Intelligence has limits, – Love in it’s various forms not.
I see Intelligence as the fuel, love as energy, there for substitution is out of the question…
If your post is about morality my position would go back to Bryan and pokoj’s previous posts. I pretty much agree with Pinker’s video just before your thread. You just need a bit of empathy, treat people as you would like them to treat you.
I can do good things without having to ‘love’ people. Moreover I don’t ‘love’ most people but I behave like a responsible member of a community and I try not to hurt people who don’t hurt me.
In fact in my business a lot of people who want to do good because they ‘love mankind’ are not necessarily very effective at it. I apply my intelligence as best I can to be as effective as I can in helping people.
I think sentient people thrive on stimulation of some kind — intellectual, physical, or emotional. In the absence of one, another can give a sense of fulfillment. I’d say in the absence of emotional (love), physical or intellectual stimulation can definitely fill in some of the void.
yes, the lack of love can be replaced by thinking, actually, – all one’s love can belong to thinking only.
And love rules! No matter what, for without love life is just survival.
Chris, not speaking of loving others, I’m speaking of being loved. Do people substitute for lack of love? Answer, yes.
Follow up questions, what is an appropriate substitute? Thinking is better than drinking, but is any deliberate substitution right?
Verisoph, loving to think is not being loved, it is a distraction.
Patti, yes, people fill the void all the time. The question now is: is it right to fill the void with anything but love?
Chris, do you not ‘think’ a person can learn to love? Do you ‘think’ a person can put themselves in a position where they are more probable to receive love?
did not work the way I thought it might have. But since I still have you on the line, sort of speak, no this is not about morality. I also believe love is not necessary for morality. Being moral could be strictly logical. I will not do bad things because of the consequences of those actions, and I will do good things for others around me because that improves my surroundings. Logical and good.
But good logic does not necessarily produce morality.
If you don’t feel love, I strongly believe, you can “substitute” it with thinking.
Is it not so that only if you love yourself you are able to love others.
I agree with Patti, it’s all about sentient stimulation. If we are stimulated by learning, we’ll probably increase our intelligence, if we’re empathetic as humans and not toally self absorbed there’s a good chance we’ll do well socially and love in it’s many forms will prosper. We seem to be sentient erect impluses in search of an opening?!
Neither love nor intelligence is a guarantor of anything though..
love on ya Hue, TAFKAM
Still can’t sign in to my old name, so I’m temporarily a potpie. Because they are delicious.
how goes it… anyway… I think Love is felt, not thought. And our hearts were built to constantly be filled and overflowing with Love. But as our hearts are broken and separate from G-d, we seek to fill the void. I think that when people live without Love they seek all kinds of different ways to fill the gap in their hearts, though they may not even be aware that there is one, they only feel incomplete, so in seeking elsewhere for a ‘feeling’ that is irreplaceable, it only makes the chasm bigger. One problem that can arise is that when one first experiences true Love, it can be very damaging to the assumed state of that person’s self-identity… if we are unable to open their hearts immediately, for a multitude of reasons, we tend to try to trap Love within ourselves, and this serves to cause much internal damage to the heart and mind in the case of perceiving Love. I believe this is one reason infatuations arise.
But anyway, connecting this to your original question, I can see how people could keep their minds running constantly in order to ignore the sense of Love trying to re-enter their hearts. It is initially painful and disruptive to us within our cocoons. The mind does all it can to ignore the heart and remain the dominant force.
HZ, this is the full chapter on Love from that Khalil Gibran quote from a week or so back…
“When love beckons to you, follow him,
Though his ways are hard and steep.
And when his wings enfold you yield to him,
Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound you.
And when he speaks to you believe in him,
Though his voice may shatter your dreams
as the north wind lays waste the garden.
For even as love crowns you so shall he crucify you. Even as he is for your growth so is he for your pruning.
Even as he ascends to your height and caresses your tenderest branches that quiver in the sun,
So shall he descend to your roots and shake them in their clinging to the earth.
Like sheaves of corn he gathers you unto himself.
He threshes you to make you naked.
He sifts you to free you from your husks.
He grinds you to whiteness.
He kneads you until you are pliant;
And then he assigns you to his sacred fire, that you may become sacred bread for God’s sacred feast.
All these things shall love do unto you that you may know the secrets of your heart, and in that knowledge become a fragment of Life’s heart.
But if in your fear you would seek only love’s peace and love’s pleasure,
Then it is better for you that you cover your nakedness and pass out of love’s threshing-floor,
Into the seasonless world where you shall laugh, but not all of your laughter, and weep, but not all of your tears.
Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself.
Love possesses not nor would it be possessed;
For love is sufficient unto love.
