Can love really give us immortality

[ceath]

i posted my thoughs on love on My Otaku today, and i'm interested to see what people really think of love today.
So do you believe that love is the answer to immortality or just a method of control, to ensure no matter what we will never achieve absolute individuality?

[Guest D. Resurrected]

[QUOTE=ceath]i posted my thoughs on love on My Otaku today, and i'm interested to see what people really think of love today.
So do you believe that love is the answer to immortality or just a method of control, to ensure no matter what we will never achieve absolute individuality?[/QUOTE]

Love it self can not be put into words it can only be expressed. :animesmil

Ill check it out :D

[Renate]

I must agree with D. Resurrected, love is not something that can be put into words. 'I love you' simply does not fit this huuuuge feeling you're feeling, it's too simple. Love is reflected in your actions, your thoughts and your eyes. I personally think you shouldn't always be told that your partner loves you, you see it.

[Sandy]

To me immortality means that you'll be remembered long after you're dead. I guess loving and being loved helps in that. ;D

I don't believe that love's just nature's way of controlling us, really. I'm more happier now that I'm in love than ever before. The feeling of security, that you have somebody you can trust no matter what, somebody who you can share your good and bad moments with... That's just an overwhelming emotion! <3

Sure, one can abuse another person's love for him or her, but one-sided love rarely works in the long term... Okay, what was the question again? XP

[Sara]

[quote name='ceath']So do you believe that love is the answer to immortality or just a method of control, to ensure no matter what we will never achieve absolute individuality?[/quote][color=#b0000b][size=1]Does it have to be one or the other? That seems like a rather narrow (and cynical) range of choices for something so abstract.[/size][/color]

[Fasteriskhead]

I also admit some confusion as to what the question is asking. I read your blog post - it's obvious (and admirable) that you've been thinking about this a lot, but I'm not sure if you've yet begun to clarify what exactly you're asking into here. This is not to say that your question necessarily has an answer, but for right now maybe bringing some light onto what's being asked is enough. What, more exactly, do you mean by love, since this word has lately become totally confused (I talk about this a little in that overlong Saikano article [but then again, everything I've written here is overlong])? What, more exactly, do you mean by immortality, control, and individuality?

But before that:
[quote name='D. Resurrected]Love it self can not be put into words it can only be expressed. :animesmil[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Renate']...love is not something that can be put into words. 'I love you' simply does not fit this huuuuge feeling you're feeling, it's too simple. Love is reflected in your actions, your thoughts and your eyes. I personally think you shouldn't always be told that your partner loves you, you see it.[/quote]
I agree with this to a degree, but I also think it's to give language too little credit. True, we may not be able to confine what love is to a simple collection of words. True, the words themselves are often totally inadequate. But doesn't this [i]itself[/i] give us a clue as to what love is? Along this same line of thinking, I must disagree with both of you regarding the fact that, though you doubt speaking's capacity to say "love," you believe that instead it can be put out through "expression" or "actions, thoughts, and eyes." Aren't these inadequate as well? Think of what happens when, for example, one goes out birthday shopping for one's beloved. Perhaps you can't afford that really nice (let's say) flatscreen moniter they've been wanting for the past month, so you end up buying something else... but even if you COULD buy that moniter, [i]would it be enough?[/i] Isn't there always something else one could do for them that is just beyond one's reach? One may console oneself by saying "it's the thought that counts," but here too one has trouble. Even our [i]thinking[/i] of our beloved is frequently inadequate to our love for them: we don't think of them enough, or do so in the wrong way. The same for our eyes, our glances: they cannot hold on to what our love is.

We could just stop here, disheartened, and say that we're always unable to express love in the right way. But I say again: isn't all this talk about inadequacy, the failure of signification, "not ... enough," giving us a [i]clue[/i] as to what love is? In Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound the title character is made to say:

"Look at myself chained, a wretched god hated by Zeus, despised by all the gods in the court of Zeus, because of my overwhelming love of mortal humans."

