Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Kerrigan · Nov 16, 2006, 11:55 PM

Do you think that people only fall in true love once, and that everything afterwards is just an imitation or inferior version of that original love?

Genuine love is so rare that it seems unlikely to me that one person could experience it several times in their life. Also it would seem to me that falling out of true love would be such a jading experience that one could never return to that high ideal.

What do you think?

Z4cane · Nov 16, 2006, 11:57 PM

But, how do you kn ow if it's love, or just a set of circumstances that seem like love?

Kerrigan · Nov 17, 2006, 12:00 AM

Wow, this devolved into semantics with startling speed.

♥ · Nov 17, 2006, 12:14 AM

I love love.

Railroader · Nov 17, 2006, 12:52 AM

Nope. I've loved three different women. But my wife has been/is my greatest love.

mac128k-1984 · Nov 17, 2006, 07:48 AM

I think you can fall in love more then once, preferably not when you are not already in a committed relationship

bstone · Nov 17, 2006, 08:16 AM

I fell in love once. I fell hard. She broke my heart and I promise you no relationship since then has been even close.

Zeeb · Nov 17, 2006, 08:35 AM

People can fall in love multiple times but you have to be open to it. Though I think some people in desperation will convince themselves they are in love with someone because they are tired of waiting and don't want to be alone. Bad move.

If there truly was only meant to be one person for you the chances of you meeting that person in the world would be far less than winning the mega millions jackpot or walking into a Best Buy and just picking a PS3 off the shelf during the Xmas season.

Doofy · Nov 17, 2006, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by Zeeb

If there truly was only meant to be one person for you the chances of you meeting that person in the world would be far less than winning the mega millions jackpot or walking into a Best Buy and just picking a PS3 off the shelf during the Xmas season.

Isn't that like only half-believing in fate/destiny? Surely if there was just one "fated" person for you then "fate" would also conspire to make you meet them?

Dakar² · Nov 17, 2006, 09:09 AM

If love exists, I think you can find it multiple times.

Tuoder · Nov 17, 2006, 09:51 AM

I hope I can love more than once. I have only done that once, romantically, at least.

wallinbl · Nov 17, 2006, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Zeeb

If there truly was only meant to be one person for you the chances of you meeting that person in the world would be far less than winning the mega millions jackpot or walking into a Best Buy and just picking a PS3 off the shelf during the Xmas season.

If there was one person you were "meant" to be with, then whatever was causing that "meaning" would also cause you to find that person.

Stradlater · Nov 17, 2006, 10:16 AM

The answer is, simply: "No."

When one falls in love, they fall in love with a complex set of characteristics that end up complementing one another through trust and intimacy. One doesn't fall in love with a specific configuration, but, rather, various (sometimes completely different) sets of characteristics can stir up the same base emotions while tickling a few unique ones here and there.

The simple matter: all love is the same, and all love is unique.

Zeeb · Nov 17, 2006, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Isn't that like only half-believing in fate/destiny? Surely if there was just one "fated" person for you then "fate" would also conspire to make you meet them?

Originally Posted by wallinbl

If there was one person you were "meant" to be with, then whatever was causing that "meaning" would also cause you to find that person.

I was just trying to cheer the guy up a little and then both of you have to go and ruin my attempt with logic.

I guess you are both correct however. I didn't realize my statement was a half-belief in fate but I suppose it is. I guess what I was trying to get across was that you can meet someone who is "meant" for you but that isn't a particular person. In other words, there is a "pool" of people that could be meant for you and you just have to wait to bump into one of them. I think there are things you can do to rush fate however.

Kerrigan · Nov 17, 2006, 11:00 AM

Well the reason I ask is because I was reading Kierkegaard's Repetition which he wrote after his marriage/engagement mysteriously collapsed.

As usual, I can't figure out exactly what his own opinion on the matter is, since he always disguises himself with multiple personae. But he seems to have concluded (through this and later texts) that one falls in love once, and one's approach to life thereafter depends on how this first love is dealt with. For instance, in the case of Kierkegaard, his love for her quickly evaporated, and he spent the rest of his life dwelling over, or longing for, his ex, even though he chose to leave her.

It is hard to imagine that he could have returned to the original ideal of love after he had experienced it, and then seen how empty or unfulfilled the actual love was.

turtle777 · Nov 17, 2006, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Well the reason I ask is because I was reading Kierkegaard's Repetition which he wrote after his marriage/engagement mysteriously collapsed.

