Enas:
I strongly agree with a chunk of what you're saying here. I think that it whould be very unhealthy to have an absolute devotion to any one person. However we're not talking about the same thing i belive. Your point of view feels especially individualized. I'm not in that page. I think that love *could* be the driving force of humanity (people think that "it doesn't work" And for me, love is not only between two individuals, altho what you feel there IS love! But love is also what pushes us to do good things and most importantly, take care of other people.

What i disagree strongly with is self-love. In my judgement it's apsolutely toxic and it's a product of what i tried to explain in my previous reply. I won't follow it one bit, however that doesn't mean that everything is fine, quite the opposite. If everything was fine there whould be no space for self-love to be useful for.

We live in a dystopia. The worst one we've ever come up with.

PolyPinoyPuppy:
I'll admit to an individualist bias. I was raised in the US and many of my greatest role models, philosophical exposures, and pup culture obsessions espouse individualist themes.

Still, I think I understand what kind of society you idealize. One where charity to strangers is common and born out of love for fellow humans, and is given without consideration of compensation. I truly hope such a world can come about in our lifetimes; I simply think that the path to it requires a bit of self-love.

Humans are a social species, yes, but those instincts are born of an extended sense of self-preservation. We value others' lives and company because they enrich and enable us to thrive ourselves.

When we exercise self-love, I believe we exercise empathy. By valuing ourselves, we provide a reference for how we should value others. By appreciating and seeking joy for our own sake, we know the joy of receiving kindness and charity from others. This awareness can provide the fulfillment needed to sustain a culture of compassion and charity. In a world where no one wanted anything for themselves, there would be no point to giving gifts to others, of showing compassion to others, of providing company to others. A sacrifice only has value if that which is given up has value.

Though I am no longer religious, I was raised Catholic, and one aspect of it has resonated with me through my entire life: "Love others as you love yourself." It is an admission to our inherent needs and desires as individual organisms while simultaneously being a reminder of the existence of those needs and desires in others. A call to compassion born of self-love.

The dystopia comes when people forget to consider the inner lives of others, their innermost passions and fears, their wants and needs. Or it comes from demanding more from others than they can give, to act not out of self-love, but out of selfishness.

I think there is a difference between self-love and selfishness. Self-love affords us the same charities we should direct to others. Selfishness callously deprives others of those charities. Self-love is a candle; it illuminates itself the most brightly, but still extends that light and warmth to its surroundings, and can provide a spark for other candles. Selfishness is a fire burning out of control, consuming everything around it until it chokes or starves from its own greed.

It is not selfishness to deprive a tiger of its meal by fleeing from it. Nor is it selfishness to prevent other human beings from harming or exploiting us simply because it would benefit them. Nor is it selfishness to admit when we are at our limits. There is nuance to the world, and our priorities, necessitated by the scarcity of time and resources, which means we cannot only ever give. At the very least, sacrificing ourselves to too great a degree will leave us too spent to provide for future obligations, too depleted for further compassion. A father could not give away all his possessions and belongings to a stranger without potentially depriving his own children.

There is no utopia in absolutism, except perhaps for absolute plentitude. Seeing as we do not live in such a Paradise, we must exercise moderation. Self-love is important. As is compassion. As is acting on our priorities. As is love for all people. These must be balanced. And no one can dictate that balance for others. Only for themselves.

Munchies:
Oh, Enas. All these words, and I'm not convinced you truly understand what you're saying.

Enas:
The definition of love is one of my favorite topics so allow me to jump on that boat as well.

Just a warning, I've never been into a serious relationship so far. I also understand that my view might seem to be very extreme in this neoliberal (for the most part i assume) enviroment.

What is love? The answer is that it's a feeling we've developed as a *social* pieces (thats important because not all animals... love the same) because it helped us survive. It's in our *human nature*! It's also important to note that this is not catholic, it's not apsolute.

Okay but how do i Vew it? Well, i think it's a human need. For example, and I'll use myself, I can't function properly without being loved. I really need someone to care for me and give me some attention. But it's not something i only wanna receive, but something i also feel the need, like i have a duty, to give back. And not in just one person. I have a very bad time lately, because i cant bring myself to enjoy anything that is not helping other people. I need, i really need to make people's lives better and in fact im disgusted by how, in our college, the way they teach us that subject is disconnected from making something for other *human beings* but exclusively something to provide us with profits!

And love should not be seen like something that people get because they deserve it, but because they need it. And for that, im trying to do my best at, attempting at least, to feel love about *everyone*. Im failing miserably now, but i think it's the way forward.
Btw i hope i wrote my points well and please... Pleeease criticize it if you have the time. I litteraly beg you, unironicaly, to comment on it!