Doesn't this one word, "overwhelming," attached to love as it is, tell us precisely what we've been looking for? Love [I]overwhelms[/I]. It constantly refuses to contain itself in our expression of it, it constantly overflows our words and actions so that, as [I]containers[/I] of our love, they are too small, petty, and inadequate. Has language failed us? Not at all: saying that "love is not something that can be put into words" perfectly expresses what love is. Love is overwhelming, it defeats our ability to fully express it, and so (as in Aeschylus) it causes us to be chained, although perhaps not unhappy as such.

I have to go to lunch, so I'll see if I can dig into the main topic a little later. Think carefully about all of this!

[Retribution]

[size=1]Of course love can't make you immortal. My parents love one another, but they're going to die one day. They can't love one another after they die -- they'll be decaying in the ground. Eventually there will be no one on Earth who remembers them or their lives or their deeds. That's when they truly die.[/size]

[vegeta rocker]

Can love make us immotal? I think in a way it can; what better way to leave a mark on a previous life than to have felt such a great emotion?

As for it keeping us trapped and not letting us attain individuality i like to believe that in order to exist we need to coexist. If a person can be an individual but be blind to love and emotion then humanity as a whole are no longer individuals. They have become a monotone collective of cold beings.

If you love someone you discover more about yourself then you ever could on your own. The memories of my last love will last forever; i was blessed with a chance to coexist with a great human being that loved me back. The feeling of love is security yes, but it is more a reminder of our own mortality. I say that because the human heart is fickle, by accepting love you acknowledge that it will one day end. By not caring and seizing the moment in which you are in love, you in a way make your memories immortal and in the end, what else do we really have?


Memories make us human; when a person dies they say their lives flash before their eyes. People will always try to prove life to themselves to validate their existence.

[Annie]

[size=1]I happen to believe in ghosts/spirits. I was watching this special on the Travel Channel one night which featured the most haunted places in the US and such. One house was haunted by the woman's husband. Though, it wasn't frightening; it was said that he was actually waiting for her, his love. The children were at their mother's bedside as she was dying. And they reported that they saw their father's ghost standing in the door way. The mother smiled at him, and held her arms out to reach for him. He then disappeared, and she passed away. Days after, the children reported they saw their parent's ghosts walking along their courtyard....hand in hand. Other witnesses that had lived in the house over the next several years reported the same sightings.

Love conquers death. I believe that. Does it make one immortal? I suppose in this case, yes.[/size]

[ceath]

[quote name='Fasteriskhead]I also admit some confusion as to what the question is asking. I read your blog post - it's obvious (and admirable) that you've been thinking about this a lot, but I'm not sure if you've yet begun to clarify what exactly you're asking into here. This is not to say that your question necessarily has an answer, but for right now maybe bringing some light onto what's being asked is enough. What, more exactly, do you mean by love, since this word has lately become totally confused (I talk about this a little in that overlong Saikano article [but then again, everything I've written here is overlong'])? What, more exactly, do you mean by immortality, control, and individuality?[/quote]

I just want to start by saying AT LAST, I?ve been trying to find somewhere to discuss this for ages, but it always end with one of two outcomes. The person starts lecturing me on the purity of love and how I?ll understand when I find someone, or they just smile and nod while edging away like I?m some kind of weirdo (understandable I guess). What?s the go you can question life and death but love seems to be some kind of taboo.

Anyway as for my definition I guess I should have been more clear I tend to write heaps so sorry in advance. These are basically my interpretations, so they might sound a little different.

People seem to believe that love is this indescribable emotion that where by you feel totally comfortable with someone that makes you feel safe, and who you inturn want to make feel just as safe, to the point of dying for them. But I don?t agree with this, it seems more like a line from Fruits Basket. I mean if you want protection with comfort buy a dog.
I see love as validation, people these days seem to believe that we need to have a reason to live. That we have not been born just to fill up space and that if we die no one will really care. Kinda like in the Eva series Shinji pilots the Eva because he believes it gives him worth and if he isn?t a pilot he has no worth, but he discovers that there are other alternatives out there, it is all just psychological. Yet we don't seem to have gotten past the point that we could exist without the purpose of being needed by someone. But I guess than that could be considered a selfish existence. But what if we could live for others without needing their praise or acceptance for validation. But I also see love as the answer to our fears of death and what happens afterwards. I?ll explain that more later with immortality.