When you love you should not say, “God is in my heart,” but rather, “I am in the heart of God.”
And think not you can direct the course of love, for love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
Love has no other desire but to fulfill itself.
But if you love and must needs have desires, let these be your desires:
To melt and be like a running brook that sings its melody to the night.
To know the pain of too much tenderness.
To be wounded by your own understanding of love;
And to bleed willingly and joyfully.
To wake at dawn with a winged heart and give thanks for another day of loving;
To rest at the noon hour and meditate love’s ecstasy;
To return home at eventide with gratitude;
And then to sleep with a prayer for the beloved in your heart and a song of praise upon your lips."
Certainly Hue, did myself. Coming up to my twenty fifth wedding anniversary, prior to meeting my wife I was a very selfish individual, serial relationships; first science and then art were the only important things to me. However I don’t think that I ‘filled’ the absence of love with ‘thinking’. The two occupy different spaces. I do think that if you are very intense about something that you can put relationships second.
I think love can’t be learned, you can learn various techniques which may enhance at least one form of love – but Love it self is just there, in all of us humans.
But if there is no recipient for your love, I believe that “thinking” or thought can be a replacement for this absent love.
Perhaps this does not apply when you are young…?
pokoj… nice poetry. but poetry doesn’t need the supernatural overlay my friend, it works beautifully without it.
I’m getting my old avatar and more importantly my old picture! (thanks to the mighty HZ)
Love is love, it’s human/animal, it aint celestial. The heavens are empty.
where’s Bryan? all this love talk and no BWC… don’t seem right?
I still don’t think it is right. Whether it is alcohol or other drugs. Thinking maybe a far better substitute, maybe even the best, but I don’t think a lack of love should be substituted with anything. I believe the space should be left open and kept clean until love shows up.
If it is about stimulation satisfaction, then I most definitely don’t think that any desire for love should be substitute with anything else. I guess the question here would be, do some people desire more love than others? If a person craves a great deal of love from other people and things, is that person simply trying to substitute their own lack of love for themselves?
MR, is it possible that some us are sentient erect impulses trying to create openings?
PP, hehe, all different forms. From food to God. Do you think this is possible? The heart maybe born void, filling it with love, to me, just seems to be the most healthy form of void filler. People tend to trap love inside themselves, (my theory), because they fear it will never come again. When a person can fill their own heart with love of ‘thineself’ they are very surprised at how little they need from anywhere else. This includes, validation from other, God, parents, children, drugs and so it goes.
Some people turn all their love outward, seeking to help all that need it, while ignoring the little guy inside. Taking care of the little guy inside, by feeding it love, until it overflows, I believe, is the healthiest way love others.
And the poetry was beautiful.
Love on, in all directions, PP!
hehe
That is one reason I don’t think their should be any substitution. The space for love should remain open for love. This is one way love shows up. If love comes looking for a place to stay, and that space is occupied by thinking, or drinking, how could it stay?
No it doesn’t seem right. If almost feels like I’m cheating on him.
And btw, hz didn’t paint ‘Whose Your Daddy’?, it was D. Ilic. Hz is in the past man, your living in the past man, you gotta simplify. The future is in HD;)
mus:
“… nice poetry. but poetry doesn’t need the supernatural overlay my friend, it works beautifully without it.”
But then it has no soul… especially in this case. Without the belief behind it the statements in that poem it means nothing.
“where’s Bryan? all this love talk and no BWC… don’t seem right?”
I was just thinking that…
Let me know when you get your old name back, so I can pester them about doing the same for me… though I know they are busy with this whole transfer thing and working out the bugs and such… and listening to all our complaints…
HZ:
…I mean HD:
“Do you think this is possible? The heart maybe born void, filling it with love, to me, just seems to be the most healthy form of void filler.”
Love is the natural ‘filler’ for the heart. It is the water for the well, the air for the lungs, the gas for the engine… nothing else but Love is fitting. And it is not meant to merely be ‘filled’. The heart needs to Love as much as it needs to be Loved.
“People tend to trap love inside themselves, (my theory), because they fear it will never come again.”
I agree… but the instant they do so, they loose It, and It becomes something else entirely.
“When a person can fill their own heart with love of ‘thineself’ they are very surprised at how little they need from anywhere else. This includes, validation from other, God, parents, children, drugs and so it goes.”
I consider Loving myself to be no more, but not anything less, than recongising that G-d Loves me. You cannot Love without IT coming from G-d, that goes for thineself as well. It’s a Namaste thing, a Shalom thing… ‘loving’ yourself in any other sense is spiritual masturbation and you reap what you sow in this sense as well.
“Some people turn all their love outward, seeking to help all that need it, while ignoring the little guy inside. Taking care of the little guy inside, by feeding it love, until it overflows, I believe, is the healthiest way love others.”
The problem in any case is the idea that we possess and/or control Love. Our hearts are vessels. “It is by Grace that you have been saved… and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of G-d…”
The great Albert Einstein ones said:
“Am Anfang gehoeren alle Gedanken der Liebe. Spaeter gehoert dann alle Liebe den Gedanke”.
Translated: In the beginning all thought belong to love. Later all love belongs to thought. That’s what I was trying to say too.
Original content is for Non-commercial use under Creative Commons. Except where otherwise noted.
Some Rights Reserved. Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Discuss
HerbieP on February 6, 2009, 3:07 AM
I’m not sure what you mean. Love is an emotion you either feel it or not, you can’t choose to feel love.
Intelligence can be consciously applied or not.
Verisoph sapiens on February 6, 2009, 4:10 AM
Intelligence has limits, – Love in it’s various forms not.
I see Intelligence as the fuel, love as energy, there for substitution is out of the question…
HerbieP on February 6, 2009, 10:01 AM
If your post is about morality my position would go back to Bryan and pokoj’s previous posts. I pretty much agree with Pinker’s video just before your thread. You just need a bit of empathy, treat people as you would like them to treat you.
I can do good things without having to ‘love’ people. Moreover I don’t ‘love’ most people but I behave like a responsible member of a community and I try not to hurt people who don’t hurt me.
HerbieP on February 6, 2009, 10:04 AM
In fact in my business a lot of people who want to do good because they ‘love mankind’ are not necessarily very effective at it. I apply my intelligence as best I can to be as effective as I can in helping people.
Hue J Downs on February 6, 2009, 5:53 PM
Sorry, should rephrase that,
Question is: if a person is lacking love in their life, do they substitute it with, maybe I should have said, thinking?
They do it with drugs, alcohol, sex, tv, and so on, do they do it with thinking?
And to reverse it, is feeling love an acceptable alternative to do anything else?
Patti Schuldenfrei on February 7, 2009, 2:14 AM
I think sentient people thrive on stimulation of some kind — intellectual, physical, or emotional. In the absence of one, another can give a sense of fulfillment. I’d say in the absence of emotional (love), physical or intellectual stimulation can definitely fill in some of the void.
Verisoph sapiens on February 7, 2009, 11:34 PM
yes, the lack of love can be replaced by thinking, actually, – all one’s love can belong to thinking only.
And love rules! No matter what, for without love life is just survival.
Hue J Downs on February 8, 2009, 12:25 PM
Chris, not speaking of loving others, I’m speaking of being loved. Do people substitute for lack of love? Answer, yes.
Follow up questions, what is an appropriate substitute? Thinking is better than drinking, but is any deliberate substitution right?
Verisoph, loving to think is not being loved, it is a distraction.
Patti, yes, people fill the void all the time. The question now is: is it right to fill the void with anything but love?
Chris, do you not ‘think’ a person can learn to love? Do you ‘think’ a person can put themselves in a position where they are more probable to receive love?
Hue J Downs on February 8, 2009, 12:27 PM
If you don’t feel love, do you fill that time with thinking?
Hue J Downs on February 8, 2009, 12:33 PM
did not work the way I thought it might have. But since I still have you on the line, sort of speak, no this is not about morality. I also believe love is not necessary for morality. Being moral could be strictly logical. I will not do bad things because of the consequences of those actions, and I will do good things for others around me because that improves my surroundings. Logical and good.
But good logic does not necessarily produce morality.
Verisoph sapiens on February 8, 2009, 4:38 PM
If you don’t feel love, I strongly believe, you can “substitute” it with thinking.
Is it not so that only if you love yourself you are able to love others.
And love has nothing to do with logic, has it……
Musycks on February 8, 2009, 6:42 PM
Hue! so HZ has let you out to play?
I agree with Patti, it’s all about sentient stimulation. If we are stimulated by learning, we’ll probably increase our intelligence, if we’re empathetic as humans and not toally self absorbed there’s a good chance we’ll do well socially and love in it’s many forms will prosper. We seem to be sentient erect impluses in search of an opening?!
Neither love nor intelligence is a guarantor of anything though..
love on ya Hue,
TAFKAM
pokoj potpie on February 8, 2009, 11:24 PM
Still can’t sign in to my old name, so I’m temporarily a potpie. Because they are delicious.
how goes it… anyway… I think Love is felt, not thought. And our hearts were built to constantly be filled and overflowing with Love. But as our hearts are broken and separate from G-d, we seek to fill the void. I think that when people live without Love they seek all kinds of different ways to fill the gap in their hearts, though they may not even be aware that there is one, they only feel incomplete, so in seeking elsewhere for a ‘feeling’ that is irreplaceable, it only makes the chasm bigger. One problem that can arise is that when one first experiences true Love, it can be very damaging to the assumed state of that person’s self-identity… if we are unable to open their hearts immediately, for a multitude of reasons, we tend to try to trap Love within ourselves, and this serves to cause much internal damage to the heart and mind in the case of perceiving Love. I believe this is one reason infatuations arise.
But anyway, connecting this to your original question, I can see how people could keep their minds running constantly in order to ignore the sense of Love trying to re-enter their hearts. It is initially painful and disruptive to us within our cocoons. The mind does all it can to ignore the heart and remain the dominant force.
HZ, this is the full chapter on Love from that Khalil Gibran quote from a week or so back…
“When love beckons to you, follow him,
Though his ways are hard and steep.
And when his wings enfold you yield to him,
Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound you.
And when he speaks to you believe in him,
Though his voice may shatter your dreams
as the north wind lays waste the garden.
For even as love crowns you so shall he crucify you. Even as he is for your growth so is he for your pruning.
Even as he ascends to your height and caresses your tenderest branches that quiver in the sun,
So shall he descend to your roots and shake them in their clinging to the earth.
Like sheaves of corn he gathers you unto himself.
He threshes you to make you naked.
He sifts you to free you from your husks.
He grinds you to whiteness.
He kneads you until you are pliant;
And then he assigns you to his sacred fire, that you may become sacred bread for God’s sacred feast.
All these things shall love do unto you that you may know the secrets of your heart, and in that knowledge become a fragment of Life’s heart.
But if in your fear you would seek only love’s peace and love’s pleasure,
Then it is better for you that you cover your nakedness and pass out of love’s threshing-floor,
Into the seasonless world where you shall laugh, but not all of your laughter, and weep, but not all of your tears.
Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself.
Love possesses not nor would it be possessed;
For love is sufficient unto love.
When you love you should not say, “God is in my heart,” but rather, “I am in the heart of God.”
And think not you can direct the course of love, for love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
Love has no other desire but to fulfill itself.
But if you love and must needs have desires, let these be your desires:
To melt and be like a running brook that sings its melody to the night.
To know the pain of too much tenderness.
To be wounded by your own understanding of love;
And to bleed willingly and joyfully.
To wake at dawn with a winged heart and give thanks for another day of loving;
To rest at the noon hour and meditate love’s ecstasy;
To return home at eventide with gratitude;
And then to sleep with a prayer for the beloved in your heart and a song of praise upon your lips."
pokoj potpie on February 8, 2009, 11:30 PM
by the way, my name is Dan Kenenski, in case anyone was wondering… I just don’t fancy seeing it so often…
TAFKAM, did you come up with a symbol yet?
HerbieP on February 9, 2009, 7:47 AM
Certainly Hue, did myself. Coming up to my twenty fifth wedding anniversary, prior to meeting my wife I was a very selfish individual, serial relationships; first science and then art were the only important things to me. However I don’t think that I ‘filled’ the absence of love with ‘thinking’. The two occupy different spaces. I do think that if you are very intense about something that you can put relationships second.
Verisoph sapiens on February 10, 2009, 3:58 AM
I think love can’t be learned, you can learn various techniques which may enhance at least one form of love – but Love it self is just there, in all of us humans.
But if there is no recipient for your love, I believe that “thinking” or thought can be a replacement for this absent love.
Perhaps this does not apply when you are young…?
Musycks on February 10, 2009, 5:49 PM
pokoj… nice poetry. but poetry doesn’t need the supernatural overlay my friend, it works beautifully without it.
I’m getting my old avatar and more importantly my old picture! (thanks to the mighty HZ)
Love is love, it’s human/animal, it aint celestial. The heavens are empty.
where’s Bryan? all this love talk and no BWC… don’t seem right?
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 10:47 AM
I still don’t think it is right. Whether it is alcohol or other drugs. Thinking maybe a far better substitute, maybe even the best, but I don’t think a lack of love should be substituted with anything. I believe the space should be left open and kept clean until love shows up.
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 10:57 AM
If it is about stimulation satisfaction, then I most definitely don’t think that any desire for love should be substitute with anything else. I guess the question here would be, do some people desire more love than others? If a person craves a great deal of love from other people and things, is that person simply trying to substitute their own lack of love for themselves?
MR, is it possible that some us are sentient erect impulses trying to create openings?
