Love at first touch?

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

Is it real, or is it a myth? Can true love only come after getting to know someone? Can we grow to love someone who at first our feelings for were quite unremarkable?

On the two occasions in my life when I have fallen madly, insanely in love, it happened instantly. I even managed to astonish myself, and that’s not easy. One day everything was normal, and the next day my world had been turned upside down. Not all in a good way either, in fact, it was quite painful. Though despite this, I wouldn’t have wanted to change it, because the pure intensity was liberating. It wasn’t even necessarily much to do with the other person, either, who, on both occasions, turned out to be less than deserving of me. But despite the heartbreak, I wouldn’t have missed the experience for anything.

Is it real, then, in the sense that it can last? I’m sure, or perhaps, more accurately, I sincerely hope, that such a thing is possible in this world. Or is it all a bunch of mindless chemicals?

2

What’s the alternative to ‘mindless chemicals’? What would it mean to be ‘real’? Is there some hypothetical (not even actually possible necessarily, just hypothetical) test you could perform to distinguish between a world where love was ‘real’ and one where love was just ‘mindless chemicals’?

I’m asking this completely sincerely. I want to understand what the difference is, or rather what you think the difference is.

3

I don’t know if there’s a difference. However, we are not just automatons, and we do have consciousness. So, chemicals perhaps, but not necessarily mindless.

4

Sounds all too personally familiar.

But don’t confuse an eternal bond with the desire and willingness to bond eternally. The recognition of the hope of the bond to the point of action is the actual Love. There are seriously deep philosophical reasons for that, that I won’t go into. The object of such devotion is a speculation based on the tenuous antics of communication and presumption, often blinded by the prospect of something recognized as so very hopeful.

Touch is one of the communication methods between people. It, like sight, reveals subtle nuances not noted by the conscious mind. It is deep within the subconscious, the “heart”, that such associations are noted and from there inspiration arises to pursue further; “falling in love”.

Can a mere touch or sight reveal an actual truth? Can a statement be actually true? It might be. It might not. The cognitive mind is so very poor at assessing what is or isn’t actually valuable, any questioning of such intuitive and instinctive urges tends to be very dubious, and as much so as the prospect of such an instant communication of truth.

Can it happen? Of course.
Does it happen often, not bloody likely.

What causes it to happen more often is the acceptance of it in devotion which means dropping the other presumed “more important priorities” and accepting the bond as The Priority. But doing that in this age of deceit, obfuscation, and manipulation would be a serious challenge for the best of the best. The term, “snowball’s chance in Hell” comes to mind and is quite a good analogy.

The key is recognizing that the other person is recognizing the value of such a bond as well. Without that one element, there is little hope of enduring the storm of the times.

Desire is not the bond. The bond is the isolation and proper defenses against other desires. It is from that instinctive sense, that feelings like jealousy arise, even though they are largely a part of the problem. Proper eternal defense is a complex scheme very few men ever comprehend.

Thus the love between two people requires the allegiance of those surrounding them such as to properly isolate and defend what the two people could not have perceived nor defended against. The touch is only a beginning. To what end, is up to other “touches” from and upon other people and their issues.

{{chemicals are irrelevant except as possible avenues for interference and corruption of an otherwise healthy mind and body}}

5

It’s certainly true that you can know more about a person from a single touch of the hand that from hours of talk, but equally true that it’s very often impossible to put this into words. If it’s going to happen, that’s when it happens.

6

That’s kinda what I was thinking as well. The chemicals are mindless, but the love isn’t.

7

But then again, for some of us, a mere sound, a word, perhaps a sentence spoken at the exact right time and tone is all it takes. Instincts are wonderfully perceptive, merely insufficient in such a complex noisy world.

8

Yes, that’s true too.

9

I’ve fallen in love before.

Sometimes the sight of a particular woman just jumps out at a man, screaming a hidden message with some secret attraction. It’s not a simple lust, but something more kindred and deep, like a reunion of two lost souls. You see her, and you know. You know that somewhere in time, maybe 100 or 200 years ago, your genes had crossed before. You’ve been madly in love with her, in some forgotten previous lifetime. But the memory of love is in your genes. You’ve known each other, been best friends, even lived and died for each other, once before.

It’s in the smell and scent. You can taste the familiarity in her kiss. You smell it on her, even underneath the perfumes and deodorants. Again it’s those genes talking to each other, whispering hidden messages beneath the skin. What does it say? It says, “We’ve mated a dozen times in a dozen different ages before this one.” And we want to do it again, and again, to keep finding each other. Sometimes it takes a few hundred years, but the “soul mates” will always find each other. Some memories do last forever. Your genes know more than you ever know. You see, that is where the true memories are buried in every individual person, not in the brain, but in the genes.

Your dreams, your deepest wants, your deepest fears, are all hidden away, tucked inside the genes. Consciousness is only a result of unlocking these genetic memories, an ending, a conclusion. Life is mostly unconscious. And what do people “know” about love, except genetically?

But alas, sometimes love is blind. And sometimes she never sees you, or notices, or cares. Sometimes a man and woman are two ships passing in the night, never to become realized, never meant to be. Again it’s the genetic difference. Some are not intended to mate, to trust each other. Genes sense familiarity deeper than consciousness. Trust is genetic. Even specie is more than just skin deep.

Love is just a reunion of lost memories between lost lovers. And when two lost soulmates find each other, they rekindle something that’s been enduring for thousands of years before. Two pairs of genes, who have crossed a dozen times across a dozen ages, and every time remembering each other again, seeming as though the first time. However, it is not the first time.

10

Is this why you choose to see magic in nature?

11

Can you define “true love” as you’re using it?

12

Magic is in nature, it’s not a choice.

13

Not easily, in words. But I think those that have experienced it, know it.

14

“Magic” is the mysterious and unseen causal link.
In all life, there is always the unseen, whether impressively magical or merely ignored until it shows its effect.
Science does not deny magic. It merely explains what isn’t being seen (to a tenable degree of accuracy).

15

I would turn that on its head. As a passionate believer in “magic” (i.e. the primacy of emotion and feeling in all things that have meaning), I nevertheless accept science as a very useful tool and product of human intellect.

16

That is how you define “magic”???
…o well.

17

It’s probably more than that.

18

And that’s what’s at the heart of it.

You’ve got it, Maia :wink:

It is chemicals in the brain, but take out the word “mindless”.

Something exciting has to happen in the moment of “love at first sight”–that’s what makes it exciting and memorable. Love which grows slowly over a long period of time isn’t as eventful or exciting, but it does give the opportunity to reflect and assess. Sometimes, one comes to realize that, as long and boring as it may have been, the journey in its entirety really was amazing.

19

Is the question…

  1. can one have feelings of powerful deep love immediately upon meeting someone?
    or
  2. when one has such feelings are they ‘accurate’ or are they simply triggered by the person?

IOW is there fantasy, projection, wild hope adding ‘knowledge’ to the intuition involved in this love at first sensing that really isn’t knowledge? Are we falling in love with what we hope and perhaps reacting to someone who only is a little bit like our sudden imagination, rather than perception, is creating?

Even longer term, slow building romantic feelings can turn out to seem quite clearly to have been projections and hopes making a relationship and or a person seem like what it or they were not.

So it seems like love at first sight - if we are speaking generally - is at least as susceptible as those longer build ups to feeling what isn’t there as far as the other person goes.

20

Maia

Perhaps you’re romanticizing a bit here. A touch can be just as deceiving as one’s words can be.
Perhaps what we “know” by someone’s touch is what we need to feel but not what actually is.
And I think that we can know more about a person - and also about our self - by hours of talking; that is, if we pay attention.
Perhaps the only reason it’s difficult or sometimes impossible to put into words is because we do not want to be made vulnerable to our selves or because it seems to be so mystical.

But that isn’t really love, if that’s what you’re talking about. It is brain chemicals, it might be lust, desire, all really good things but it isn’t love. You fall into love but you grow into Love.
[l]ove is a feeling but [L]ove is a process.