Love Illusion

[Human]

From a visual novel I really like, but this really stuck me as "right" when I first read it. Wonder what people can think about that?

"Love is an illusion, a misunderstanding.
Mutual love is a mutual misunderstanding of being mutually loved.
And engagement is a vow to not wake up for your whole life from that misunderstanding."

Sorry not trying to be depressive toward love there tho, by definition love is a "belief" in the other, it's not something that is ever settled down, and no matter what you believe the other is feeling and thinking toward you, the reality is always a bit off from there.
Love is larger then romance as well, it falls into friendship and various other things. Just like a writer with their fans, the "love" shared between the two falls into that discrepancy.

Still, I'm writing this in the hopes of hearing what people think about this. Is this too depressive a view of love? From the most ancient times people have wanted to believe in something or someone, I'm not sure it's good to even approach matters of love in concrete absolute terms. Thoughts?

 

[VeganAtheist]

Hmmm... That view of love is a bit too cynical for my tastes.

I can't imagine anyone having a healthy relationship if this is their belief.

 

[sk66rc]

Somebody once defined a love as following - "Love, bio-chemically induced state of mind that resembles the result of consuming large quantity of chemical found in, not limited to, chocolate... Medical scan of someone's brain that is in love shows that the area of the brain which is affected is similar to those who are mentally unstable, mostly close to drug overdosed mental disease, hence the term - I'm CRAZY about you - ..."

 

[Human]

Think I'm seeing it as something like suspension of disbelief when you read or watch a fiction. Being aware that you are in a state of suspension of disbelief doesn't mean you cannot enjoy the fiction anymore. Without suspension of disbelief, most forms of arts are very hard to enjoy.
Love I think is the same. Those who cannot enter this "suspension of disbelief" will tend to always seek a "proof of love" and that is the view that I believe creates unhealthy relationship.

More from the same VN actually (the lines almost right under but by a different character) :

"Many things were found from his room.
From those evidences, it is possible to deduce that I am loved by you."
"Many things were found from my room.
From those evidences, it is possible to deduce that I also love you."
"Nothing was found from her room.
However, I can't deny the existence of an undiscovered evidence X of unfaithfulness."

This latter view is what the story suggests to be the wrong approach to love.

 

[Mitsuhideakechi]

I think that love and romantic entanglement get mixed up together much too often. The definition, if you want to call it that, of love that I have found to be the most accurate to my view of it is thus: to love someone is to want what is best for them, regardless of the consequences to yourself.

in other words, if you are really in love with someone your thoughts are not a question of do they this or that, but just desiring that they be happy. That doesn't mean that you can't try to manipulate things to make you happy as well, in fact if they love you as well you shouldn't even need to worry about it. In fact truly loving someone can be the most painful because it may mean letting them go, because you can see that you are not capable of giving them what they need.

love is so much deeper than the bio chemical stuff, that is just the more acceptable cousin of lust. I think that this is one of the more common misconceptions of this age, and a leading cause for high divorce rates. People get lost in that extended state of lust that is confused for love and when the fires burn down they find that they can't stand one another.

but I digress, that's how I seen love. (I just hope my words were able to covey it correctly)

 

[Limlim]

I only play eroge VNs!

 

[Human]

@ Mitsuhideakechi
Since you quote Aristotle, it appears you are referring to his definition of parental love (which may not simply occur with parents).
Anyway not meaning to argue with your view as I believe it is mostly right but there are a few points.

1) I believe that expecting that from the other while not from your own self is a large part of the problems of modern love. I've come to call this Sociopathic dating. Not saying you do that, but I think encouraging that aspect of love makes people expect that from others while seldom staring at their own selves, something few people are genuinely able to do. I see tons of forums where people are sad over not having love, and they are all thinking about everything the other should do for them, few people out there even consider that they may not be worthy of the things they demand or be unable to give the same or an equivalence in return.
2) Regardless of the consequences to yourself? That is something I disagree with. If the person you love the most sacrifice themselves for you, it shouldn't make you happy. Might be a little idealistic there but I don't think one should disregard consequences to their own selves if they truly love someone else. I'd much rather have my heart broken by someone then have to suffer the lost of the most beloved person there is to me, or simply seeing them destroy themselves for my sake. I do not wish that even on the people I dislike the most. It would however be expected from a parent, normally, to undergo such a procedure. That's why I believe what you refer to is much closer to being a parental love then a relationship love. In any case Ill never personally believe that one should disregard their own selves through romantic love. Call me cynical about this, but I think sacrifice as you mention is a lingering thing of the Aeon of Osiris that Aleister Crowley mentioned, as well as being an "easy way out" to give meaning to one's life.
Yet if I was 80 years old and my life could save that of children whom I've never even met before, I probably would chose to do so. They may not be my children, but it remains that a sort of "universal parental love" can exist at such a point.

