Is love significant because it's painful or is it painful because it's significant? Saying love is only significant because of pain gives love a negative connotation while saying love and pain come toegther, which is significant, gives love a more romantic and idealized connotation. If love were only significant because of pain, wouldn't love be a total tragedy? Pain as a result of love can come in many forms, such as missing someone or simply feeling overwhelmed with love love love. It seems that pain is always present where love is present. But, in these cases pain comes from a love that is very abundant and seems to be just a side effect. It seems that the pain involved in unrequited love is different, since its accompanied by feelings of rejection. Unrequited love seems to be the most painful, since the pleasure of returned love is not pleasant. The pain in the other cases seems much more bearable, since while there is pain, there is also a feeling of comfort and excitement, and sometimes hope. These different types of pain come from different types of love. In both cases love is significant because of the radical emotions it evokes. One of these emotions is pain, so does that mean love is defined by the emotions it evokes? And since it evokes pain does that mean love is defined by pain?
Maybe the memory of love is significant because it has had an impact on who a person is, and remembering is painful. In this case, it would seem that the love itself was already significant and pain comes with thinking about it. The process of loving could have shaped one's life because of the lessons it taught or the maturity it brought, in which case it would be significant but not because of pain. In this case, love would be significant because of how it effected a person in terms of who he or she truly is, not because of pain. Many great things are associated with love, and why would we be so in love with love if all it was was pain? Love isn't significant because it's painful, but the pain of love can be significant in one's life, and this pain can certainly cause significant changes. Even so, though, pain isn't what shapes love.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Saying love is only significant because of pain gives love a negative connotation while saying love and pain come toegther, which is significant, gives love a more romantic and idealized connotation. "
ReplyDeleteI really like this point. I couldn't agree more. Some may have a more romantic view on love and thus don't see love as being significant solely because of the pain. However, others may see love as a burden and always hurting them in the end.
Very well said and a good argument.
You seem to argue that the significance of love can't be based on pain or else we wouldn't give in to love like we do.
ReplyDeleteI think you give us too much credit. People do stupid things. Even when the long term bad outweighs the short term pleasure, people will do things for the pleasure. An example: A man cheats on his wife with a younger woman. It hurts the wife, the kids, and his life's work, when she finds out.
I am willing to argue that it is possible that we fall in love because of that one speck of pleasure, or because of that beautiful illusion, when all the pain lies just around the corner.
You ask a lot of good questions here. There's one you ask but then seem to avoid answering:
ReplyDelete"If love were only significant because of pain, wouldn't love be a total tragedy?" I don't know about total, but, yes, isn't there a built-in tragic component to any loving relationship? Doesn't true devotion have a tragic undercurrent to it?