Skip to main content
24 events
when toggle format what by license comment
May 17, 2023 at 20:51 comment added user65994 i agree that the question is entirely empty
May 16, 2023 at 18:39 history closed armand
Mary
Peter - Reinstate Monica
AnoE
Ludwig V
Needs more focus
May 16, 2023 at 13:39 answer added RodolfoAP timeline score: 0
May 16, 2023 at 13:31 comment added AnoE I was about to write an answer, but re-read the question and really have no clue what you are asking... I think you have to be more specific.
May 16, 2023 at 12:47 comment added NotThatGuy Philosophy doesn't seem like the right place to look for the answer to this question. It's a question about how brains work and what types of emotions we can experience. That's much more within the domain of psychology and neuroscience.
May 16, 2023 at 11:12 comment added NotThatGuy I object to the implication that romantic relationships "transcend" friendships, and that friendships are therefore inferior to romantic relationships. These are fundamentally different relationships (for many/most people), some people have very deep and close friendships and aromantic people aren't losing out by not engaging in relations they have no interest in. You pursue a romantic relationship if you're romantically interested in someone, it has nothing to do with "transcending the ick".
May 16, 2023 at 8:45 answer added anon timeline score: -1
May 16, 2023 at 8:04 comment added Peter - Reinstate Monica The problem with "vivid manifold phenomena" is their definition. You already broke this particular phenomenon down into narrower subsets which may be more accessible to rigorous definitions, and subsequent discussion. Therefore, your question is not answerable as-is; it is actually at least half a dozen questions.
May 16, 2023 at 4:21 comment added user65994 which ofc is not the same as giving up... everything is a frame for how we love others
May 16, 2023 at 1:33 review Close votes
May 16, 2023 at 18:39
May 16, 2023 at 0:53 comment added user65994 @ChristianHennig better alone than in loveless intimacy!
May 16, 2023 at 0:49 answer added Scott Rowe timeline score: 3
May 15, 2023 at 22:53 comment added Christian Hennig I have no idea what it even means to say that love "exists" or "does not exist".
May 15, 2023 at 22:11 comment added user65994 It may not have the attributes that we predicate of it or want it to have. It may be that, like honesty, all people are fundamentally unloving (dishonest). And it may be that no-one can live up to your definition of love. If you're asking whether, like goodness, it is subjective, I don't see what difference that makes and would struggle to believe otherwise.
May 15, 2023 at 21:31 answer added user65994 timeline score: 1
May 15, 2023 at 21:17 history became hot network question
May 15, 2023 at 17:22 review Suggested edits
May 15, 2023 at 19:08
May 15, 2023 at 16:34 comment added Daron Your "different types of love" are about 3000 years out of date my friend.
May 15, 2023 at 16:28 answer added J D timeline score: 6
May 15, 2023 at 15:32 comment added niels nielsen "philosophy" can say anything it wants.
May 15, 2023 at 14:27 answer added Joseph Weissman timeline score: 3
May 15, 2023 at 13:40 comment added CriglCragl 'The Prairie Vole Model of Pair-Bonding and Its Sensitivity to Addictive Substances' frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02477
May 15, 2023 at 13:18 comment added CriglCragl "I hate to break it to you, but what people calls 'love' is just a chemical reaction that compels animals to breed. It hits hard, Morty, then it slowly fades, leaving you stranded in a failing marriage. I did it. Your parents are gonna do it. Break the cycle, Morty. Rise above. Focus on science." ;)
May 15, 2023 at 13:12 history asked ActualCry CC BY-SA 4.0