angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 wow gurgen that can be taken into alot of denotative and connotative analyzation...im sure not the one 2 do so...confuse myself even more??? haha nno way 2 much confusion 4 the day!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiner Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 I think love is just a mutual respect, understanding, and care. I don't believe in fairy tales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurgen Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 wow gurgen that can be taken into alot of denotative and connotative analyzation...im sure not the one 2 do so...confuse myself even more??? haha nno way 2 much confusion 4 the day!! Well Nietzsch was a philopher who preached chaos and giving in to our emotions. I think the 'triumph over Christianity' part was even more important for him, because it signifies the breaking of all chains that surround us. I think what he is trying to say in part is that love is a very suppressed emotion and that it would be better for us if we would follow our hart instead of reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 i see now gurgen jan...btw aaaanoooold hahaha...i got 2 babysit his best friends kids during the elections...cool eh? they took me along to san fransisco with them,,,hehe it was fun...presidential suite and alll yippie id do it again any day... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurgen Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 Give him my love if you happen to see him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyebruin Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 good. now that you've figured it out, why don't we all use our "down there's" and live happly. aaaah m'rut@t mee gakhee! i don't mean every last guy!! more like 99.999999999999999999999 % of 'em ---there are some good ones...so i've heard...and even seen... but not many...the world has changed and why you ask?? well that's a whole different thread...maybe we need a whole different forum for that? but here are some contributing factors to our current deplorable state of society: lack of respect in general, irreverance for sex, breakdown of the family structure, loss of morality, loss of modesty, loss of character, loss of dignity, loss of caring, loss of giving, loss of sharing, corrupted mass media, corrupted television and movie industry (some exceptions here though), pornography in general which dehumanizes women, lack of spirituality, lack of faith or belief in a bigger power...when you have a society with varying mixtures of all these elements, then you have a world of people disconnected from one another and from God who don't see things in terms of 'right' or 'wrong' rather everything becomes sort of "relative" or "different" and they develop certain "lifestyles" which are not immoral or moral...rather...again...'different'....we have become blinded as a society and do not see that there is RIGHT and there is WRONG in the world and some things are not a matter of opinion....but when the social moral fabric breaks down, who are you going to get to police everyone? we are the police and the world is the way it is because we let it...we let go of a lot of precious things, precious values...and while we may not be able to save the world, we can strive within ourselves to become better individuals, better humans, better parents, better sisters, better brothers, better friends, better husbands, better wives, and indeed better lovers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 bruin couldnt have said it better myself....encore encore ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 The jeering relativists will beg to differ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 (edited) The jeering relativists will beg to differ. Mouse is this reffering to Bruins last post? btw Bruin jan, your right. Edited February 8, 2004 by gevo27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 But don`t come up to us all here later to say you love someone so much and he doesn`t love you back....looool! Because that would mean that you`re caught by it! Davo hmmm davo wtf??? lol i dont get you man, seriously... thats so pointless 4 me...im just not processing that in my brain right now...that freggin weird...y would i do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 The jeering relativists will beg to differ. mmmmmmm relativists??? who are they....wtf is that all about?? please, with all do respect, can you explain who they are what they believe in?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allarmeniangirl Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 well thats what im talking about...all people think about is the down there........ i don't think/hope that it's the case, although i know what u mean, but it depends on the people too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 i don't think/hope that it's the case, although i know what u mean, but it depends on the people too. okaay now...how bout you read the previous posts..then ull know what im talkin about..i jsut didnt pull these things outta my a** u know..pple actually said something about it....lol....or else i wouldnt even give a fat rats a** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 mmmmmmm relativists??? who are they....wtf is that all about?? please, with all do respect, can you explain who they are what they believe in?? Well, if I knew or they knew what they believed in they wouldn't be relativists would they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
