Love doesn't obey.
- Thread starter china
- Start date
Love is not the product of thought which is the past. Thought cannot possibly cultivate love. Love is not hedged about and caught in jealousy, for jealousy is of the past. Love is always active present. It is not ‘I will love’ or ‘I have loved’. If you know love you will not follow anybody. Love does not obey. When you love there is neither respect nor disrespect.Your thoughts as usual .
As usual, China, you are wrong. Well, more than that, you are vague and wrong. Your writing is chock full of assumptions that really scream their need for explanation.
Here we go:
First sentence - just what the heck do you mean? Love is not a product of thought? Love is a mental state: mental states are the product of thought and biochemistry. My knee does not fall in love with you, strictly speaking, my mind does. And just what in the world do you mean by that "which is the past" thing? Do you mean we only think about the past? If so, you're just plain wrong.
"Thought cannot possibly cultivate love." That is just pure horseradish. There are endless stories, both in literature and real life where someone persuades themselves they are in love, and ultimately, they do end up in love with that person, sometimes tragically.
Love and jealousy are not entwined? Hoo, boy - do you ever need to get out more. Again, what the heck do you mean about "of the past"? Jealousy is of the past? Where do you get this stuff - and can I smoke some of it?
"Love is always active present." No, man, wrong again - what of the old couple sitting together, fondly remembering their years together and feeling their love deepen? Is that an illusion?
"If you know love you will not follow anybody." I don't know the number of times my girlfriend has said, when pulling something suspicious out of the fridge; "Here, honey - take a sip - has this gone bad?" And I always try it. For the sake of love I have followed women, education, politics and my country.
I have more, but I'll leave it here.
I expect your usual ignoring of me or your equally usual obfuscation/patronization.
Pangloss
True!:lol: Love has nothing to do with thinking, either past or present. Love is created in the heart, therefore does not follow the brain.Love is not the product of thought which is the past.
True again!:smile:
aaahhhhmmmm... hmmm not sure, I understand you right. I believe Love between a woman and a man can very well have jealousy and love at the same time. I have experienced that!:-(
. Yes, love is always there, sometimes under the ashes!:-(
True, it is hard to will yourself to love someone... you can like someone and be nice to him/her.
False! I loved someone very much, but the love was not returned in full measure, I was rejected, my love struggled for a long time and slowly it faded away, because hope died.:-( Maybe it is only buried, I'm not sure if it could be resurrected.
True! I will only follow my love!
True!! I can not command my love to stop... it won't, because it can't!
True, because love is already more than respect.
Satisfied?;-)
Pangloss
Quoting china
Love is not the product of thought which is the past. Thought cannot possibly cultivate love. Love is not hedged about and caught in jealousy, for jealousy is of the past. Love is always active present. It is not ‘I will love’ or ‘I have loved’. If you know love you will not follow anybody. Love does not obey. When you love there is neither respect nor disrespect.Your thoughts as usual .
Quoting china
As usual, China, you are wrong. Well, more than that, you are vague and wrong. Your writing is chock full of assumptions that really scream their need for explanation.
Here we go:
First sentence - just what the heck do you mean? Love is not a product of thought?_________
You would know the answer to your question if you knew what thought is .
.
We are past.We can function only in a known .Our known is the knowledge that we have accumulated ,our experiences .Knowledge is past.Every brain cell is filled with past .There isn't and can't be anything new in the cells .The moment something is registered , it is Past. you don't have to be a specialist to reason this out for yourself ,though I'm aware there are exceptions .
What's is happening here ,Your definition of the reality of the entity of love is different than mine.No problem -as long as you know2 it.
"Love is always active present." No, man, wrong again - what of the old couple sitting together, fondly remembering their years together and feeling their love deepen? Is that an illusion?
"If you know love you will not follow anybody." I don't know the number of times my girlfriend has said, when pulling something suspicious out of the fridge; "Here, honey - take a sip - has this gone bad?" And I always try it. For the sake of love I have followed women, education, politics and my country.
I have more, but I'll leave it here.
I expect your usual ignoring of me or your equally usual obfuscation/patronization.
Pangloss[/QUO
Any how, enough .
Last edited:
dancing-loon Love is not hedged about and caught in jealousy, for jealousy is of the past.
aaahhhhmmmm... hmmm not sure, I understand you right. I believe Love between a woman and a man can very well have jealousy and love at the same time. I have experienced that!
Love is from moment to moment ,always in the present , always alive .Jealousy is of the dead, in the dead.
PS.Love the bat.
aaahhhhmmmm... hmmm not sure, I understand you right. I believe Love between a woman and a man can very well have jealousy and love at the same time. I have experienced that!
Love is from moment to moment ,always in the present , always alive .Jealousy is of the dead, in the dead.
PS.Love the bat.
China:
Those aren't answers - it's just more of the same vague, confusing cult-talk that you always post.
Seriously, China - are you in training to lead a cult? This is exactly the kind of really confusing, meaningless faux-deep babble that Jim Jones used, that the Scientologists use, and that every church engages in - at least in part.
