Does Love Even Exist?

Hi my name’s Beau, new to forum but have always thought about philosophical questions since I was a young teenager. I’m 20 now.

Perhaps my greatest question aside from what the point of existing even is would be does love exist? Seriously think about it. Because I have a hard time believing it does. I’m extremely cynical by nature so I analyze everything and when I look at people I always think of motive before anything else. Like all these people who get married and divorce within the first year how they claim they fall out of love, I don’t even think 90% of the world has a clue what love is. Most people have this magical perception of love being this thing that lasts forever. But when you look at it love really just falls into a few distinct catagories all of them are selfish. Love is convienent, love makes us feel good so we want it, love gives us social status, love usually increases our wealth, and basically when all of those things fails, when it no longer becomes convienent, when it makes us feel like crap instead of really good, when financial problems arise, well then the “love” has passed, time for a divorce.

It just seems like this is the basic principle that society as a whole follows. A divorce rate at 50% is absolutely pathetic. When I hear people say they are in love I just want to vomit up lunch. Sometimes I feel like saying something like oh would you be in love still if your signifigant other was just doused in gasoline and lit up like a tourch, I don’t think so.

So in the beginning so called “love” is mostly physical attraction with a nice emotional complacency to it, then in the next step of love we jump into less physical attration and more convienent and financially pleasing. Most divorce is caused by financial difficulties so it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if the way I see things is totally true.

So love the way most people see it isn’t love at all. The meaning of the word love is rarely if ever seen in any human. Alot of people will make a case of well dying for someone you love is the ultimate sacrifice, but hey couldn’t that be selfish too? What’s easier to do, die for someone you care about or live the rest of your life knowing that you could have saved them but chose not too. So you are being selfish by making them live with your death on their hands the rest of their life while you get to die instead of vice-versa. Yes I know extremely cynical but at this point in my life I cannot trust any girl I date, infact I rarely date, my last long term relationship was 3 years ago. I cannot find this so called love that people claim exists when I am with a girl all I see are the things behind it. Relationships are so fragile a mear sentence can rip them apart. It’s amazing to me how much emotion we put into things like that when it can be destroyed so easily. Could love really be destroyed that easily? I don’t think so, I think love does exist, but none of us can have this love. It’s a concept, like world peace, but it doesn’t actually exist in our everyday lives and it never will. We only blind ourselves into thinking it does so we can feel comfortable and remove our worries and fears. I think that is where hope fits into love as well, because with each relationship that fails we “hope” the next one will be the one where we find “true love” even though true love is just a concept. Hope is basically denial on the highest form, hope is made of the things we deny that we absolutely refuse to believe are not true such as love. So we spend our lives endlessly searching for this thing we call love using our hope to continue on everytime we fail to find it. In the end I see no point in any of it. I cannot find a reason for anything. I have absolutely no desire to live the rest of my life. Everything in this world just seems so fake, it disgusts me, does anyone else feel this way?

its as real as any other thought inside your head.

Hi Beau :slight_smile:

your post intrigued me, and I hope I can bring some optimism back to you view of love.

Firstly let me say there are different types of love. There is maternal love, romantic love and Platonic love, to name I’m sure but a few of all types of love.

Now you seem to be talking about romantic love, and a lot of your disallusion seems to arise from the instability of relationships and the divorce rate. Now I agree whole heartedly that the majority of relationships fail, but that is not to say that love fails or that love doesnt exist. Now I believe the reason for the failure of relationships has nothing at all to do with love, rather to do with external pressures and conflicts of emotion. Remember people are very complicated people often with conflicting desires and huge insecurities. And it is usually insecurities which causes a single word to end a relationship.

You also mention financial difficulties. The fact that financial difficulties end relationships does not show at all that that was the purpose of getting into the relationship. All it shows that as well as the desire and emotion of love, people have a desire and worries about material security, which can conflict with love.

So my first main point is that the failure of relationships cant be equated with the failure of love; the failure of relationships can be due to a lack of love, but also it can be due to other conflicting emotions and insecurities which damage love.

I think the existence of love is much clearer when it comes to Platonic love, love between friends. Friendship is a lot more stable than relationships, and the love is thus often more evident than in relationships.

To your final point about selfishness I can only be very brief, but ultimately I do not think love is selfish at all. I love people for their own sake, I do not love them for my own sake. I believe the good of one’s friends is constitutive of one’s own good, not instrumental to it. This is far from clear I know, but I am writing a paper roughly on this subject which I will post when finished.