I guess that connects my thoughts on individuality and control. Just because we look different we are considered individuals and by dressing, talking, thinking every little thing we do, is just another way of amplifying the fact that there is no one in this world that is exactly the same as me. Right, now I understand how that works, but it?s like achieving freedom, ones given minor restrictions such as a surface we loose a degree of that freedom, although we still have freedom per say. And I understand that we need these loses of pieces of freedom to fully understand its depth, but its still not totally complete. Therefore I believe that the same applies to individuality, while we may be unique in many ways, we will never achieve absolute uniqueness because we will all share this desire (whether conscious or subconscious) for validation or love (as I recognise it).

With control this works in with love and individuality (in my warped mind anyway). While ever we have this need for validation, like individuality we will never be completely independent. Sure we may be able to take care of ourselves physically, but we need that validation. Therefore as corny as this sound we need someone, who makes us feel needed to make our self feel whole. I guess what I?m trying to say is that our actions will always be dependant on someone else, we can be easily threatened with the lose of our validation should we exceed the expectations of others.

Immortality to me is the constant expression of life. I guess like the way reincarnation works, we may not live physically forever but our spirit lives on forever, which depending on ones self their memory can also live on. But what I?m really talking about here is the actual memories to live on forever. Death is described as the great unknown, because most people seem to fear what will happen to them after they die. But what makes death easer to accept (my understanding anyway) is that even if we physically die our memories will still live on, the people who we have met will remember us. And like in Loveless the photos we take are physical proof of us having existed, while people may not necessarily remember every detail of our personality the evidence of our physical presence will help to remind them of little characteristics. Therefore while ever these memories (which don?t necessarily have to be created with love) exist we will also live on, therefore if they last for ever we will last forever. I?m probably way off with my interpretation here, but in the story of The Cat Who Lived A Million Times (most people know this from Cowboy Bebop), the tiger striped cat kept coming back to life when he died, and it wasn?t until he found the white cat and had kittens (and grand kittens) that he died along side the white cat. I see this as having found validation within the white cat and after creating his memories he was able to die. Fare enough he was loved by his many owners but he did not love them back, therefore his validation was not completed only after the white cat was this complete. And with the many kittens he sired his memory was able to live on.

[Ikillion]

[COLOR=DarkSlateGray][SIZE=1][FONT=Comic Sans MS]Well it really depends on what you see as immortal.

If you think of being immortal as being able to live forever because of the love that you share with you lover than in that case I don't tink that love is eternal in that way. For the most part it is though that it is impossible to live forever, your cells would eventualy just multiply past the point of no return and then you may just eventually die.

Yet if you mean that the bond that you share with your lover, that even after that you love will go on till the end of time itself then yes, I do believe that love can really go on even after life, with whatever happens in life. Besides, I hope my current love for my girlfriend can go that far.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Dagger]

[quote name='ceath']Anyway as for my definition I guess I should have been more clear I tend to write heaps so sorry in advance...[/quote]
Dude, you and Fasteriskhead are going to get along [i]so[/i] well. :animesmil

You may be interested in reading up on Freud's ideas about Eros vs. Death, assuming you haven't already. Also, I think it's worth considering whether you're discussing love as seen in popular culture or actual love. I say this mainly because your blog post was sparked by something you saw while browsing a magazine, and because in your most recent post in this thread, you referenced literature in addition to citing one or two anime character examples. Not that fiction can't accurately reflect real-life emotions, but it's something you should probably be careful about, especially if you have yet to fully work out your own ideas on the matter.

~Dagger~

[Fyxe]

[size=1][color=slategray]Well, you know, a lot of people believe in reincarnation. Which would mean your spirit/soul would be in a constant living state, no matter what form it takes on. I've heard the idea that your "soul mate" or "true love" will always be your "soul mate," no matter what age or time. So, basically, when your current body dies and your soul finds it's way to a newborn body, you can still find your former soul mate.
Now, this doesn't exactly mean that that person will be your lover. Because, the words love and soul mate do not always apply to your lover/partner. Your best friend could be your soul mate, your pet could be your soul mate, your plants could be your soul mate. Etc. (Heh, plant soul mate XD)
In conclusion, the general theory is that you will always keep the same love with the same soul as you did in your many lives beforehand, and that you will always find your way back to that soul in the end. If that is what you wish to believe. I believe it to a certain extent, and it makes sense, but you can never truly be sure... not even of your own thoughts. Nothing is definite.
So, no, your material body cannot obtain immortality from love, but perhaps your soul can. Love and souls are immortal, just simply not the body we have at the moment. That's the theory I can relate with most.

