/people to make you realize that you do have love inside you, that you don't need to be taught.

The Capability to love? Yes, I'd agree we're all born with that. Humans are born with so many capabilities they are unfamiliar with and don't know how to utilize.

As for finding people to realize it rather than being taught, that's mostly the same as what I've said, just a different way of wording it. Realization of a capability is the same as learning to utilize it, isn't it? How do you make such a distinction between the two?

 

[Regumika]

I'm not going to quote anything, it was too long. I like your cake example though. However, the first part of that example I don't agree with since Love isn't about preference. Love is objective. How to be Loving is subjective (for example, the five languages of love). The second part of Cake/Screwdriver is much like using another emotion to define love. Happiness is pretty close to love, but it isn't it.

We'll just disagree on the point - do we already know what love is regardless of how we are brought up.

For me, I believe that we do.