I’m sorry if I didn’t get to the heart of your worries and scepticism, I wasn’t quite clear about all you points, I haven’t been able to write now for as long as I’d have liked. I’ll happy continue this debate if you’d like :slight_smile:

take care

I couldn’t resist. Some people I said this to found it funny. Love is a
business merger
. I totally and unabatedly agree with you when you
say that love is a social thing, no longer an emotional thing. Somehow,
over the years of my existance (which I must say haven’t been a lot), I
feel somehow that the human race is deterioating in quality and moral.
Redefining things so precious, and so sweet – such as love. Sure,
anybody could throw at you the dictionary definition of “love,” but what
is
love?

You say you like analyzing things, and I applaud you for starting
early. :wink:

I don’t really want to sound long-winded, and off-topic. It’s late here, but I love the issue you bring up. You see, I love my family a lot. My mother, my father, my sisters, ect. It’s never been conviniant for me. And it sure as hell hasn’t brought my any wealth. Heh, I’d probably make more money just leaving. I am a (admittedly, intermediate) programmer. I can make a living for myself. These people I live with get in my way, do stuff I don’t want them to, pick on me, blaah-blaah-blaah! But… I can’t nor will ever leave them. Why? I love them. I feel that I am indebted to my mother for bringing me into this world with great pains, and my father for putting food in my mouth. He never left, why should I??

I think that’s love for you. Complete faith and trust in another human being.

The reason I love my family, and not somebody else, is that I can never trust anybody else. I can’t. Period. There is nobody in this world, no woman nor man (nor cat) that I can love as much as I do my family.

And we need a word-wrap feature here. :slight_smile:

One part of your entire response really caught my eye. When you said “I think that’s love for you. Complete faith and trust in another human being”

I thought to myself, can anyone really have complete faith and trust in another human being? While your family is no doubt very dear to you, can you be sure that you can absolutely trust them no matter what? You can say that you indeed do, but none of us have the ability to completely trust anyone no matter who they are, that is just a law of existence. We do not have the ability to know what others are thinking and unless we ever do, we will never be able to trust someone completely. And we could take it one step further, we could say that trust changes, that a person who you could of at one point trusted you can no longer trust. So even if you are psychic and empathic and you can sense that you can trust someone there is no telling what the future will reveal. The only way you could completely trust anyone is to know the future which none of us do.

I mean if we want to go back to the most basic form of love, family love, how do you explain children who shoot their parents or parents who kill their children? Surely they trusted eachother up until the point where something major happened and someone ended up dead.

I really don’t think love exists not the definition as we all consider it. Time is what creates trust, if your parents had divorced and you saw your father for the first time when you were 20 would you trust him as much as you do now? Of course not. Time is what produced that trust, time and exposure to your family on a regular basis with nothing happening that threatened your security. When it comes down to it any love whether relationship or family is artificial and isn’t true love. To be capable of having true love for someone, would require you to have complete trust in them. And due to the nature of our ability to think and feel but not know what others are thinking about, we cannot ever truly trust anyone else ever. So even the love of a family member is not the definition of love society as a whole has come to accept. Love just isn’t real, it’s mearly a concept.

Added the following in an edit…

I really want someone to prove me wrong, I just don’t see love existing in any form at all, only various versions of us showing compassion to another person or caring for them but you can always break down compassion and caring into motives, love by the definition society puts on it doesn’t have motive. Isn’t it possible that the only beings capable of sharing love would have to be perfect? There isn’t a difference between love and perfect love, love is love and the way I see it the only way of having love is to be perfect.

What seriously is our point for even being here? We don’t even have an ultimate reason, take away love and we are left with nothing. Without love which we would have to be perfect to experience, what are we left with? We have some faux version of it that we as imperfect creatures give and receive to one another throughout our lives.

I have always been interested in Philosophy but as of late the things I have been thinking about have really disturbed me. I mean stuff like this topic, I cannot find a reason to exist. I have lost all ambition in this life to accomplish anything. It just doesn’t seem like it matters anymore. Is there really meaning to our existence? I read in another thread about the thought of no after-life and how the lack of one would render us all completely meaningless and mass global suicide would be the logical thing to do if it was discovered that there was indeed no after-life.