 

[johnny196775]

Love is a complicated word. Physics seems a little easier to understand.

 

[Mitsuhideakechi]

Oscar Wilde said, "To give and not expect return that is what lies at the heart of love." Unconditional love does not thrive on return favors.
"Intense love does not measure, it just gives," said Mother Teresa
“I have found the paradox, that if you love until it hurts, there can be no more hurt, only more love.” Mother Teresa

The first and greatest victory is to conquer yourself; to be conquered by yourself is of all things most shameful and vile.
Plato

Just a few quotes i found while looking for what a better way to phrase my view. And in that search I found an interesting site for furthet reading. From this site I think my view would be more closely related to agape, but not as a love to everyone, only for that special someone.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/love/

 

[Red_Wedding_Casualty]

I gotta wonder. If I'm aware if the science behind 'falling in love', could I possibly protect myself from its effects?

 

[Ymir]

I gotta wonder. If I'm aware if the science behind 'falling in love', could I possibly protect myself from its effects?

Possibly, but it would require a highly specific medication and tons of money wasted on research. The emotions we feel are a physical reaction of our brain so, yeah, technically, it's possible to stop them.

But at the same time, it's not, because we don't really know the details about how our brains and emotions work. So maybe in 20-30 years?

And to the OP: It's a very cynical view, though I confess I've quit seeing love as a powerful and nearly sacred emotion as people tend to make it look like. Love can be a bunch of things or nothing at all, given the fuzzy definition we have of it. Discussing what it is and what it isn't is fairly unproductive, in my opinion.

 

[Human]

And to the OP: It's a very cynical view, though I confess I've quit seeing love as a powerful and nearly sacred emotion as people tend to make it look like. Love can be a bunch of things or nothing at all, given the fuzzy definition we have of it. Discussing what it is and what it isn't is fairly unproductive, in my opinion.

I'm a bit surprised by those comments. Viewing love through productivity feels a lot more cynical to me, and overall I don't understand how a writer can suggest the topic to be unproductive, but I guess science fiction doesn't necessarily deal with the topic as heavily as other genre of fiction.

In any cases, I shouldn't have bought up such a topic, perhaps it should be deleted even. I didn't want to start an argument over it and apologize for it.

 

[Ymir]

And to the OP: It's a very cynical view, though I confess I've quit seeing love as a powerful and nearly sacred emotion as people tend to make it look like. Love can be a bunch of things or nothing at all, given the fuzzy definition we have of it. Discussing what it is and what it isn't is fairly unproductive, in my opinion.

I'm a bit surprised by those comments. Viewing love through productivity feels a lot more cynical to me, and overall I don't understand how a writer can suggest the topic to be unproductive, but I guess science fiction doesn't necessarily deal with the topic as heavily as other genre of fiction.

In any cases, I shouldn't have bought up such a topic, perhaps it should be deleted even. I didn't want to start an argument over it and apologize for it.

Apologies if it sounded as if though I'm arguing, that's not what how I meant to sound at all D:

I do find it unproductive because our ideas of what love is are shaped by who we are and our past experiences, and that's usually not up to discussion, is it? We can expose how we think, sure, and compare experiences also, but never cross clear lines between what is love and what isn't love in an objective manner.

Certain views about love are fairly cynical to me, but that's not a bad thing. They are just different from what I think, and aren't less valid because of it.

For example, some people say true love is when the person doesn't care if there's no reciprocation. All that matters is the other person. Others will say this is obsession and true love only exists if it is a two way street.

My take is that as long as we are happy, satisfied and healthy mentally and body-wise, love can be anything we want it to be.

 

[Nocturnal99]

I see love as more of a concept rather than something that can ever be accurately defined. In the same way something can be recognized as beautiful or ugly, hot or cold, good or bad, it can't be located or measured. You'll often hear people say 'I love' as a response to something that they think or feel. When say that I am in love, I am trying to describe something that I feel verbally. One knows that it exists becuase they can sense it, but it's a concept that we're able to recogize in various ways.

 

[johnny196775]

I see love as more of a concept rather than something that can ever be accurately defined. In the same way something can be recognized as beautiful or ugly, hot or cold, good or bad, it can't be located or measured. You'll often hear people say 'I love' as a response to something that they think or feel. When say that I am in love, I am trying to describe something that I feel verbally. One knows that it exists becuase they can sense it, but it's a concept that we're able to recogize in various ways.

very well said.

 

[Human]

My original post was basically an attempt to show exactly how subjective love is and how it's wrong to expect it to be objective, since that seems to have been completely lost, thought I'd mention it.