Can people live without love?

[CristyCurves 169032]

Some will argue love is a biological need, a mammalian drive. Others will say it's a cognitive and social phenomenon. What ever you believe drives or causes it, is it required for complete happiness? Can people exist wholly without it, or do we need some interpersonal relationships? Can we exist happily with those alone or for complete happiness do we also need romantic love?

[Guest S*rca****sid]

Personally, I think we need love. Apart from the basic physiological needs (food, water, breathing, sleep..etc), it is a basic emotional need. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, it's not the foundation of our needs, but does come right after Physiological and Safety needs.

[Ice4fun 78396]

I will speak for me only... i could not live happily without love in my life. I'm not saying we always need to be in a romantic relationship to be happy but I need to know I care for and love people and they return that love... that includes romantic love.... love of children and parents and other family.

 

I can't imagine myself getting by without someone who cared for me... but that may just be me.

 

Just my opinion

[CristyCurves 169032]

It appears that some have, Sir Issac Newton and Nikola Tesla apparently did.

I think to love is to live. I don't believe you need romantic love to be happy but I do think we need to give love and to feel loved to feel fulfilled. People need to be nurtured. I equate nurture to love:)

But I'm sure their are many who are happy living with loves that are non-human, their careers, hobbies, pets, possessions, etc.

[Guest S*rca****sid]

It appears that some have, Sir Issac Newton and Nikola Tesla apparently did.

I think to love is to live. I don't believe you need romantic love to be happy but I do think we need to give love and to feel loved to feel fulfilled. People need to be nurtured. I equate nurture to love:)

But I'm sure their are many who are happy living with loves that are non-human, their careers, hobbies, pets, possessions, etc.

It's interesting that both Tesla and Newton lived without ever having a relationship. It's been noted that Newton may have died a virgin.

My initial thought was that maybe they were both homosexual, "not that there's anything wrong with that" (Seinfeld). They both lived in a time were that kind of "behaviour" was not tolerated.

But if we look at it from a different perspective, maybe they represent the "mad scientist" or "tortured genius" stereotype? Because of their high intelligence, maybe they suffered from anti-social behaviour of some type or mental illness that precluded them from forming emotional or physical love.

[CristyCurves 169032]

It's interesting that both Tesla and Newton lived without ever having a relationship. It's been noted that Newton may have died a virgin.

My initial thought was that maybe they were both homosexual, "not that there's anything wrong with that" (Seinfeld). They both lived in a time were that kind of "behaviour" was not tolerated.

But if we look at it from a different perspective, maybe they represent the "mad scientist" or "tortured genius" stereotype? Because of their high intelligence, maybe they suffered from anti-social behaviour of some type or mental illness that precluded them from forming emotional or physical love.

Yes, both were apparently virgins when they died. Your conclusions might be possibilities and although there are those who are so highly intelligent they border on insanity or are considered "mad" we don't know if that is there case. So we could conclude that perhaps they were just men who were so wrapped up in their love of science and discovery that they had little time for any other type of love:) I also read that the only thing Tesla loved or showed love for was a white pigeon.

[MightyPen 67414]

It's entirely possible to live without love. The effect of such a life varies depending on the person.

 

Human beings are herd animals by nature; our survival as a species has always depended on us working in a group, since none of us alone was faster or stronger than the predators out there. As a result, we've evolved mental processes that make us tend to herd-friendly behaviour. Most of us want the assurance that we have a place in the herd and are connected to our herd-mates. The result is a high psychological value placed on connections to others -- friendship, love, and the validation of the community we belong to.

 

For most people, that makes having love and a connection to other people indispensable. We can be alive without it, but if we do then we sense that our life is lacking an essential quality. Most people when deprived of caring relationships fall into depression.

 

Some people started out inclined that way but circumstances changed them so that they avoid those connections. I can think of a couple of guys I know who were so traumatized by rejections or betrayals in their 20s that they swore off relationships forever. (If you asked them, they would describe the process differently.) Their subsequent relationships with women were superficial and usually brief; they held the women in their lives at arms' length so that they couldn't be hurt. (Again, they would describe what they were doing differently.) They never did find love again, and declare they're quite happy without it. They pour that energy into other pursuits (careers of course, or various collections, cars, technology, and other safe things). They say they are happy and, while I suspect they're missing something, who am I to say their lives are being lived wrong? Just differently and in a way that now works for them.