Is there really a single atheist in the world? I highly doubt it. If one was truely and atheist then suicide would be the only logical thing to do. After all life is meaningless, nothing matters, so these people who claim to not believe in ay after-life are either total liars or they are hypocrites. Does anyone else have trouble finding meaning in anything when they deeply discuss this broad subject? Thoughts like college is worthless, any kind of job is worthless, searching for a signifigant other is worthless, life itself just feels stale and without purpose to the point where you seriously consider just ending it all? It’s like you can’t even begin to discuss this with the majority of people, they just haven’t and probably never will reach this level of thought and most people think you are nuts for even bringing it up.

Hello, my names Andre I’m 18 and I’m very much like yourself because the same thoughts and Ideas are running through my mind. Also I’m new to these forums. So here goes.
I differ with you in that perhaps out of naive optimism or hope I still have some faith left in love though I do not think one can hope to find salvation or anything of the sort in it.

  "Socrates marvels at the eulogies of Love but wonders whether they are true. Instead of flattering love he prefers to say what love actually is. Questions of Agathon make clear that Love is the love of something and therefore lacks what it desires; so as it loves what is beautiful and goodness, it lacks beauty itself and also goodness. Then Socrates relates a conversation he had about this with Diotima, who showed him that Love is not bad and ugly either but something in between knowledge and ignorance. Love goes up to heaven in prayers and descends as answers and guidance. Diotima says that Need and Resource are the parents of Love; thus Love is always needing but is resourceful. The lover seeks to make the good his own, which results in happiness."

 "Diotima explains to Socrates that Love brings forth the beautiful in body and soul. Its wisdom is concerned with ordering society by justice and moderation, and it motivates one to undertake the education of one's favorite in living virtuously. Initiates in love must learn to move from the love of one person's beauty to love the beauty in every body and then move from the beauty of the body to that of the soul, the spiritual loveliness that never fades. Climbing this heavenly ladder will eventually lead to beautiful institutions to learning and finally to beauty itself."

  Alright I don't buy all of that myself so don't go critiquing it right away. But I posted it because it has some good insights. Love needs but is resourceful is what stands out to me most.

  This is not to awnser your questions on love for I myself am faced with the same questions. I think the matrix insight that love is merly a word implying a connection acounts for what love comes closest to being. It is a connection between people or perhaps if you believe in the soul, souls. 

 I'm only going to ask you this question is living and expriencing love or a very intimate connection with another human being not worth existing in this chaotic seemingly meaningless life? 

 When your a child, new born, you are full of trust and full of love. I'm talking a very young child but is it not so? As you grow older and more skeptical and your hurt because we know pain and hurt is a givin of life and inescapable from, just because of deaths existance, you build up a shield around yourself so you won't be hurt as much, so that you can survive in this crazy world. Trust is precisly what love is when your a kid you don't question this. To you your parents seem godlike and your filled with love for them. I'm talking of a child of 2-3 or so. You ask what love is how do you exprience love you exprience it by totally trusting the one you love, and if you can't if you refuse if you don't put yourself to total vulnerability then you can't really exprience what love has to show can you? Trust is essencial. Think about it, you can't even drive a car without trust in other people, total strangers I might add. You trust they will obey the laws and drive on their side of the road. Now do they all keep to their side? No. People die right? But I bet you still drive a car and without that trust driving would be impossible and so would love.

next thought:

    I just finshed reading Krishnamurti and he showed me how love is selfish how we are all really alone and don't wish to admit this void in ourselves. He says:
  "You say you love your wife. In that love is involved sexual pleasure, the pleasure of having someone in the house to look after your childeren, to cook. You depend on her; she has given you her body her emotions. her encouragment, a certain feeling of security and well-being. Then she turns away from you; she gets bored or goes off with someone else, and your whole emotional balance is destroyed, and this disturbance, which you don't like, is called jealousy. There is pain in it, anxiety, hate and violence. So what you are really saying is, 'As long as you belong to me I love you but the moment you don't I begin to hate you. As long as I can rely on you to satisfy my demands, sexual and otherwise, I love you, but the moment you don't I begin to hate you.' So there is antagonism between you, there is separation, and when you feel seperate from another there is no love. But if you can live with your wife without thought creating all these contradictory states, these endless quarrels in yourself, then perhaps--perhaps--you will know what love is."

Is this basicly not what you are saying also?

  But, don't you owe yourself the chance to go through life in search of someone who you can trust, who you can love. Why do people even open themselves up to love when one knows in the end your love will die which will be the greatest pain to you. Why do people love when they know from the onset it will produce great sorrow for themselves as Krishnamurti points out since love is so selfish. It is the self that will cry when your lover dies at your loss not for the other person but in you losing someone you depended on. So why love? Why do human being put themselves through the agony and pains of love? 

 Well this isn't good I started out with optimism and what seemed like good Ideas but I have lead myself I see to not only not awnsering you but posing myself with why love? When one thinks about it love is sort of like a drug an escape from this world but a very ephermal one. Yes, ok now I want someone to come along and set me in the right direction  :confused: Why do we love?

Heh, well Krishnamurti said it best a guess. He answered the question and now we are both floating in the same boat. Anyone care to come along and refute Krishnamurti? If not I guess we have our answer that the definition of love as we know it is untrue.

There seem to be many questions that have spawned from the unanswered first one. Does love exist? From which we got, is love selfish or not selfish? Which led to, is love temporary or permanent? and so on. A few posts were headed on the right track by trying to understand, first, what exactly we were questioning the existance of, and so a few tried to define it. As Cicero once said: “I will…at once begin my discussion, following the rule which, I think, ought always to be observed in the exposition of a subject if one wishes to avoid confusion; that is, that if the name of a subject is agreed upon, the meaning of this name should first be explained. Not until this meaning is agreed upon should the actual discussion be begun; for the qualities of the thing to be discussed can never be understood unless one understands first exactly what the thing itself is.” The only issue is that there doesn’t seem to be a concensus between the posters on the definition of love. One definition I like, though I don’t necessarily believe it is the best one can be found on dictionary.com and it goes as follows: “A deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.”

Within me there is a sense in which I believe in true love though I have never experienced it. I simply believe in it. By true love I mean two people who don’t need anyone else (sorry Krishnamurti) but welcome the other in anyway. Two people who feel like they are at their best on their own, but somehow the other person raises their self-esteem even higher. Two people that have an unmistakable and yet unexplainable understanding between them that goes beyond words. Two people that don’t worry or doubt the other, instead they have undying trust and loyalty toward each other. I believe true love to be ever-lasting.

So to answer the question, yes I believe love does exist. I believe that it is not selfish and that it is permanent. I am also quite aware of how occult my exposition on love sounds, and rationality sort of takes a detour within my post -but I hope to atleast get through to one or two people with my explanation.

What’s your take?

For starters: read 1 Corinthians, chaper 13 in the New Testament of the Bible.

I’ve heard of three types of love, all of which are derived from Greek. First, there is phileo, or brotherly love, from which we derive words such as philanthropy and Philadelphia (city of brotherly love). Then there is eros, or the love shared between a husband and wife, from which we derive the word erotic. And thirdly, there is agape, or indefatiguable love, such as the love a theistic, particularly Christian, God would have for mankind.

love when it exists is whole unto itself…like wisdom it is a whole ingredient…it can not be added to for it is complete and flows from its wholeness…the only way to deminish it is to add the shadow of doubt…

raven

Ok guys, this is my first post here, EVER. Please welcome me :slight_smile: jk.

I might be a little too into the social sciences to be talking here, but the main reason for divorce is not financial problems. Women are torn between the demands of the relic of tradition (because biologically, the mother is responsible for bearing a child), yet are tempted and driven towards the individualization that modernity brings. With this, women have gotten equal educational opportunities, and have today more than ever, a serious ambition for career. Men, on the other hand, have to be stripped away from what was “given” to them through history, and have to change their ways if they were to welcome a modern woman. These conflicts within the “private spheres” are strengthened by the games the social institutions play on us, the media, and discourses of the all mighty, and so on.

Love was the answer as a remedy to these conflicts. Women (and men) were promised love as a solution, but what I must stress is that is not LOVE, but the fear of loneliness, that is the strongest foundation of a marriage.

What is love then, you ask? First off, let me just say that I too am young. I’m 21. I believe I have been a “victim” of love, but today, I question it’s existence too.

What love really is,so they say… is a passion or strong attraction for something or someone, and this thing that is honored for your love, provides what is missing for you. However, I believe that loving someone is loving yourself around that person. By finding a “love”, you are faced with the confirmation of who you are. Your significant other confirms who you are deep down, they acknowledge it, and value it, and when you can be yourself AND get rewarded for it, you feel great, and it is this other person who granted you such a feeling (feeling great), so you feel that you love that person. So, love becomes a feeling, but STILL an illusion.

I forgot who said this, but I too love my family very dearly but then again, I don’t really have a choice. They’ve given me no reason to leave, nor to hate them.

But… I also love animals. And I can love them freely, unconditionally, and without ever expecting same treatment in return. Why? Because I can’t be dependent on an animal. It’ll never turn it’s back on me. It won’t stab me in the back or lie to me.

Those are my 2 cents :slight_smile:

fading soul
i feel sorry for you
you are shallow
love is generosity of the soul
its about what you give to others not about what they are supposed to give to you
as long as your perspective is shallow you will never find true love
besides you cant search for love
you will always be disappointed when it does not arrive
it will however find you if you drop your bullshit pretences and just start enjoying your life
forget about finding your true love and just try to meet good people
stop beating yourself up things could always be worse
love and respect
kasey

p.s. its wonderful to know that you desire love so dearly, that tells me that you do believe

Well that was quite optimistic (and harsh, and ALMOST made me puke) of you but I think I’d fall in (and out and back in and out) of love if I was naive. I can do without the love between lovers, although I can love, and I do, other things and beings, but this kind of love is not volatile, because these things and beings I love will never hurt me, and will never leave me. They’re what I call pure. In this day and age, love dies way too fast, passion is put into them and are raped right back out.

I wanted to tell you, Beau, that the “True Love” you are talking about is something that is possible for us to experience in this life. There actually are couples out there who are currently experiencing “relationship ecstasy” but they are few in number. What you are ultimately asking is why True Love is so rare. What is it about Human Nature that causes couples—who once saw each other as the best friends—to become bitter enemies?

In most cases, the cause can be traced to the collection of “values” that people typically embrace when they are in social environments. What they value is any effort that might succeed in persuading others that they are not vulnerable to the disapproval of others. When the attention of others is successfully distracted away from this vulnerability, they enjoy a “comfort zone” of sorts, where they do not feel immediately threatened by “uncomfortable” topics. Unfortunately, when everybody does the same thing, we end up with a crazy social environment where everyone is trying to hide the truth of their emotional vulnerability from each other, people are constantly hurting each other in order to protect themselves from attack, and most people have become convinced that it is possible for some people to be invulnerable to emotional pain. It is the source of most of the emotional pain that people experience in their lifetimes.

What makes a human being emotionally vulnerable is the fundamental need for approval that all of us are born with. It is an extremely demanding need that punishes us with emotional pain whenever we perceive any hint that another human being might disapprove of us. Recognizing this, the brain runs a fear program that attempts to protect us from the re-occurrence of emotional pain. It urges us to do whatever we can to hide the vulnerability it perceives. The first line of defense is simple denial; we try to convince others that no vulnerability exists, that we really don’t have a need for approval that gives others the power to hurt us so easily. If someone criticizes you, show a smile instead of fear. People are quite happy to discuss almost any topic, as long as the topic isn’t their own emotional vulnerability. We especially enjoy talking about other people’s imperfections because attention is then distracted away from our own.

When men and women enter into intimate relationships, the comfort zone they once enjoyed in their social encounters begins to quickly melt away. As less of their attention is focused on “others” and more is focused on each other, it becomes more and more difficult for them to hide their imperfections from each other. Unkind commentary is certainly not appreciated, but criticism doesn’t even have to be verbally expressed in order for it to hurt us. A woman could be completely innocent of even thinking some critical judgment of her husband, but if he fears she might be thinking it, he may very well launch a counterattack to defend himself from the criticism he expects, thus sparking a cycle of retaliation.

Intimate relationships are a special challenge for most people because the truth about human emotional needs becomes laid bare. They instinctively employ the strategies they learned in the social environment to protect themselves from emotional pain (denial, counterattacks, pre-emptive strikes, massive retaliation, and the use of humor). As they begin to defend themselves from the criticism they fear by “criticizing back”, pain is inflicted and that pain triggers the anger instinct. Expressions of anger are poison to love relationships; nothing causes us more emotional pain than when we’ve been the target of another human being’s anger. If couples rely on their anger instincts to defend themselves, their intimate relationships are guaranteed to fail, as they will soon become bitter enemies. The bottom line is that the strategies that people employ in social environments to protect themselves from emotional pain do not work in intimate relationships. They destroy them, instead.