But, you know, if you want your body to be immortal as well, you can always take up alchemy and create the Elixir of Life. >>[/color][/size]

[Farto the Magic]

[QUOTE]But, you know, if you want your body to be immortal as well, you can always take up alchemy and create the Elixir of Life. >>[/QUOTE]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS][COLOR=DarkGreen]Hey, I'm down with that. I'll take two please. But I digress, I don't believe that love makes one immortal, but it definitely makes life more bearable. The highs seem higher, the lows aren't as low, and life in general seems more fulfilling. By love I refer to eros, a passionate, romantic kind of love. Philia and agape aren't so much fulfilling as nice to have in your life.[/COLOR][/FONT]

[Fasteriskhead]

I'll try to be relatively brief with this (which can hopefully become a habit). First off I'll second Dagger's Freud rec - in summary, towards the end of his life (starting from Beyond the Pleasure Principle) Sigmund reasoned that the ultimate "goal" of life is to return to lifelessness. For him, this then explained violence, which was the self-destructive urge projected out onto other objects. Now, the death drive in higher organisms usually conflicts with the libido ("life" drive, i.e. urge to expand outwards), but in a VERY complex way, the libido is actually taken as an [i]aspect[/i] of the death drive helping the organism along on the way to death. If I understand him correctly, the urge to continuous growth coincides with the urge to spread oneself out into nothing - which, really, is a kind of immortality. In his later theories of the mind Freud has the death drive primarily taken up by the self-critical Superego, while the libido is held by the expansionist Id - this point is usually misunderstood (the Superego is seen as "good," the Id "evil"), and I only note it to keep myself honest.

Ceath - I can't honestly say I fully understand your argument as you've laid it out, but I'm going to try to restate it as fairly as I can for my own benefit (please tell me if I'm misreading you). You think of love as the result of a basic human need for validation, i.e. for a "reason to be." Love, as living for a reason, then becomes a way to immortality by our contributing to something outside of ourselves. However, validation requires us to "submit" ourselves to this outside thing (e.g. our beloved, society, God), leading to the loss of our freedom and individuality - which you think of as control. That paragraph at the bottom suggests that immortality can also be taken as physical proof of existence as well, but I think it's fair to lump this in with immortality as contribution to something else.

I have a couple of thoughts. First, you view freedom as contradicted by any restriction that is put on it - classically speaking, freedom as the absence of all other objects (think the last episode of Eva, which I believe you allude to). While this definition has a proud history, especially in the sciences, I disagree with it: this kind of absolute freedom requires the total absence of anything actual, a kind of perpetual indecision, which is [i]never[/i] how I use the word. Briefly, I take freedom as arising from the status of my always being [i]situated[/i] wherever and whenever I may happen to be, essentially free to [i]be myself[/i]. In other words: freedom is my freedom to be what I am. (I'm not sure how I can put this more clearly, but leave it alone for now)

Second, when you speak about immortality you do so, I think, in the "chronological" sense, as something that exists for a very long (or infinite) period of time. The obvious problem with this is that it doesn't happen - my beloved dies, the photographs rot away, society collapses when someone finally drops the bomb. Immortality, if it's going to make sense, can't mean existing for an infinite amount of time - it has to mean going [i]outside[/i] of time altogether. "Eternity," in the sense that mathematicians talk about numbers and theologians about God, doesn't mean infinite time, it means [i]no[/i] time, [i]without[/i] time. And, to finally return to the question you posed in your first post, "eternity" happens to be what gets discussed in romance pretty much all the time. In my Saikano article I discussed the "love song" as the moment of depth which returns us to what is most essential. To apply this more generally: this "love song" [i]is itself[/i] eternal, outside time, and so a kind of immortality. Now, talking about an "eternal love" doesn't mean that any relationship's going to "last forever," as anyone who's broken up can tell you. But [i]in the depth of that moment[/i] when my beloved and I are together, it still [i]lasts[/i] in a way that can't be measured on a clock. Does that make sense?