 

Finally, other people start out wired in such a way that they genuinely don't care about love, or don't have the modules in their brains to experience it. These can be the heavily autistic, some of the mildly autistic, or sociopaths and psychopaths, or people with other psychological makeups that don't have a name or diagnosis. This doesn't necessarily prevent them from being talented and productive. And I think that probably Newton and Tesla fall in there somewhere; people who were so deeply invested in their fields, and reaped such pleasure and other psychological rewards from its pursuit, that nothing else really mattered. Spending time pursuing romance probably would have been a waste of their time. Nothing made them happier and more fulfilled than their work. They lived without love and, overall, I think were as happy as those who do have love in their lives. Just as there are people who are completely asexual and don't miss sex that others find indispensable to happiness, I think there can be healthy people who simply aren't wired to care much about love.

 

(I think speculation that they might have been gay makes too big a leap. I mean, maybe -- we can't know -- but it assumes they must have had some sexuality, and it leaves out the middle ground of "they were just geniuses who were very deeply preoccupied with other things").

 

People are SO complicated and varied. There's never one answer to what "people" can or can't do, or what they need for their unique happiness.

[Midnite-Energies 110563]

I don't believe we can live without love. Love comes in so many forms, not just human entanglements. There is romantic love, familial love, love for a pet or a career or a cause one is passionate about. Love is a central need that we, as humans, have. Even those who never had a relationship or sexual relations have probably still felt the need and lure of love, just in a different way than most people perceive it.

 

One of the greatest of these is self love. Very few people would look at this as love or a fundamental need but when it's not present, everything around is impacted. Self love impacts esteem, acceptance, overcoming fear to take on new challenges, to go after what we're passionate about no matter what it is.

 

Babies, disabled, mentally challenged etc all have needs of love, they just look different and sometimes it takes a different perspective or a lot of searching. This, I believe, is ingrained because these people must rely on others for so many things. It is not a choice, it is a fundamental need. There have been so many studies done on behavior and learning and in most of these, there is a thread of love and connection.

 

Love is such an expansive concept that to touch on even half the aspects would require a much longer post than anyone would care to read. Bottom line is, I believe no matter what form it takes, it is a need and one that everyone has. It's when this need is denied that life is negatively impacted and the side effects come out. There are so many stories based around people not having something important in their life or losing it or fearing it. No matter the topic, I believe a lot boils down to lack of love in some form or another.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

I agree with MightyPen's wise post that you can live without love. Many do.

 

The word "love" can have so many meanings depending on who you're talking to. Devotion, selfless caring or concern, deep affection, sexual passion... . I think complete happiness is overrated anyway and if you don't happen to have "love" in your life, don't sweat it. I would focus on acceptance instead of love and if you can't find that from your friends and family, well, learn to accept it. :) That's your true path to peace and contentment, which is more lasting than happiness, in my opinion.

 

Not to hijack your thread Cristy but which would you (or anyone else here) rather have from your family and friends, love or acceptance? For arguments sake let's say you can't have both! I don't think they are the same thing at all and I think it's a question that requires a bit of reflection before answering.

[CristyCurves 169032]

 

Not to hijack your thread Cristy but which would you (or anyone else here) rather have from your family and friends, love or acceptance? For arguments sake let's say you can't have both! I don't think they are the same thing at all and I think it's a question that requires a bit of reflection before answering.

 

I may be mistaken, but I think mighty pen was eluding to that you could live without interpersonal love, as he did use examples of people loving their careers, possessions, etc, in place of.

 

No hijack, I appreciate the question:)

I equate acceptance as love, an important component of. I'd want both. Both are selfless acts, and I don't know how you could separate them. To have one without the other I would think would be cause for conflict. If I were to love someone I would want them to flourish, to be all that they would want and could be, no ownership and take them as they are. To love and accept someone is to go beyond all of you, it becomes about them and their betterment. I think when people become attached, in lust, "head over heels" desirous, they are thinking of themselves, and misinterpreting their love.

