- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 62 Hour
- Reading permission
Originally posted by xilaren at 2009-9-21 05:50
Love is a battle where to win you have to learn some tricks.
I think you were quite clear .How elease can somebody interprete this phrase.It does not leave space for any doubts.
You are not ...
It's not so much about capacity of understanding as about outlook on love or human nature. And the metaphor of love as a battle is by no means new either; I was just repeating an ages-old insight into the man-woman relationship, and to the insight I do agree.
Most relationships, if not all, essentially, are about Give and Take. Love is about two persons who have things or qualities of equivalent value, according to their respective values, who meet together. You take from her something that you value such as her look, gentleness, and voice and in exchange you give her something that she equally values such as access to a comfortable living, a superb love life and a lot of fun, among others, including of course what you may term stuff about the heart. I think you won't deny there is economics at work behind all human behaviors. There are many factors you have to balance, and the scale does not always tilt toward those intangible qualities. Love is neither noble nor vulgar. It is neutral. You feel lonely without love just as you feel hungry without food. Both needs are of the same nature and of the same meaning, if they have any meaning of all.
I am more a nihilist and existentialist rather than a moralist, even less a christian. I am free from the "I am holier than thou" attitude. I am neither moral nor immoral; I am amoral.