I wonder what your motives are, when you refuse to write clearly with any kind of definable meaning. After I read several of your posts, I wonder who has indoctrinated you, or if you are learning how to indoctrinate others.
Pangloss
Those aren't answers - it's just more of the same vague, confusing cult-talk that you always post.
Seriously, China - are you in training to lead a cult? This is exactly the kind of really confusing, meaningless faux-deep babble that Jim Jones used, that the Scientologists use, and that every church engages in - at least in part.
I wonder what your motives are, when you refuse to write clearly with any kind of definable meaning. After I read several of your posts, I wonder who has indoctrinated you, or if you are learning how to indoctrinate others.
Pangloss
Gee Yeah China...
Write what the formula thinker wants to hear.... Don't invite speculation or re-examination of precepts and concepts
If Kierkegaard and Hobbes or Descartes and Socrates....didn't form the basis of your philosophy and cognitive synthesis ...well then surely your ideas are without basis and simply cultist propaganda.... Get with it China...
Look around... These well-founded and exhaustively expounded gems of western philosophy have given us the world of success and prosperity we all enjoy today!
No need to question anything China....c'mon boy what's yer point...
Write what the formula thinker wants to hear.... Don't invite speculation or re-examination of precepts and concepts
If Kierkegaard and Hobbes or Descartes and Socrates....didn't form the basis of your philosophy and cognitive synthesis ...well then surely your ideas are without basis and simply cultist propaganda.... Get with it China...
Look around... These well-founded and exhaustively expounded gems of western philosophy have given us the world of success and prosperity we all enjoy today!
No need to question anything China....c'mon boy what's yer point...
Hi, China;
I'm not an expert on love and can't argue with you! But you are getting a lot of flak from the wise guys!!!:roll::lol:
I think you are doing great for such a young person as you still are. According to your photo you seem to be involved in some modern-day evangelism in China. That surprises me, because I thought China is anti-religious. Perhaps they have come around and allow such sport now.
Is your mission similar to what Ernest Angley is doing in Canada and America? Why not tell us a little about it... I am interested.:wink:
P.S. The little bat decided to fly outside last night when I let the dog out! I hope she found some sort of shelter... poor creature! Luckily it wasn't that cold.
Dancing Loon
Greetings!
China always generates grief when he contributes his thinking to this forum. Thinking "outside the box" (I really loathe that phrase.. isn't awfully popular here. One is expected to conform to repeat the formula and themes of "classical philosophy", self-restrict one's self to some particular "camp" politically...either a leftists or a rightist...the labels change from time to time but labelling is what's important not the substance or the context....
Like I told Scott Free....it's all a game!
Greetings!
China always generates grief when he contributes his thinking to this forum. Thinking "outside the box" (I really loathe that phrase..
isn't awfully popular here. One is expected to conform to repeat the formula and themes of "classical philosophy", self-restrict one's self to some particular "camp" politically...either a leftists or a rightist...the labels change from time to time but labelling is what's important not the substance or the context....Like I told Scott Free....it's all a game!
Hi, Mikey and greetings to you as well.Dancing Loon
Greetings!
China always generates grief when he contributes his thinking to this forum. Thinking "outside the box" (I really loathe that phrase..
Like I told Scott Free....it's all a game!
I haven't had a conversation with you yet, although I admired you from the start!
Yes, it IS all a game, a time-killer, what we are doing here, but it makes us feel smart and important for a minute or two!!:lol: We are in the big league with the leaders of the world and we can praise them or criticize them... not that they give a damn ... and feel good inflating our own little egos!!:lol:
You impress me with your knowledge of classic philosophers! I don't know a single one of them and only a little bit about Wolfgang v. Goethe.
"Thinking outside the box" ... yes, it is a popular phrase, but it has some good advice in it, I think. It is an encouragement to think indepently, and that is progressively very desirable!!!;-) (how is my English??)
Have a nice Sunday evening, Mikey, and drop by again some time:smile:
Love is not the product of thought which is the past. Thought cannot possibly cultivate love. Love is not hedged about and caught in jealousy, for jealousy is of the past. Love is always active present. It is not ‘I will love’ or ‘I have loved’. If you know love you will not follow anybody. Love does not obey. When you love there is neither respect nor disrespect.Your thoughts as usual .
Love not being the product of thought is a disputable thing to say. With some it is, with some it isn't. It all depends on the extent of your self-awareness, on how well you understand the processes that happen inside you.
Another thing you said - when you love there is neither respect nor disrespect. I will never agree with that. There are two things, that are the foundation of any kind of relationship, of any kind of affection, and they are trust and respect. I cannot love a person I do not respect, not in any way, not as a friend, or a relative, or a partner. If I do not respect someone, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with that person. I've seen couples, who have "love", as they call it, and have no respect for each other. Truly a pitiful sight.
I don't know MickeyDB .
Let me say Mickey that there is no one who knows what love is let alone talks about it.Most of the "Holy" writers describe Love in a form of what it is not .My suggestion ......Love and you'll know.
Last edited: