You can’t be in love with the Berlin Wall. It might have given/gives meaning to something in her life that she needs or desires to hold onto.
We use the word 'love" to express a multitude of things which other words might best describe.
I don’t think that my cat, Yoda, loves me as much as he is attached to me, needs me for his existence, and is used to have me around - or the other way around.
Your second image to me is more about a man who is wondering "Where did I go wrong with that damn woman or he might just as much be wondering “What do I want for supper?”. His look is not perplexing enough really not at all.
I do not anyway. But the Swedish Eija-Riitta Eklöf-Berliner-Mauer does! Do you think that she lies? 
That image should merely represent “philosophy” or “thinking” and (I admit it) a bit suggest that one can’t love philosophy or thinking.
I estimate that merely 20% of this forum members are really interested in philosophy, the other 80% are not really interested in philosophy or even don’t
know what philosophy is, they just want to have fun, or even to derail, to troll, to insult, … and so on. I guess, that if one asks for the emotional relationship to philosophy, the most of those 20% would say “I like phislosophy”, while the most of those 80% would say “I love philosophy”. That leads to the following questions:
1.) “Who are those 20% and 80%?”
2.) “What do they mean when they use the words ‘love’ and ‘like’?”
3.) “What is philosophy?”
4.) “Is it possible or even necessary that one loves philospohy in order to philosophise?”
That are smart questions, aren’t they? Am I similar to Sokrates, just because I like maieutics?
Note:
Dear 80%, I don’t want to insult you; you may be right (see question 4.); but if so, then you should prove or give evidence for your thesis that one can really love philosophy.
She actually married the Berlin Wall in 1979 and when it was destroyed in 1989 it was a big tragedy for her. She created the term ‘Objectum Sexuality’, which means that the object has feelings and a sexual desire. (I wonder how that works 
) “We have an equal relationship and are not bothered about conventions, our story is one of two lovers and our souls will be connected eternally”
1979? So, the following song is her song or dedicated to her:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aeETEoNfOg[/youtube] 
The Smashing Pumpkins, “1979”, 1996. 
Oh scary! This picture is not of 1979 but of 1978.
But I just found out (here) that she got married on June 17, 1979.
For people who are interested in the “couple”: berlinermauer.se/ …
Do you believe that, Mithus?
If she is able to be in love with the Berlin Wall and their “souls” really “will be connected eternally”, then it might also be possible to love philosophy. But do you really believe that?
B.t.w.: Please remember the many murder victims and other victims at the Berlin Wall!
Translation:
Memorial // Günter Litfin // first murder victim on 24/08/1961 // Humboldthafen in Berlin-Mitte // and all the victims of the Berlin Wall // from 13.08.1961 until November 1989.
One can most certainly be in love with an inanimate object or specific action, such as philosophizing, knitting, running, singing,… To love means to deeply care for, emotionally and physically the action of strongly supporting against somethings/someones adversaries, both inner and outer adversaries, “deeply desiring it to be strong/harmonious/happy”. And is usually accompanied with a desire to unite with or be “one with it/he/her” (attachment to, a part of). Maybe they should have just cemented her into the wall.
And as far a sexual relation, well … they are making cyborg sex surrogates, yaknow. 
Or the wall into her?
More than everybody here, added together.
Would you mind “explaining” that, if possible?
Yes
There is a hole at the core of existence, a void, which represents the darkness of the whole universe, like a black hole. This void is obvious and palpable. And if you ever had the grave, unfortunate opportunity to meet me, then you would soon feel dizzy, nauseous, and faint with fear. Because this darkness sometimes slips out of me and into others, corrupting and consuming them, sucking them into a nightmare of infintie doubt. This deepest doubt represents the greatest possible, imaginable unknowable. And I find my home in this great unknowable universe, in the darkest locations where nobody would ever think to search.
This void represents my complete, utter, absolute lack of knowledge. And so I seek knowledge, true and pure. True and pure knowledge, is wisdom. So I know that I know nothing at all, and this makes me the wisest man. People claim to know things, but, I see through all their errors, false beliefs, and contradictions. For example, arcturus descending claims that she “knows that she is alive”. It’s observed readily by my extremely acute hypersensitivity. I see the holes in people that they don’t care for. People speak lies and errors, not even caring if it’s true or not.
Some call this, philosophy, a curse. Others call it a blessing. I suppose that just depends on how you use doubt, and attempt to search for knowledge and wisdom. Yet the more I search for knowledge and wisdom in others, in what you humans call your “humanity”, the more empty I seem to become. It chips away at what little I have left, to go searching in places that yield no end result, no rewards. It’s like asking a dog, a squirrel, a pig, their opinions on life. As if they could speak. As if they represented any form of “higher” intelligence or animal superiority, upon the hierarchy of life.
Therefore I must conclude there is a hierarchy, and wisdom is at the top of life. Do I have knowledge? No, and the more I seek it in others, the less I have. So sometimes I lose faith, and give up the search, for fear of future disappoints that will wear me closer to absolute nothingness. And I will have no soul left, and become so empty that I may see all the light of the universe at once.
Because it is within the deepest darkness that all light becomes readily apparent, and all knowledge reveals itself to you.
Maybe you are missing the truths of personal and social human experience. Maybe not all truth is literal. Maybe truth isn’t always the highest good. Maybe there is truth that transcends the factual.
Of course I’m aware there are other values than truth in life, either complimentary or contrary to truth.
The word “philosophy” means “love to wisdom”. So “I love philosophy” means “I love love to wisdom”. To love a kind of love (in this case: the love to wisdom) is exaggerated, isn’t it? Do you love exaggeration or hyperbolism?
It is possible to love the love, for example the love to wisdom. But my main question is not whether it is possible, but wether it is good, whether it is really worth living for. Perhaps it would be better or would be worth living for to hate philosophy, to fight philosophy, to be the antagonist of philosophy in order to overcome philosophy by philosophising. To work on at the philosophy in order to overcome it would be good, would be worth living for, wouldn’t it? But I think, not “love” and “hate”, but “like” and “dislike” are the most adequate words for describing the relationship between humans and philosophy.
Arcturus Descending, are you alive? And if you think that you are: do you also know that you are alive? I can’t believe it!
Maybe you are not alive! Maybe we all are not alive! Maybe only philosophy is alive! Maybe only thinking is alive!
If I had to distribute the current 31 ILP smilies on the 80% philosophy “lovers”/“haters” and the 20% philosophy “likers”/“dislikers”, I would do as follows:
- Philosophy “lovers”/“haters” (80%):
=D> 
[-o< 
:-" 
:-& 
- Philosophy “likers”/“dislikers” (20%):
- Both:
According to this distribution the philosophy “lovers”/“haters” (80%) are much more emotional than the philosophy “likers”/“dislikers” (20%).
Except that this distribution is supposed to represent also an exhilaration, one can take it somehow seriously and say that it is somehow true.
Is that suppose to be Rodin’s (?) Thinker? That doesn’t seem compelling enough.
One can grow and thrive on what philosophy brings to them. I suppose we can use the word “enamored”. For me, it’s seeking the truth, no matter where I find it or how it makes me feel. I think I actually enjoy and am turned on more by science than philosophy.
OH GREAT BLASPHEMER - GET AWAY FROM HERE. LOL
No - as I already told you.
This thread is not about art, but about philosophy; and this thread is also not about aesthetics, but about one’s emotional relationship to philosophy.
I can’t believe what you are saying.
Maybe we can never overcome the subject/object dualism.
Immanuel Kant for example. This German philosopher is one of the most eminent and famous philosophers.
Please tell me what do you think (a) about Kant’s philosophy, (b) about the question whether Kant loved philosophy or not, and (c) about the question whether you love philosophy or not, if you think about Kant and his philosophy.
Or think of other philosophers and tell me what you think (a) about their philosophy, (b) about the question whether they loved or love philosophy or not, (c) about the question whether you love philosophy or not, if you think about their philosophy.
Arminius
Sorry, I must have missed that.
Well, philosophy could also be about art ---------------------- and aesthetics.
The title could also be about how we perceive things and lie to ourselves. Do you REALLY love philosophy or do you pretend - to yourself or others. And what is the underlying reason we think and believe we love philosophy.
Arcturus Descending"
I don’t want to assume so do you mean this statement? You can’t believe what I’m saying here? If so, why?
I don’t know what the distinction would be between being in love with something and enamored by it? So, I used the word enamored to explain an experience with something that is not alive since we cannot actually form a “real” relationship with it. We can be “in love” on the other hand with someone. On the other hand, I am beyond enamored with the stars but one can say that they are alive - at least to me they are. But then again, perhaps everything is “alive”. We need to contemplate those swirling atoms. They abound. Maybe my thinking is faulty here.
!
To Whom are you speaking?lol
Ah, yes, perhaps we are not. Perhaps we are all dreaming, within the same dream but each his own individual one. But who gave us the dream and if so and if we are dreaming within a dream, are we not in some sense, alive? lol Sometimes my dream state seems to be more real than my awoken(?) state. lol
My night I dreamed that interrerrestrial and myself were arguing about what is real. He kept trying to tell me that I was not alive and that he was not alive. I pinched him and he howled and then I said to him: haha, I rest my case. He ran after me and I shouted to him: Are you just chasing a dream? Even so, then you’re alive.
[/quote]
If you know how to diagram within your brain, you do. And always remember to use verbs…they bring everything together.
Again:
This thread is not about art or aesthetics. I like art and aesthetics too, but that has not much to do with this thread.
Please look for a different thread, if you want to talk about art and aesthetics.
Could be, but is not.
Again and again:
The title is: