What is love Holla Forums?

No no, it's not all pointless. It most definitely has a point and a reason, for which you advanced the reasoning for fairly well. However, mere self-interest isn't really a philosophy, especially when the self is so ill-defined. At least racialists make some definitions, as compared to globalist humanists. But there are some serious, fundamental questions that are not being asked. What does it matter if we live or die? You may just as well argue for my suicide as you could convince me to lead a space colonization program.

What are my ideals? What are ideals? Who determines them, who interprets them?

I have always been in relationships but I have simply come to admit to myself that I will probably never really know what true love is. I'm just learning how to improve myself and the tricks to a relationship. I feel like taming a woman is like taming a horse.

an indefinable state of perpetual compromise.

Beat me to it.

Love is a binding force between all living organisms, including the Earth because the planet is a living organism. Gravity is a form of love. electromagnetic radiation is love. Hydrogen fusion is love.

Our concepts of love being super sexy times with the ladies or some obscure parenting bullshit just shows how little we understand of love. Love is a universal phenomena. Love is a frequency emission. Love is life, and life is love.

I love you.

All of you.

No, not you. The other user.

user, a huge chunk of the human population are literal brain dead retards.
No species like ours is supposed to grow this large without proper guidance. Therefore most of us are on a pointless march to death while the geniuses invent things and live off the masses. I'm not arguing over-population, I just think there is too many of us to be a sustainable successful society, unless we were all geniuses. Euthanasia

I give up OP. I can sympathize with the MGTOW faggots as a Christmas cake that's never had a relationship. I'm half-white, so my genes are wasted to pass on regardless

It always comes back to sex. Gas the degenerates, nobody respects the sanctity of marriage. Romantics will care about the person, otherwise its just settling for an unplanned child or gold digging.

Well, thank you, but I just posted a few stray thoughts I had. I wouldn't call it a thorough argument by any means.

I wouldn't try to convince you of either, since I don't know you and wouldn't presume to tell you how to live your life, when I can't even figure out how to live my own. But it seems like people who try to colonize space, and do the other worthwhile things, are generally satisfied with their lives' labors. Meanwhile the suicides seem like unhappy individuals with whom none would trade places. Of course, no suicides have risen from the dead to tell us whether they regret killing themselves, so who knows…

You are indeed right that there are important questions not asked. What would you ask? How would you answer?

Well, as an atheist, I assume that it is my problem to determine my own ideals. It follows that I determine them carefully so that I can avoid a wretched existence.

Well what would that even mean if we were all geniuses? We'd devolve into petty infighting over who came up with the most elegant abstraction for such and so. There's no point trying to devise a political structure to fit humanity into, so that you can claim that this is the shape and the way and the truth. You can only have geniuses if you have have retards

What hubris we have! To think that we have conquered the world. Ants and bacteria have far more say over geopolitics than we do. Who would admit such a thing? Why bother with such nonsense? Philosophy is obviously just a method for getting what you want in the sweetest sounding sentence you can muster.

Stray thoughts and stray cats are both fertile fountains. Whether I have reason to live or die really has very little to do with the quality of my life or even the quality of my personality. What is required is an existential sense of belonging and purpose, and this is something that you are able to order from a magazine or from Amazon.

Because you are an atheist, I am going to assume you have a fairly limited view of yourself, and perhaps you have forsaken any idea of the divine and instead just accepted the manifested mind, instead of the Monad.

But no matter if you're an atheist or a Catholic or an Odinist, it wouldn't much matter. If you avoid the basic questions of life they will continue to bite you in the ass.

What do you have to say for yourself, your race, your people, that is transcendent beyond mere survival? Every organism has said, "let me live!" What makes your own struggle so cosmically important(which it is)?

this is something you're not able to order*

I don't know. I don't think I could justify my existence to the cosmos (and so I'm very glad the cosmos isn't asking me to). What about you?

Nice double dubs.

At least in a society of geniuses, what their petty infighting is must be incomprehensible to what most would usually fight over in our society. The end result of such fighting may even result is greater discovery, instead of more chaos and infighting a society such as ours would find.

What if physics does not allow space travel? Maybe all sentient species always have the tragic apocalyptic end that is violence.

I'm pretty sure if the cosmos asked me any sort of shit like that I'd probably goatse it. I mean what kind of a question is that, asking a being of life why its alive? Why does fire burn?

Well good questions, obviously silly questions no one should ask. It's self-evident, built into the framework of the universe.

Who are we to be beholden to such a thing? Maybe the creators of such paradoxes?

"Our" society? A society of highly intelligent, ambitious people would factionalize and quite possibly destroy itself quite quickly. Maybe not.

Discovery towards what? Longer life? Colonizing more planets? How does that make humanity any different from an AI?

It'd be easier if I was a christian.
How I wish I could believe.

I want to believe.

How would we differ from AI? What do you mean? Emotions? Ambition? Curiosity? All these things still make us very human, and, if at some point an AI can reach or excel human qualities, we must come to the fact that we created a superior race, stronger than us, yet we are their gods. Although currently I find the possibility of a robot indistinguishable from human quite an impossibility. We won't really know until we cross that bridge.

Indeed, it would be a very silly question. How can you be expected to explain that which is self evident.

You have truly confused me, and made me recognize these weighty points to be pondered, with your astute observations. Very good taste in images of women in revealing dress, also.

>>>/r9k/

Well the first step in explaining the self-evident is in explaining the self. Which should seem silly but will quickly become quite necessary the longer you ponder things like boundaries and borders, nations, cultures, and languages.

Who are you?

How is the human imperative any different from some dystopian idea of robotic AI completely colonizing the entire universe and turning it into some mechanical hypermind of machinery?

Reason has no answers for this. This is why the divine is necessary.

Practically all women in the US are disloyal now that the state has given them the tools to control men in their lives as they see fit. Is it the most beneficial for her to stay in a relationship? She will do that while fucking someone else on the side. Is it the most beneficial for her to divorce and take the man's assets? She will do that while also extracting resources and validation from her new boyfriend. Is it the most beneficial for her to falsely accuse her husband of domestic violence or abuse? She will do that, and the state will be more than happy to kick the man out of the house he paid for so she can live in it with sole custody of their children while the man slaves away to pay alimony and child support.

Love is the lie that is drilled into men that we should accept this arrangement even though it's a thoroughly rigged game.

No one is more alpha than the state, which has passed laws and policies allowing your woman to be disloyal to you with the full force of government behind her.

Who is the woman making these decisions? Can you ever find a woman outside the influence of her environment? The path of least resistance is lubricated with the tears of those who tried, and tried.

I believe he assumes that all their terrible decisions amass into one huge awful entity that eventually sway the balance of chaos and order.

Well as long as we don't have to take responsibility for anything, I'm game.

Love is the same as hate, figure it out.
Fear and Love, not the only two options.

what are you talking about with all this talk of transcendence, you're obviously a communist.

Familial relations should trump laws. In a proper marriage, the husband would mean too much to the woman to screw him over for any amount of alimony or child support.

It doesn't really require any extreme alpha behavior. Women just get easily confused, they need a consistent, principled man that they can count on to give them direction. In the West, men have forgotten how to direct their women and become terrified of disrespecting their right to choose. Now the women are malicious shrews, because there is only one other major (((source of direction))) left in their lives.

so should that mean polygamy should be legal?

It could be a solution if somehow you end up in a situation where only a small minority of men can be redpilled, as a temporary emergency measure to restore normalcy.

However in the long run it could cause societal instability because so many men would have no women. It is better if all men could be made to unfuck themselves and approach women with a mature attitude.

who or what sort of governing body determines when is necessary and when is too much? Do the polygamists just decide to give up their twelve wives because it'd be a lot better if the rest of us could get laid, too?

