Loving the Person versus Loving the Feeling | INFJ Forum

Loving the Person versus Loving the Feeling

InvisibleJim

InvisibleJim

Banned
Dec 13, 2010
1,757
566
0
MBTI
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
One of the most important lessons I've learnt in life is not to love the feelings that people give me but to love the person for their essence and who they are.

I think it is unreasonable for people to expect exclusively for the feelings to always be 'good' but if someone is really that important you should grab them and then remove the other obstacles.

This post was brought to you courtesy of a few 'Help bf/gf' threads I've been reading. This isn't intended to lecture others on their relationships, but to generate discussion on the topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roxtehproxy and Gaze
Love is not a feeling. It has absolutely nothing to do with feeling good. It's more about loyalty, devotion, trust, forgiveness and doing what's right, imho. Most of all it's about forgiveness because humans are fallible but few seem to accept that.


"Being in love" however is a feeling and can occur completely in the absence of love.


It comes down to this for me. Love is a principle and not one I've ever been willing to commit to outside of family because I expect it would be my life's most challenging work. I really don't understand people who run around loving everyone.
 
Last edited:
I think it's tricky defining love for everyone. Each person experiences love differently, as I imagine type would. If Ts and Fs process emotions and feelings differently then they will likely experience it quite differently. Love is a feeling and action. It's not one or the other. And love has to be a feeling on some level because it's an emotional response. I think what you may getting at instead, is that love shouldn't be based on "feel good" feelings alone since those feelings can be temporary and conditional.

And of course, you're going to love the person for the way they make you feel, because that's probably one of the reasons why you love them. So, on some level, it wouldn't make sense not to love them for how they make you feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sriracha
I think that love being both a feeling and an action is entirely a failing of language. That's where the confusion is.

Ultimately, it comes down to levels of commitment. If the parties involved are not equally committed to the survival and thriving of the relationship, they might as well part. Eventually one will grow to resent the other. It makes no difference how you feel.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: the
kiu said:
Ultimately, it comes down to levels of commitment. If the parties involved are not equally committed to the survival and thriving of the relationship, they might as well part. Eventually one will grow to resent the other. It makes no difference how you feel.
Click to expand...

This^^^. Love involves committment, and investment. Feelings aside, because they are important, both parties still need to make a decision to love (action) through committment and investment of time, etc.
 
Dear [MENTION=3473]InvisibleJim[/MENTION]:

You are wonderful. :)
 
I think what I have learned more than anything with love it that it is a verb, not a noun. . it is a word that requires action. . what have you done for your love today? what has your love done for you? there are poeple that I have loved and left because the acton was missing on their part. . I can love and act all I want , but if it is not returned. . it just doesnt' work. .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norton and Gaze
Spailpin said:
I think what I have learned more than anything with love it that it is a verb, not a noun. . it is a word that requires action. . what have you done for your love today? what has your love done for you? there are poeple that I have loved and left because the acton was missing on their part. . I can love and act all I want , but if it is not returned. . it just doesnt' work. .
Click to expand...

*nods*
 
There is always going to be contrast between one and another - having the maturity to appreciate differences and look outside of one's self is a large part of overcoming the vicarious joy-without-investment seeking that happens. Love people for who they are, not what they are to you, and seeds will bloom. This is where many stumble, I think. Yet the stumbling is necessary or we'd not know what we lost, or what we truly have for that matter. True learning happens when one is completely out of the comfort zone, surrounded by unlike objects never seen before. Quoting a lovely RPG I played, "A culture's teachings, and most importantly, the nature of its people, achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves... or find themselves lacking."

Related topic: living by ideals of how circumstances ought to be instead of how they are. Creating unrealistic "musts" and not taking off the rose-colored glasses.
Unbending.
 
Thing is love is learning process. It's a feeling and a set of experiences which we go through. If it's real, then once the "loving" feelings dissipate, then you know what you have. It's not always going to be obvious whether there's something lasting until you go through the stages. So, yeah, it's natural to go through that rose colored glasses staage - it's how we learn. Sometimes, the lessons are hard to learn but it in the end you figure out how to the distinguish true feelings from the overly idealized ones. But love is such an individual experience that to say we should or shouldn't approach it in a particular way may be a little misleading. Each person experiences this idea very differently.

And just because the feeling is temporary, doesn't mean it isn't love. Maybe it was meant to be short lived. Just because it doesn't last forever doesn't mean it isn't real. The key is in realizing early enough that it may be something to enjoy for the moment rather than dooming it to failure because it seems like it's not going to last a long time.
 