I am still learning, trying to understand, in the midst of making mistakes:) Life is a lesson after all, each day a teacher, each person we meet a trial. Hopefully from here on in I will learn the right lessons by the right teachers;)

[Ice4fun 78396]

I agree with MightyPen's wise post that you can live without love. Many do.

 

The word "love" can have so many meanings depending on who you're talking to. Devotion, selfless caring or concern, deep affection, sexual passion... . I think complete happiness is overrated anyway and if you don't happen to have "love" in your life, don't sweat it. I would focus on acceptance instead of love and if you can't find that from your friends and family, well, learn to accept it. :) That's your true path to peace and contentment, which is more lasting than happiness, in my opinion.

 

Not to hijack your thread Cristy but which would you (or anyone else here) rather have from your family and friends, love or acceptance? For arguments sake let's say you can't have both! I don't think they are the same thing at all and I think it's a question that requires a bit of reflection before answering.

 

For me love includes acceptance...

 

I agree that you don't need romantic love but i still think we need to be loved.

 

Just my opinion

[Midnite-Energies 110563]

Love IS acceptance. If you have someone who says they love you but the can't accept you for who you are and constantly want to change you, that is not love. Llove is not conditional on meetings someone else's expectations.

 

You can be happy without someone else's acceptance as long as you have your own IMO. Spending your time chasing after someone else's is just a waste of time and energy and never really makes you happy in the end because their conditional love may change conditions. Happy comes from within.

 

It is important to focus on what you have versus what you don't have because with one you can be content and happy while the other is always chasing something elusive. There are very few people who achieve complete happiness but the right perspective can give you day to day joy.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Who's chasing after love or acceptance? I simply said "focus" on acceptance. Focus in the sense of putting your attention to something. I also clearly said if you can't find it, don't sweat it, accept it. Who recommended chasing it?

 

Also, not to be nit picky but acceptance has a different definition than love in a dictionary which is what I was referencing. Acceptance in this context generally means approval or favourable reception. Again, I don't condone chasing after it, merely that it is nice to have but don't worry if you don't get it.

 

To illustrate my point about the difference between love and acceptance, you can love your child but not accept his choice to steal, do drugs, not look after his responsibilities, etc. Surely it shouldn't mean I don't love my son unless I also approve of his choice to steal or in order to love my son I must also accept his choice to steal? In this situation you don't want to condone his behavior yet you still love him. That's what I mean when I say love and acceptance are not the same thing. Love the person but not accept the faults.

 

Maybe you're talking about unconditional love but I don't see anything wrong with saying "I love you but I won't tolerate you hitting me" or some other reasonable condition. Of course if the condition for love is that you must be perfect then that is neither love or acceptance, but that isn't what was being discussed by me. Expecting unconditional love is probably why we have so many narcissistic kids or why some find it hard to find "true love". Something to consider for a future topic?

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Steve

[MightyPen 67414]

This is a really interesting thread. I've been thinking about it at various points through the day.

 

I really do think that some healthy and capable people are just not "wired" for major relationships with other people. They just don't have the emotional receptors that other people do, and so human interaction is mostly just puzzling and distracting to them. The rewards that most of us associate with interpersonal connection just don't happen for these people. And without the capacity to experience those emotional rewards, adding more people to their lives really wouldn't make them any happier; in fact it would just stress them out.

 

That's a small minority of people, though. Most of us value human relationships because we ache not to be alone in the world. We want people who will participate in our lives so that we form a little community with shared bonds of experience, and upon which we can rely in difficult times.

 

Regarding love vs. acceptance, here's my view:

• I hope that the people who love me care enough that they will challenge me when they think I'm doing something wrong, and explain their concerns. If I don't have an answer for those concerns, then (hopefully) I'll reconsider my actions.
  
• But here's the deal: if I *do* have an answer for the concerns, or if I explain that I understand the risks and I'm comfortable with them, then I hope the people who love me will respect my self-determination enough to let me pursue my chosen path.
  