PolyPinoyPuppy:
Talk of duty reminds me of hard lessons.

I used to have an unhealthily self-sacrificing attitude toward even casual acquaintances. It took a long time to realize that I couldn't please everyone, and it wasn't my responsibility to read minds or predict people's desires.

I adore helping people still. I love giving gifts, and part of my attraction to being a feeder comes from the desire to spoil and nurture someone's growth and happiness.

And perhaps almost everyone needs love, or even deserves it--but it took me too long to realize that it was okay for me to not be the one to provide that love, or helpfulness, or even kindness.

I am human. I make mistakes. I am limited. To say otherwise is deluded or arrogant. And so I accept that some people's needs and desires are beyond my capability to provide--and it might always be so despite the possibility for growth on my part. I may try--if I feel I will find joy in the effort--but I will not see it as a failing if I cannot reach those heights.

To recognize these limitations and to accept them is part of a very important kind of love: self-love. To then set those expectations and boundaries based on what you can provide is a furthering of self-love as well as a means of showing compassion and openness to others. To do so requires vulnerability, and its reward is a greater understanding on everyone's part of what is realistically possible in a given situation. An empty promise of absolute devotion is only worth as much as wind. Better to make promises you can keep to those who will truly appreciate what humble gifts you can give.

Enas:
The definition of love is one of my favorite topics so allow me to jump on that boat as well.

Just a warning, I've never been into a serious relationship so far. I also understand that my view might seem to be very extreme in this neoliberal (for the most part i assume) enviroment.

What is love? The answer is that it's a feeling we've developed as a *social* pieces (thats important because not all animals... love the same) because it helped us survive. It's in our *human nature*! It's also important to note that this is not catholic, it's not apsolute.

Okay but how do i Vew it? Well, i think it's a human need. For example, and I'll use myself, I can't function properly without being loved. I really need someone to care for me and give me some attention. But it's not something i only wanna receive, but something i also feel the need, like i have a duty, to give back. And not in just one person. I have a very bad time lately, because i cant bring myself to enjoy anything that is not helping other people. I need, i really need to make people's lives better and in fact im disgusted by how, in our college, the way they teach us that subject is disconnected from making something for other *human beings* but exclusively something to provide us with profits!

And love should not be seen like something that people get because they deserve it, but because they need it. And for that, im trying to do my best at, attempting at least, to feel love about *everyone*. Im failing miserably now, but i think it's the way forward.
Btw i hope i wrote my points well and please... Pleeease criticize it if you have the time. I litteraly beg you, unironicaly, to comment on it!

Munchies:
Neoliberalism and love have nothing to do with each other. Neoliberalism is a political approach that favors free-market capitalism, deregulation, and reduction in government spending. For example, crypto.

Enas:
The definition of love is one of my favorite topics so allow me to jump on that boat as well.

Just a warning, I've never been into a serious relationship so far. I also understand that my view might seem to be very extreme in this neoliberal (for the most part i assume) enviroment.

What is love? The answer is that it's a feeling we've developed as a *social* pieces (thats important because not all animals... love the same) because it helped us survive. It's in our *human nature*! It's also important to note that this is not catholic, it's not apsolute.

Okay but how do i Vew it? Well, i think it's a human need. For example, and I'll use myself, I can't function properly without being loved. I really need someone to care for me and give me some attention. But it's not something i only wanna receive, but something i also feel the need, like i have a duty, to give back. And not in just one person. I have a very bad time lately, because i cant bring myself to enjoy anything that is not helping other people. I need, i really need to make people's lives better and in fact im disgusted by how, in our college, the way they teach us that subject is disconnected from making something for other *human beings* but exclusively something to provide us with profits!

And love should not be seen like something that people get because they deserve it, but because they need it. And for that, im trying to do my best at, attempting at least, to feel love about *everyone*. Im failing miserably now, but i think it's the way forward.
Btw i hope i wrote my points well and please... Pleeease criticize it if you have the time. I litteraly beg you, unironicaly, to comment on it!

RobbyP:
One only tells themselves that something is a duty when they fear the possible consequences of not doing it, but won't admit or haven't seen that. Better to be honest with oneself and to trade fear for reason and perception. Our capabilities are limited, so there's no shame in being incorrect. Our minds are our tools, not our commanders. As social beings, it's healthy for us to talk to unabusive people in person at least once a week.

Wrestlemania13:
Bold strategy.