As usual, I can't figure out exactly what his own opinion on the matter is, since he always disguises himself with multiple personae. But he seems to have concluded (through this and later texts) that one falls in love once, and one's approach to life thereafter depends on how this first love is dealt with. For instance, in the case of Kierkegaard, his love for her quickly evaporated, and he spent the rest of his life dwelling over, or longing for, his ex, even though he chose to leave her.

So, a typical case of projection.

What arguments does Kierkegaard have to make it a universally true statement ?

-t

Kerrigan · Nov 17, 2006, 12:20 PM

If you don't know what the proofs are (and we haven't even delved into what his conclusion is), how can you say it is projection?

Or is that just the obligatory "I don't agree with you, but I don't know why"-style post that you are so apt to make?

Philip J. Fry · Nov 17, 2006, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by bstone

I fell in love once. I fell hard. She broke my heart and I promise you no relationship since then has been even close.

I was going to start my feelings and then bam, I saw what you wrote, and I have to agree 100% on that since I've had the exact thing happen to me.

Tuoder · 12:49 PM

It seems to me that having a debate about whether or not one may fall in love more than once hinges intrinsically on one's definition of love. Love, being a feeling, is not clearly, concretely defined. I think that the only thing that we may actually agree about is the intensity of one's first love, and perhaps even how diminished all others may seem in contrast to it. Although, the amount of contrast will vary from person to person. This can make the definition of love, according to a specific person, a moving target.

hart · Nov 17, 2006, 12:43 PM

I respond while listening to my compilation of covers of "These Boots were Made for Walking", "50 Ways to Leave Your Lover" and "Hit the Road Jack" just so you know where my head is.

My opinion after 30 years of assorted relationships including 15 years of a marriage now on it's last legs is the following:

1-You're in love when you think you are. It may not be the all-time perfect 100 percent good for you love of all time but that doesn't mean it's not love.

2-Love can come and go. Experience and circumstances can bring you to love someone or to stop loving them. Just because love ends doesn't mean it wasn't love before

3-Love can happen more than once. Being in love is not about that one magical person fated for you, it's about feeling something for one particular person at a given time and circumstance. The person I loved at 16 is not the person I'll be loving at 48, although many people do grow through a lifetime of love with the same person. For my part, I finally feel, at my advanced age that I may be able to finally be healthy and clear-headed enough to love and be loved well. Which leads to point

4-being in love with someone doesn't mean that they'll be in love with you. Ideally you need to find someone who loves you in a way that is complementary to the way you love them.

Reading back through this it looks like I'm not a very constant lover which I think is misleading. I've always felt that it is necessary to commit totally to a love relationship and have generally been dumped in the end as a result. Good thing for me there's always been someone else out there eventually.

Finally, about this idea that you're always reliving your first love. I look on that from a different point of view. As I've gone through life I've learned lessons from my experiences, including my love relationships. How I am today cannot help but be changed by all that has come before. But far from being the one and only love, I feel the first one was more like a failed launch.

forkies · Nov 17, 2006, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by Philip J. Fry

I was going to start my feelings and then bam, I saw what you wrote, and I have to agree 100% on that since I've had the exact thing happen to me.

ditto to your ditto

turtle777 · Nov 17, 2006, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

If you don't know what the proofs are (and we haven't even delved into what his conclusion is), how can you say it is projection?

Or is that just the obligatory "I don't agree with you, but I don't know why"-style post that you are so apt to make?

My experience tells me that his thesis is not true.
Therefore, my presumption is that it was projection on Kierkegaard's side.

I'm open to good arguments to convince me that the "reading" of my experience is flawed.

-t

SirCastor · Nov 17, 2006, 02:36 PM

I've been in love twice. But I've been broken hearted 3 times.

After being heart broken the second time, I was sure I would never fall in love again.But I have, she's wonderful, and even more wonderful than the last.

There isn't any limit to the amount of people you can be in love with. I might also add, there's no such thing as "falling out of love" and "falling in love". There is definitely chemistry between two people, there are definitely people whom you will not get along with, but ultimately whether or not you commit yourself to that relationship and seek to love a person truely and deeply is a choice. The people who cite "we fell out of love" as a reason for divorce (or breakup) means that one or both gave up somewhere in there.

ghporter · Nov 17, 2006, 05:39 PM

I've fallen in love many, many times. Almost all of 'em have been falling in love with my wife (yes, over and over again). But I have fallen in love, really and for truly, with several women over the years, and yes it was really love. The best fit was falling in love with my wife-I don't see being able to fall in love with any of the others more than once...

hart · Nov 17, 2006, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by SirCastor

There isn't any limit to the amount of people you can be in love with. I might also add, there's no such thing as "falling out of love" and "falling in love". There is definitely chemistry between two people, there are definitely people whom you will not get along with, but ultimately whether or not you commit yourself to that relationship and seek to love a person truely and deeply is a choice. The people who cite "we fell out of love" as a reason for divorce (or breakup) means that one or both gave up somewhere in there.

I don't agree. In my experience, commitment by itself isn't enough to strong-arm love into being. Love can go away anyway. You can stay committed without love however. And probably love without being committed for that matter.

And as for the chemistry, one is a very different person at 20 than at 40. Chemistry can change.

ink · Nov 17, 2006, 07:17 PM

I fell in love with several women, and each seemed progressively stronger until I met/married my wife. We were engaged after dating only 4 months (when I was 26 years old).

Never say never, but -- my experience leans to the "you'll know it when you have it" notion. I don't know if it could happen again, but I suspect it could -- even if I have no interest in experimenting with that.

SirCastor · Nov 17, 2006, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by hart

I don't agree. In my experience, commitment by itself isn't enough to strong-arm love into being. Love can go away anyway. You can stay committed without love however. And probably love without being committed for that matter.

And as for the chemistry, one is a very different person at 20 than at 40. Chemistry can change.

You make love sound like a force that does what it wants when it wants. Love is an expression that human beings and other animals can make. I agree with your statement about comittment without love. I'm not sure about love without comittment. Love is a strong emotion It etches deep into the heart and it's not easy to erase those markings.

Regarding the idea of choosing to love, I've seen people become friends with people they hated. I know people that have made the effort to become friends with people that they don't get along with, or are afraid of. That's an expression of loving someone. Romantic love is a slightly different method of that.

I do believe that any two people could love each other. It will be easier for some and harder for others. Yes people change, people grow. In my experience it's the couples that make the effort are the ones that grow together, rather than apart. That effort is another expression of Love.

zerostar · Nov 17, 2006, 07:42 PM

Wear a rubber dude.

Helmling · Nov 17, 2006, 10:02 PM

Let's dance about architecture next.

Atomic Rooster · Nov 17, 2006, 11:01 PM

I fell in love once many times.

ironknee · Nov 18, 2006, 12:27 AM

a guy falls in love with someone that resembles their mother*

a woman falls in love with someone that resembles their father*

*good or bad

Atomic Rooster · Nov 18, 2006, 01:02 AM

Originally Posted by ironknee

a guy falls in love with someone that resembles their mother*

a woman falls in love with someone that resembles their father*

*good or bad

Oedipus complex by proxy.

ironknee · Nov 18, 2006, 01:12 AM

it's sick but true

JoshuaZ · Nov 19, 2006, 08:23 AM

Romantic love only lasts so long. Then you get over it.

Salty · Nov 19, 2006, 03:55 PM

I've recently decided to start calling falling in love falling in hope. That is until the feelings are returned. I really think love has to be a mutual thing.

dcolton · Nov 19, 2006, 10:20 PM

.....

amru · Nov 20, 2006, 01:06 AM

Originally Posted by forkies

ditto to your ditto

ditto^3

TheWOAT · Nov 20, 2006, 01:50 AM

Originally Posted by ironknee

a guy falls in love with someone that resembles their mother*

a woman falls in love with someone that resembles their father*

*good or bad

My first serious relationship was with a girl who was ALOT like my mother. The current woman I am with is nothing like my mother, and I am quite happy too; that is not a coincidence

Chuckit · Nov 20, 2006, 02:09 AM

I used to wonder about this. I don't think love is any specific feeling at all. It's not like being happy or sad or angry. It's a label that people apply to various combinations of emotions and deeper psychological factors. Whether you fall in love easily or reluctantly, repeatedly or only once, depends on what combination you're choosing to call "love." I think that's why some people believe it's possible to fall out of love and others think they just lack commitment — because they're not actually talking about the same experience at all.