den_wolf Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 ive never expereinceds it so what tells me it exists unless i c it or feel it i wont believe it Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means that you haven't experienced it. each person gets a definition of love based on what they expereince I disagree. I think there is something absolute called "love", and while recent definitions of "love" extend to sex and sexuality, I think the feeling underneath it is pretty much the same. Just because people's definitions of something vary doesn't mean that there is no absolute truth behind it. Just like the problem with cultural relativism. But this is called emotivism. for someone to show me what love is...to give the word a meaning Not everything can be put to words. Hence why some things are "feelings." If you could put each and every feeling into absolute and unchangeable definitions and words, they would cease to be feelings. and love for god... and do you have "evidence" or "proof" that this "god" exists? you said that you needed evidence to believe that love exists. Wolfie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExtraHye Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 Mouse explained it very well in my opinion!!! Great job mousy!! I used to be very skeptical when it came to love... But then realized, just because I haven't had the pleasure of experiencing love doesn't mean it doesn't exist... Love is something that you gain over time If your looking for love at first sight, you've got a long wait ahead of you, because it isn't going to happen Love starts of with lust and then friendship, with whom you want to spend every moment with that special friend. Last but not least, that friendship turns into love Now you might be thinking... Love? Love never lasts... That may be true, but love turns into something a lot more special, it turns into respect. Love my not last forever, but respect could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 hmm im beginning to see what you guys are saying..i think i was a bit too stubborn because i wasnt willing to accept other peoples points of view...but i myself dont believe in love at first sight either....thats what im questioning......i know it exists....but im questioning my personal expereinces....not whether its possible....aye here i go again...yet no one seems to understand waht im saying....heres my point.... i know love exists!! just that i find it hard to believe that it can happen 4 me...as an individual, what i msayig is...what is love 4 other people? ad would that be the same or enarly similar to what i may expereince...well i c that this is sonmething only i can answer here...but just concerned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 about relativism...this is what i found: Relativism is sometimes identified (usually by its critics) as the thesis that all points of view are equally valid. In ethics, this amounts to saying that all moralities are equally good; in epistemology it implies that all beliefs, or belief systems, are equally true. Critics of relativism typically dismiss such views as incoherent since they imply the validity even of the view that relativism is false. They also charge that such views are pernicious since they undermine the enterprise of trying to improve our ways of thinking. Perhaps because relativism is associated with such views, few philosophers are willing to describe themselves as relativists. However, most of the leading thinkers who have been accused of relativism--for example, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Peter Winch, Thomas Kuhn, Richard Rorty, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida--do share a certain common ground which, while recognizably relativistic, provides a basis for more sophisticated, and perhaps more defensible, positions. Although there are many different kinds of relativism, they all have two features in common. 1) They all assert that one thing (e.g. moral values, beauty, knowledge, taste, or meaning) is relative to some particular framework or standpoint (e.g. the individual subject, a culture, an era, a language, or a conceptual scheme). 2) They all deny that any standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others. It is thus possible to classify the different types and sub-types of relativism in a fairly obvious way. The main genera of relativism can be distinguished according to the object they seek to relativize. Thus, forms of moral relativism assert the relativity of moral values; forms of epistemological relativism assert the relativity of knowledge. These genera can then be broken down into distinct species by identifying the framework to which the object in question is being relativized. For example, moral subjectivism is that species of moral relativism that relativizes moral value to the individual subject. How controversial, and how coherent, these forms of relativism are will obviously vary according to what is being relativized to what, and in what manner. In contemporary philosophy, the most widely discussed forms of relativism are moral relativism, cognitive relativism, and aesthetic relativism. is this what you guys are reffereing to as relativism? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 i think my problem here is that im just writing down what comes to mind, and not hesitating to think whether they all agree or make sense.... i guess its just a phase where im questioning everything, although i know what i believe in, i dont want to accept the fact, because im not in the same position as others my age...well i guess so! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 well, heres where my problem started....ive enver been in love, but i write alot of poems and stuff, and its weird how ive never expereinced love but i can go on and on writing romantic poems and such, so one day i was like, what the hell am i doing, how do i know what love is? or is it exists....because maybe here and there ive had a little crush on someone but i knew that wasnt love, it was just some puppy "love" ...i just wanted to learn more about love...but in a way did the total opposite by beginning to deny it...so when given good reasons and other peoples views and judgements, i can safely say i believe in it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
