|existentialism ° art ° poetry ° exquisite corpse ° chat ° search engine|
|( the cry ) Philosophy Discussion Board|
Posted by Brathelwaite on Wednesday, March 12, 2003 at 01:01:09 :
In Reply to: Re: Feelings and love - the intelligent version posted by Brathelwaite on Wednesday, March 12, 2003 at 00:34:55 :
I've decided to write a paragraph or two at a time in response to my own posts; that is me trying to understand myself better.
What bothers me about a biological interpretation of love (its "demystification") is that such an attitude is limiting. People who berate love, or simplify it, do so generally because their own ignorance frightens them. While it's obvious that we procreate through sex, and that feelings of love are conducive to the maintainence of a relationship that will prove advantageous to the survival of offspring so that they may in turn procreate, we don't know the purpose of procreation. To relate that we love each other in order to forge and maintain bonds beneficial to the human race is, by dint of its obviousness, another way of having related nothing at all. But it's worse than that because it leaves the self-satisfied impression that something meaningful has been uttered, that there has been a genuine answer to "why love" while nothing of the sort has occurred. When posting about love, you'd be better off using the language of the poet who through allusion and irony is much nearer the mark.
Post a Followup