Yes, [MENTION=1669]Rite[/MENTION], I believe what you say to be true. Some loves can last only for a season, due to extenuating circumstances. That doesn't negate the fact that they were great loves, to be remembered as such... Just, sometimes two people sharing a great amount of love for each other can't/shouldn't celebrate it together. Indeed a learning process. I feel I am able to better love the man I am blessed enough to be with, now, by living through the trials, and tribulations of loves from the past. Also, remaining friends with ones I have loved and lost is a testament to the true feelings/respect we had, and have.
 
when i loved the person more the feelings became a little more volatile. i didn't get caught up in them as much, i thought more about the person and who they are. when i loved the feelings more i wasn't paying that much attention to the person. i didn't know them that well. i used them like a drug to minimise my negative feelings about my life and problems in a maladaptive escapist way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaze
To love the feeling - it will pass and then you will start idealizing new person. It is an addiction not love.

To love a person - it will last if you show/ have "care [respond to the needs of the significant other], responsibility [not possession], respect ['which implies the absense of exploitation. I want the loved person to grow and unfold for their own sake, and not for the purpose of serving me'] and knowledge ['It is possible only when I can transend the concern for myself and see the other person in his own terms'] and those are mutually interdependent" (Eric Fromm - The Art of Loving).
 
LABRADOR71 said:
To love the feeling - it will pass and then you will start idealizing new person. It is an addiction not love.

To love a person - it will last if you show/ have "care [respond to the needs of the significant other], responsibility [not possession], respect ['which implies the absense of exploitation. I want the loved person to grow and unfold for their own sake, and not for the purpose of serving me'] and knowledge ['It is possible only when I can transend the concern for myself and see the other person in his own terms'] and those are mutually interdependent" (Eric Fromm - The Art of Loving).
Click to expand...

Agree
 
Loving your brother is different than loving your partner (OR AT LEAST I HOPE SO!) :D
 
I totally agree with Fromm. If you read his book, you will find that he describes all types of love "men-women," toward your neighbor, friend, your countrymen [women], toward another human being whoever he is or she is, even toward another country - and this I find true in real life - his requirements care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge are must to trully, fully love another being. Of course, the most intimate and most profound type of love is between a man and a woman if it is real - they become one - but they are not one - not even sexually (most intimate if not self-serving) one without these requirements.
 
I won't try and describe love because I'm not sure it's an emotion or an action...I don't know how I would put it into words. not that it is transcendent in any spiritual way, just that I can't really categorise it.

My feelings on love, though, is that to love is not to expect. I try not to but I do get frustrated at times when I hear friends expect things of their lovers. There are some base things that we should always expect. We should expect a person to take responsibility and we should expect them to look after our feelings as much as their own by being kind and respectful. I think these things we can expect from lovers. However, we can not expect lovers, as the OP says, to always make us feel good. It is not their responsibility. Your happiness is your own responsibility for the reason that you are the only one that can make you happy indefinitely. Hoping others will make you happy is dangerous, because they can only do so for a limited period of time. Happiness is not external. But this means something different for each individual. You should not expect a person to change, because they rarely do and if they do for you they will grow to resent it. You have to take a person how they are - everybody has flaws, you are not going to love every part of them. You are always going to have bugbears about the people you love. Part of the choice of whether to be with someone or not is whether their flaws are upsetting to you or whether they seem irrelevant.

I suppose what I'm saying is love does not mean entitlement. If you love somebody, that does not make you entitled to anything more than they are willing to give. If they are not willing to give enough for you, if you find yourself feeling entitled, then go out with someone else.
 
^^^Absolutely brilliant. I know someone who should read this entire thread but especially your quote, they seem to be afraid of setting boundaries because the're convinced every single one (relationship) is a learning experience, but at some point the training wheels have to come off. Metaphorically speaking, you can only learn so much from the same exercise then you need a new program.
 
justeccentricnotinsane said:
I won't try and describe love because I'm not sure it's an emotion or an action...I don't know how I would put it into words. not that it is transcendent in any spiritual way, just that I can't really categorise it.

My feelings on love, though, is that to love is not to expect. I try not to but I do get frustrated at times when I hear friends expect things of their lovers. There are some base things that we should always expect. We should expect a person to take responsibility and we should expect them to look after our feelings as much as their own by being kind and respectful. I think these things we can expect from lovers. However, we can not expect lovers, as the OP says, to always make us feel good. It is not their responsibility. Your happiness is your own responsibility for the reason that you are the only one that can make you happy indefinitely. Hoping others will make you happy is dangerous, because they can only do so for a limited period of time. Happiness is not external. But this means something different for each individual. You should not expect a person to change, because they rarely do and if they do for you they will grow to resent it. You have to take a person how they are - everybody has flaws, you are not going to love every part of them. You are always going to have bugbears about the people you love. Part of the choice of whether to be with someone or not is whether their flaws are upsetting to you or whether they seem irrelevant.

I suppose what I'm saying is love does not mean entitlement. If you love somebody, that does not make you entitled to anything more than they are willing to give. If they are not willing to give enough for you, if you find yourself feeling entitled, then go out with someone else.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel about the subject and I don't think I could add any more to what has been said in this post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back