How is it that certain couples are able to experience a True Love that lasts in spite of this background dynamic? The only reason they are able to succeed is because they have rejected the values of the social environment and have embraced the values of Intimacy, instead. In a thriving intimate relationship, vulnerability is not a bad thing; it is a good thing. Each is aware of the emotional vulnerability of the other and each is happy to protect the other’s vulnerability. They realize that they can be safe in each other’s company. They are able to walk away from the greater social world because each of them recognizes that the other is the primary source of need-satisfaction in their lives. Indeed, it is only within intimate relationships that human beings are able to achieve an ideal satisfaction of a collection of very important physical and emotional needs (sexual, emotional, security, etc.). That is why people fall in love and get married.

So True Love is desirable, but the only way it is possible for human beings to experience its ultimate blessings if they are willing to make themselves utterly dependent—emotionally—on their intimate partners. That is a prospect that even people who are married fear greatly. In the social world, people typically believe that the less dependent they are on others, the better off they will be. They are afraid of intimacy because they fear rejection (disapproval). In order to experience True Love, you need to be able to make yourself open to the supreme pain of rejection. If you hold back, if you can’t help but “protect” yourself from ultimate disappointment, you will not be able to experience the supreme satisfaction that intimacy provides (because you will know that you don’t “deserve” it). Because most people are not able to expose themselves to the pain of rejection, they are not able to experience a happy marriage that lasts. When both parties hold back, the marriage is pretty much guaranteed to fail as one or the other will eventually decide to protect himerself from rejection by rejecting the other first.

That is why True Love is so rare, Beau. It takes a certain kind of wisdom to be able to stand up to the anti-intimacy values that are constantly celebrated in the social environment. It is not enough if only one of the parties is committed to the ideals of Emotional Honesty; both the man and the woman need to be willing to embrace them. Given the predominance of anti-intimacy values in our culture, it is an “aberration” when two people who fully embrace the values of Emotional Honesty are able to find each other. It doesn’t have to be this way. The odds of finding someone who wants to experience True Love and knows what it takes to experience it would be greatly enhanced if our culture could be persuaded to embrace the values of intimacy. That is why I have created the website http://www.wearesaved.org. We can either hope for an aberration to occur, or we can try to find some way to persuade “society” to embrace the values that work in intimate relationships. If we can succeed in the latter, there will be lots and lots of members of the opposite sex around who will want to share the True Love experience with another.

There is really no good reason why we need to perpetuate the Myth of Emotional Invulnerability any longer.

Gabriel
http://www.wearesaved.org

Would you love me if I was doused in gasoline and lit up like a torch? :cry:

I would love you no matter what.

Hi everyone,

someone said to me a few years ago, " Love is natures way of tricking us into reproducing" i don’t know where she heard that from, but i pretty much believe it!! :laughing:

Victoria

I believe that love does truly exist. Love is an over-used phrase and as a result it perceived to not exist. People will throw the phrase around and say they have found true love when they do not know a thing about how relationships work. Sometimes, People will say they are in love when they are purely sexually attracted to them and others will love another just because of money or even pity. True love is found in the people who have been married for 40 years and still say that they are in love, or in the couple that keep saying things will be fine when they have 4 kids and are breaching on the poverty line. True love does exist it is just hard to come by and even harder to recognize.

Love does not equate with longevity. You can truly love the ephemeral.
Love can exist in a two-week marriage, or a two-hour friendship.

Im cynical by nature too, but we must not make sweeping statements.

Define love.

I think love is the intense appreciation of a thing, usually accompanied by curiosity and desire.

THe feeling people associate with love is NOT love.

But “love” and the capacity for “love” exists.

If your having problems with forming romantic relationships, than this is not proof of lovelessness.

And btw, EVERYONE has had, or will have problems with relationships. Its a human condition.

Ive found that no matter how intelligent, willful, conscious, imaginative, or genuine you are, you will still experience problems with relationships.

“Hi my name’s Beau, new to forum but have always thought about philosophical questions since I was a young teenager. I’m 20 now.”

Just as a matter of interest, the statement which opens this thread could be regarded simultaneously as both self-contradicting and tautological!

How so? Well, according to Pythagoras, a man’s life is divided into four quarters, twenty years a boy, twenty years a youth, twenty years a young man, and twenty years an old man.

So, this guy, Beau, is a boy and has been asking questions since he was a boy!!