Delusional.
Trying to be daddy and re-explain life to liberal women has never worked. They always return to degeneracy.
You can't undo what nurturing implanted in one person after a certain age, for the same reason that educating a nigger and dressing him in a suit will not make him white.

Date church girls

Whoever is interested in preserving good society determines. When circumstances are so dire that saving most men is impossible, polygamy could be attempted as a last resort. As soon as a critical mass of men with good character is reached, the practice should be phased out.

It wouldn't be right to tear families apart, so maybe the leaders could simply discourage future polygamy and let extant marriages be grandfathered in.

You've got a good point there, some people are unfortunately beyond saving. It's no use trying to reach them.

Nice dubs, but you seem to be operating under the assumption that people will do what's best for their people long term instead of acting as short sighted, pseudo-rational actors.

Some do, some don't. I suspect societies full of people who only act with short-term, hedonistic self-interest (what are called degenerate societies) are bound to fail and disappear unless enough members with long-term vision act to prevent this.

So it's not so much assuming this will happen, but saying that if the society is to survive, this long-term thinking in at least some individuals is essential.

Thank you, I worked very hard for the dubs. It took me all night.

BABY DON HURT MEH

It's really not like it matters. I can't believe.

Quotation by Archbishop Fulton Sheen:

"Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it.
It does penance for the sins of others, but is not broad-minded about sin.

A cry for tolerance never induces it to quench its hatred for the evil philosophies that have entered into contest with the truth.

Forgives the sinner, but it hates the sin - it is unmerciful to the error of the mind.
The sinner, it will always taken back into the bossom of the mystical body, but his lie will never be taken into the treasury of his wisdom.

Real love involves real hatred.

Whoever has lost the power of moral indignation, and the urge to drive the buyers and the sellers from the temples, has also lost a living, fervent love of the truth.

Charity then, is not a mild philosophy of 'live and let live', it is not a species of sloppy sentiment.
Charity is the infusion of the spirit of God, which makes us love the beautiful and hate the morally ugly."

Meditate harder, mother fucker. The gods are right next to you, laughing their asses off. Wake up.

Love is when you know a woman and don't think about fucking her but how it would be to spend your live together with her.

Not that this will be believed, but due to the nature of organic minds being evolved only to pay attention to indirect cues of fitness, at least in humans, beyond a comfortable setting (easily faked with light application of body language mirroring, emphasis on light) the only hidden variable is increasing periods of eye contact between the sexes.

You just have to be subtle about it, dont be a sperg, and work your way up in periods of eye contact.

Also, bath and dress somewhat normally.

Source: evolutionary biologist/psychologist
doing thesis on this as we fucking speak.

BOOM GF

Now can we never have this thread again?

...

ayyyy

Love is: a genuine mutual awareness, an internal absolute knowing that one is alive in the life of another. Indeed, this is the only true way one is alive.

Love is not: a mandate to couple.

Very well put.

That first one is amazing.

An abstract created by western civilization to give life more meaning. It's pointless to try and explain to niggers or lesser people.

Permavirgin reporting in!

So all I gotta do is bathe and dress myself, and gradually stare longer into her eyes! Then I can finally be laid!

THANK YOU SANSAI YOU HAVE SAVED MY HONOR!

youtube.com/watch?v=MU1ns6fIHFg

Quote is from the man in the vid.

Love is the opposite of hate, not the same.

I can agree with that part.

However, I'd like to clarify and expand on that in saying:

Love is wanting/doing what is best for the other person, regardless of their own, and your own personal desires. The wanting/doing is interchangeable based on whether you have power over the other person, as a parent over a child.

It is NOT and never has been an emotion.

Modern society first conflated love with lust in the 60s. Now lust has replaced love in the modern mind, because under the classic of love the only way homosexuals could love one another is by remaining celibate.