And yes, there's also the question of the soul (which Lix brings up, and which is a very good topic), but this is probably enough for now.

[Papa Smurf]

If love doesn't allow you to live forever, physically, and eventually, all traces and memories of you will fade away, so that means "immortality through posterity" isn't important, and there's no way to prove that transcendant love exists, that eternal bond that some people have mentioned here, how is love automatically some sort of level of control?

Love is not mortality. I don't even know if you could say that procreation is caused by people's knowledge of their own mortality, and their desire to "live on." I don't even think mortality itself is a control, because is there ever a method to the madness? If mortality itself was some measure of control, wouldn't that mean there are never any senseless deaths, because it's all planned beforehand? Which would mean that some random accident wasn't random. It would have been pre-smurfed. ^_^

I agree with Sara I think. The options here don't make sense. The topic doesn't make much sense, either, and I don't think that's just because it's such an abstract idea, or a topic of discussion that's only for higher thinkers or anything. It just doesn't make sense.

[Guest Prick Wizard]

Has anybody else considered what will happen when we live eternally but die and exit our physical bodys?

I honestly think that we might enter lands devoid of modern day technology and science but instead occupied by mystical creatures like trolls, gnomes, pixies and elves who practice magic and are skilled warriors.

I love letting my mind run wild with these probable truths, as I'm sure most of yous do. I would simply love to be a warrior or a mage fighting for good and slaying goblins or gnomes.

[Starwind]

Love is expression. You can never say or define exactly what love is, since it mean so many things for so many differenst people. The way I feel about love, or even express love, would be different from anyone else here on the OB. There is only one thing I'm certain of about love. True love is ever lasting. I know it sounds kinda corny, but it's the way I feel about it. If you let if fade or just feel like youjust don't love someone anymore, then it wasn't love to begin with.

Immortality is something kind of unique it's idea. To think of something ever lasting. I'm personally a little fond of the egyptian idea of immortality : "To say there name is to make them live again." In the end I suppose immortality is simply to be remeberd forever. If this is the case, then there are many men and women who will be forever immortal.

[Charles]

Don't glorify "love." Plenty of people have fallen in love and yet they have not attained immortality. Love is a characteristic of humanity that is just as mortal as the people who share the feeling (or believe they do). Love is a very private emotion that's shared between small groups of people. Once their lives are over, so is the emotion.

Having said that, although love has the ability to make one's life more fulfilling (or miserable), it doesn't do much else. Immortality is dealt by accomplishments, by standing out. If someone is remembered for years upon years after their death, it's because they managed to set a precedent by contributing to society in an extremely positive or negative way. People don't remember people like Benjamin Franklin or Hitler because they enjoyed wonderful, passionate marriages. So, don't get carried away by believing that just because true love can make your life more gratifying that it can also reach beyond that. Significant individuals are significant because they accomplish significant things. In the grand scheme of things falling in love is only personally significant, not socially.

[/thread]

[Pumpkin]

[quote name='Sandy']To me immortality means that you'll be remembered long after you're dead. I guess loving and being loved helps in that. ;D[/quote][FONT=Trebuchet MS]I guess this point really strikes home to me. Immortality is based on being remembered. I think love can make your memory live on longer, but not forever. Like Retribution stated, those people are going to pass away sometime. When they pass away, your memories will cease to exist. Unless your family keeps some kind of record of your history, I suppose you could consider that immortality. [/FONT]

[vegeta rocker]

When you truly love someone the love never fades away, i truly love my exboyfriend and he is with somebody else. I may get over him and move on but i will always love him, because thats the way true love is.

If i never felt anything for him ever again then i will know it was never true love, it was just infatuation or something like that.

The way to tell true love apart from infatuation or lust is to look back at what caused it. There are events or actions that lead to love. I fell in love with my ex because he kissed my back. I have had a scarred back since i was little when i got very sick and had marks streak my back.

