Think of some of your relationships; the ones with individuals of the opposite sex. And then think about your feelings for each of them. Can you quantify or explain them? More importantly, are you sure? Our American society gives us so many different definitions of "love", and who's to say which one is right? I mean, even Christians have it all confused; you've got some people claiming that it has nothing to do with feeling "because huggin' and smoochin' don't last, and beauty is only skin deep - character is all that matters". And then you've got those who are only looking for happiness and satisfaction in a relationship, in other words, basing the seriousness of relationship on the magnitude of the euphoric feelings involved. Honestly, I don't agree with either - I only agree partially with both. But anyways, here's what I think - I'm not saying it's right or anything, it's just what I think. read it and see if you understand...
Have you ever, like me, felt tension in those relationships (oh, and I'm not talking about simple acquaintance relationships, if you get my drift)? Have you ever wondered where it came from, or did you just ignore it? Maybe its just me, but I've felt that tension quite often. Its like an intermittent, internal turmoil - although it strangely, can also be like an self-abhorrence. Where it comes from and why it's present so often in my life is a question is struggle with alot. I mean, sure, I can call it "fear of commitment, but that doesn't help me find out why it's there. The fear itself is really just a result of the tension, so its kinda redundant to say that the tension is simply a fear of commitment. So, what is causing the tension? Take a look at the two "definitions" of love in the previous paragraph, do they suggest anything to you? Look at it this way, the people who define love in the first example are basing relationship soley on what's logical and makes sense - in other words the mind, right? And the people in the second example are basing it on what feels right - which would be the heart, would it not? Well, guess what? If that's true, then there's really two factors to relationships; one is the mind and one is the heart. And really, I think this is where the tension comes in; see, they each want to commit for different reasons. The heart wants to commit when it feels secure in a relationship, and the mind wants to commit when the scenario makes sense logically; and when one of them is for the relationship and the other isn't, then there is constant tension - and it doesn't matter which of the two is actually followed, if there isn't agreement, then tension is there. So then, Love would really be the agreement of both facets; the mind desiring the relationship because it "makes sense" and the heart desiring the the same, because it feels secure enough to allow the vulnerability of emotions in the relationship. Heh, I wonder if this is making sense to anyone...
7 comments:
It makes sense and I think it's accurate. Here's a question. Is it more important for a relationship to be logically sound or emotionally sound? In other words, is it more important that two people work together on paper, or more important for the relationship to be passionate?
Heh, good thought...
In my life, the majority of relationships are restrained by my mind. That, coupled with the fact that emotions follow mental acceptance more readily than vise-versa, brings me to put the importance on the metal side.
Also, I can't deal with emotional pain so I would rather err on the less risky side...
Thoughts?
Hmm but I think our minds can also follow emotional acceptance. Emotions are so persuasive that it's not too hard to change our minds based on what we feel instead of thinking it through. In that case, the emotional part of a relationship can sort of "force" the mental part to comply. Emotions can also dissuade us from relationships even when they make sense mentally. So, first of all, I'm not sure that mind is stronger than emotion in terms of taking charge. But you could be right.
For instance, it could be smarter to place more importance on the mental side, BUT, it COULD cause you to miss out on a really important emotional part of a relationship! I think the emotional is what makes a relationship exciting and gives it its spark, distinguishing between a friend relationship and something further.
Along the same lines (or at least I THINK we're talking about the same thing), I asked my friends this question the other day: would you rather be in a relationship with someone who was a Christian who paralleled all your beliefs but never really "connected" with you, or with someone who was not a Christian but who completed you and connected with you on the deepest level?
I like that; you've thought it through. And you know what, where the importance in the relationship lies likely depends on the individual - thank God that He created us differently.
It's not often that I change my mind. But I am...I'm realizing that you are right - hmm, who would have thought
Some would say I've spent too much time thinking about this haha. I don't necessarily think I'm right, but it's cook to be able to see the other side of things and be able to weigh them against your own opinions. Lots of times I just argue a point in order to play devil's advocate, if you will. Just to rattle people's brains a little :P
Understood...
But even "Devil's Advocates" find it hard to "rattle" the brains of those who do not come to conclusions flippantly. Reality, however, is very persuasive (I assume you know what I am talking about); nothing is quite as convincing as truth to an open mind.
Post a Comment