den_wolf Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 is this what you guys are reffereing to as relativism? Pretty much it, yes. That is what I meant by "cultural relativism." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
den_wolf Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 angel4hope, not having experienced love doesn't mean that you cannot think about it and try to find out what it's all about. A lot of people would claim that our views on love are the result of popular culture and the constant bombardment by commercials and so on, but love is not something that you need to have "learned" about in order to be able to write about it. Writing is about stretching the imagination. And on the contrary, I think it makes it more interesting when someone writes about love that they haven't experienced. There were a lot of novelists who wrote about The Great War without having experienced it. An example of that would be Pat Barker. Does that mean her account of soldiers' suffering was any less touching? Maybe less realistic when it comes to actual events, but what is realism in love? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted February 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 wow wolfie...that was great...because i used to think somethings wrong with me, because how can i write about something i have never experienced, ive expereinced other types of love, like love for my family and friends and stuff, and the love for knowledge and learning and enlightment...i know someones gonna question that lol....but i had never been "in love" to write such poems..and when i had people read them, they seriously thought i was in love or something, and made me feel like a dork u know....so i was like okay, there must be somethign wrong with me...therefore my questioning of the concept of "love" well i think its safe to say my questions have been answered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 about relativism...this is what i found: Relativism is sometimes identified (usually by its critics) as the thesis that all points of view are equally valid. In ethics, this amounts to saying that all moralities are equally good; in epistemology it implies that all beliefs, or belief systems, are equally true. Critics of relativism typically dismiss such views as incoherent since they imply the validity even of the view that relativism is false. They also charge that such views are pernicious since they undermine the enterprise of trying to improve our ways of thinking. Perhaps because relativism is associated with such views, few philosophers are willing to describe themselves as relativists. However, most of the leading thinkers who have been accused of relativism--for example, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Peter Winch, Thomas Kuhn, Richard Rorty, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida--do share a certain common ground which, while recognizably relativistic, provides a basis for more sophisticated, and perhaps more defensible, positions. Although there are many different kinds of relativism, they all have two features in common. 1) They all assert that one thing (e.g. moral values, beauty, knowledge, taste, or meaning) is relative to some particular framework or standpoint (e.g. the individual subject, a culture, an era, a language, or a conceptual scheme). 2) They all deny that any standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others. It is thus possible to classify the different types and sub-types of relativism in a fairly obvious way. The main genera of relativism can be distinguished according to the object they seek to relativize. Thus, forms of moral relativism assert the relativity of moral values; forms of epistemological relativism assert the relativity of knowledge. These genera can then be broken down into distinct species by identifying the framework to which the object in question is being relativized. For example, moral subjectivism is that species of moral relativism that relativizes moral value to the individual subject. How controversial, and how coherent, these forms of relativism are will obviously vary according to what is being relativized to what, and in what manner. In contemporary philosophy, the most widely discussed forms of relativism are moral relativism, cognitive relativism, and aesthetic relativism. is this what you guys are reffereing to as relativism? Personally I am not an adherent of any relativism due to its elastic nature and it's flaws. If anything at all from "relativism" perhaps the best outcome is more tolerance and understanding, but as a principle I find it flawed. Love does indeed exist, but whether or not it's as powerful as some may think is the real question, for what I said earlier means that love changes. But then again I hoped some married folks with children would clarify this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 i think my problem here is that im just writing down what comes to mind, and not hesitating to think whether they all agree or make sense.... i guess its just a phase where im questioning everything, although i know what i believe in, i dont want to accept the fact, because im not in the same position as others my age...well i guess so! AHHHHHH. LMAO You gotta love our hereshtak!!!!!!! You are a bit confused arent you... Well. i find myself not carring much about love, and relationship based on that.. well not for now.. I have acclaimed the "im always in a good mood" policy for myself, and hey, the more people isay this too, the more i oblige myself to be that way.. LMAO.. Its really a good philosophy.. But angel jan, if all else fails, all you do is become a nunn. problem solved Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.