It's a balance, and can be hard to strike.

 

Finally: it's maybe a useful exercise to ask ourselves two questions on this subject:

 

a) what do you think "love" is?

 

b) why do you think love is important? What do you think is significant about having it, or not having it? Does love, or its absence, affect how you view yourself?

 

I'll go away and formulate my own answers, and post them later.

[CristyCurves 169032]

Who's chasing after love or acceptance? I simply said "focus" on acceptance. Focus in the sense of putting your attention to something. I also clearly said if you can't find it, don't sweat it, accept it. Who recommended chasing it?

 

Also, not to be nit picky but acceptance has a different definition than love in a dictionary which is what I was referencing. Acceptance in this context generally means approval or favourable reception. Again, I don't condone chasing after it, merely that it is nice to have but don't worry if you don't get it.

 

To illustrate my point about the difference between love and acceptance, you can love your child but not accept his choice to steal, do drugs, not look after his responsibilities, etc. Surely it shouldn't mean I don't love my son unless I also approve of his choice to steal or in order to love my son I must also accept his choice to steal? In this situation you don't want to condone his behavior yet you still love him. That's what I mean when I say love and acceptance are not the same thing. Love the person but not accept the faults.

 

Maybe you're talking about unconditional love but I don't see anything wrong with saying "I love you but I won't tolerate you hitting me" or some other reasonable condition. Of course if the condition for love is that you must be perfect then that is neither love or acceptance, but that isn't what was being discussed by me. Expecting unconditional love is probably why we have so many narcissistic kids or why some find it hard to find "true love". Something to consider for a future topic?

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Steve

I'm not sure who your reply is addressing but I'll respond by saying that most of us don't define our relationships by dictionary terms and standards. Of course everyone is going to respond and see those terms differently. Your example is understandable, but we could also say the mother loves and accepts her son for being the way he is. No she doesn't condone his behavior but she understands and accepts that he has flaws, she loves him.

Some of us who don't separate the two would look at it that way, neither is wrong. However those who speak professionally about these topics would probably see it differently:) We all love in our own ways, for our own needs, some more than others, some don't at all. What ever brings you happiness and peace is what you should seek:)

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Cristy, I was just trying to clarify my position on how I view acceptance versus love and my own feelings towards whether it's needed, or not, and wasn't addressing anyone in particular.

 

If we stick with the "book" definitions of words to make me less confusing, I think people seek acceptance(approval or favourable reception in this context) as they want to feel like they belong, we all do. Feeling a sense of acceptance, within yourself and within the larger group may be a greater desire than the desire for love. First we accept ourselves and accept whether we belong and then grow from there with love?

 

MightyPen, to answer your question, Love to me is more of a choice than a feeling. I don't discount the rush of feelings initially but as those mature love becomes more of a choice. Otherwise, our relationships would not last beyond the first or second good argument. Additionally, I agree with your point about finding the right balance. I don't believe we should choose to love someone only if they conform to our beliefs. Yes, it is hard to find the proper balance but for me I find guidance by following my own moral code, which is to try making this world a little easier to take.

 

These are just my own feelings on a difficult subject to put to words. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Feel free to challenge my post. I'm still refining my beliefs and hopefully will to the day I die.

[Frank7 3939]

It really depends on every individual wich kind of love is important (or if it's important at all). The vast majority probably can't live without love though. Just look at all the side effects people have when they aren't loved by there family, have no friend or never been in a romantic relation.

 

Personnaly, i can't live without romantic love. Since i don't have it, it's a constant battle to not be depressed. Medication helps though.

On the other hand, even if i'm not very social, i've always had friends and know i can make new ones. So even in the unlikely event that i have none, i wouldn't be to conserned that it would stay that way, and even if it does, i enjoyed friends for a long time. Likewise, i've always had a loving supportive family, so it's not really a need for me. And since i don't plan to have child, i'll probably end up "without" family eventually, but i'm not worried.

[jafo105 39057]

Living without friends, love, and companionship is not easy. It is (can be) an emotional rollercoaster at times. IMHO.