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 11:11 AM
PP, hehe, all different forms. From food to God. Do you think this is possible? The heart maybe born void, filling it with love, to me, just seems to be the most healthy form of void filler. People tend to trap love inside themselves, (my theory), because they fear it will never come again. When a person can fill their own heart with love of ‘thineself’ they are very surprised at how little they need from anywhere else. This includes, validation from other, God, parents, children, drugs and so it goes.
Some people turn all their love outward, seeking to help all that need it, while ignoring the little guy inside. Taking care of the little guy inside, by feeding it love, until it overflows, I believe, is the healthiest way love others.
And the poetry was beautiful.
Love on, in all directions, PP!
hehe
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 11:19 AM
That is one reason I don’t think their should be any substitution. The space for love should remain open for love. This is one way love shows up. If love comes looking for a place to stay, and that space is occupied by thinking, or drinking, how could it stay?
BTW, Chris, is your new avatar a self-portrait?
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 11:23 AM
Love yourself, before you substitute that feeling for thinking.
There are times to think, and there are times to love.
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 11:24 AM
Hue J Downs on February 11, 2009, 11:30 AM
No it doesn’t seem right. If almost feels like I’m cheating on him.
And btw, hz didn’t paint ‘Whose Your Daddy’?, it was D. Ilic. Hz is in the past man, your living in the past man, you gotta simplify. The future is in HD;)
HerbieP on February 11, 2009, 1:43 PM
pokoj potpie on February 12, 2009, 12:03 AM
mus:
“… nice poetry. but poetry doesn’t need the supernatural overlay my friend, it works beautifully without it.”
But then it has no soul… especially in this case. Without the belief behind it the statements in that poem it means nothing.
“where’s Bryan? all this love talk and no BWC… don’t seem right?”
I was just thinking that…
Let me know when you get your old name back, so I can pester them about doing the same for me… though I know they are busy with this whole transfer thing and working out the bugs and such… and listening to all our complaints…
HZ:
…I mean HD:
“Do you think this is possible? The heart maybe born void, filling it with love, to me, just seems to be the most healthy form of void filler.”
Love is the natural ‘filler’ for the heart. It is the water for the well, the air for the lungs, the gas for the engine… nothing else but Love is fitting. And it is not meant to merely be ‘filled’. The heart needs to Love as much as it needs to be Loved.
“People tend to trap love inside themselves, (my theory), because they fear it will never come again.”
I agree… but the instant they do so, they loose It, and It becomes something else entirely.
“When a person can fill their own heart with love of ‘thineself’ they are very surprised at how little they need from anywhere else. This includes, validation from other, God, parents, children, drugs and so it goes.”
I consider Loving myself to be no more, but not anything less, than recongising that G-d Loves me. You cannot Love without IT coming from G-d, that goes for thineself as well. It’s a Namaste thing, a Shalom thing… ‘loving’ yourself in any other sense is spiritual masturbation and you reap what you sow in this sense as well.
“Some people turn all their love outward, seeking to help all that need it, while ignoring the little guy inside. Taking care of the little guy inside, by feeding it love, until it overflows, I believe, is the healthiest way love others.”
The problem in any case is the idea that we possess and/or control Love. Our hearts are vessels. “It is by Grace that you have been saved… and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of G-d…”
Namaste. Shalom. Love and ripple on.
Verisoph sapiens on February 13, 2009, 4:17 AM
The great Albert Einstein ones said:
“Am Anfang gehoeren alle Gedanken der Liebe. Spaeter gehoert dann alle Liebe den Gedanke”.
Translated: In the beginning all thought belong to love. Later all love belongs to thought. That’s what I was trying to say too.
Verisoph sapiens on February 13, 2009, 4:22 AM
perhaps Freud could answer that….
Verisoph sapiens on February 13, 2009, 4:29 AM
oops, that was meant to go a couple up a replies.
Sorry, still getting use to this new format..
Musycks on February 15, 2009, 8:59 PM
spiritual masturbation pokoj? ha! you’ve finally summed it all up! ;)
the future is Blu ray HD… Toshiba pulled out and won’t pay maintainence..
Sony rules!
Verisoph sapiens on February 16, 2009, 3:14 AM
be a case of trendy corporate nonsense?
Or perhaps is it the urge to define yourself through your purchase?
forget about the future, it’s the present which is
Hue J Downs on February 16, 2009, 2:18 PM
ignored?
Verisoph sapiens on February 16, 2009, 9:41 PM
since most people do not live in the present but just prepair to live soon, so yes, – you can call it ignored…
Musycks on February 19, 2009, 1:30 AM
I consume therefore I am!
pokój! on March 13, 2009, 10:09 PM
consume until you are consumed
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register