I am shy about them and no one had ever seen them. He asked to see my back then after i finally let him he kissed my scars. I started to fall heed over heels right then. My love for him is immortal because of how we started. If i had just liked his *** or something thats diffrent. lol

True love is Immortal, like the human soul.

[ceath]

Fasteriskheads. i'm in the porocess of reading your article and i'm going to get the Freud book you and dagger recomended, so i hope to resume my arguement with more insight after i finish reading these. so bare with me for the moment

[Guest matisse]

Love is a condition that people suffer, some a little more than others, I have to agree with ceath I dont believe that you need the vailidation or a strong sense of love from another. While the feeling that someone does love you whether it is your family, friends or that one in your life is nice.I dont believe that people should put so much emphasis on this .People unfortunantly are putting to much emphasis on finding love , as they believe that this will make them happy. In reality alot of the time they are not happy with themselves so if they find some one that will love them it will give give them a sense of worth.This pattern can be distructive especially if that relationship doesnt work out .
Imortality is the way you are percieved after the way you die.I dont believe that love really has anything to do immortaility.And if you honsetly believe it does it is a little pretentious of you. It is all about respect.

[dark king]

i don`t think that love makes you immortal in any way since love may be a great emotion nowadays no one actually love someone their whole life.
it sounds grimm and harsh but it is a truth.
and on that truth you could gain more immortality that anything else.
to be someone who brings truth to people or seeks the very truth of life itself once you achieve that then you gain immortality by thought, your body decays your spirit moves on and all that remains is a memmory of how much you pursued the truth and how far you got melting that truth together with your lifestyle.

indivivuality is something that is our own, and is always there but how far it sticks out is how much you stand out.
people around you will recognize you as cool, dumb, weird, dangerous etc.
it is just in wich way you choose to be.
so when you are in love and it`s great, people indeed will see it in you depending on how much they see.
and when your partner sees it it should be enough for it is a small part of your individuality but a part that must be filled some point in your life.
and individuality is actually something personal the way you are and not the way people want you to be.

some people always want love, others want sex to a point where it starts to bore them and they seek love too, it`s our privilege of feeling love in such a complicated way.
yet that complexity of it can also drive us apart from our partner, the only thing that can stop you from exiting that complexity is your persistance in it, and that makes you seeking truth because in the end you seek confirmation if your partner still loves you and by saying i love you you mostly ask your partner to say the same as a confirmation.

again it sounds harsh but still it`s a truth and to add that how much can you melt that truth in your individuality, lifestyle and train of thought.
it is also true that doing this with truth is also complex and also it depends on how you are as an individual as to how far you can go into that complexity.

and that is also a truth

the point is it can go on forever, and as for your love, enjoy it and i wish you both the best of luck in harsh conditions and may you be together long after these words.

then you may not have found your immortality but at least you have experienced a piece of life.

[ceath]

I couldn?t find the book, so I borrowed some of my sister?s notes and got some info off some sites, anyway I got half way through it and gave up, it just bugged the damn hell out of me. Ok so I might sound immature but there is no damn way that I can believe that in order to develop into a functioning member of this civilisation that I was once attracted to my parent. The whole thought just freaks me out. And than I got really angry about the fact there are only two choices Eros or death, I?ve spent years trying to disprove my friend, and to only have it confirmed by a great mind is totally deflating. Why can?t we override both instinct?s.
Another thing I didn?t agree with, although I may have just misinterpreted it. But how can love and Eros be the same from what I read Eros is all about sex and self-gratification, were as we are constantly told that love is pure and selfless. So I guess it got me thinking is love just another concept being taught to us to make us believe that even if everything is this world has a selfish motive there is something pure to believe.
But at the same time I guess it helped me to figure what I meant by I don?t believe in love. The love that I don?t believe in is not the love for a family member, pet or anything like that but the fact that we are told from birth that we need to have someone by our side in order to be a complete member of this civilisation. We are told bedtime stories about the damsel always finding her knight in shining armour and living happily ever after. Than as we get older and enter puberty we are bombarded with teen dramas obsessed with the confusion of being attracted to your childhood friend, and it only gets worse with age as romantic comedies plague the cinema. I can?t stand the fact that that we are constantly being brainwashed to believe that there are only two options in life either Eros or death and either way we can?t break free. Why can?t there be more?