WMN: t3_1k2ucr_t1_cbkwjyo

[TITLE]

I believe love is a choice and that a person does not "fall" in and out of love CMV.

[mrpacman28]

I believe love is a choice whether it is in a relationship with a SO or with a friend or between a parent and child or even an object. “Falling in love” is a phrase used quite often but I believe it creates a fantastical idea of the love that is unhealthy. If I were to say I fell in love with someone or something, then in essence I would be saying something beyond my own power caused me to love that person or object whether I wanted to or not. I came to this conclusion studying theology and philosophy. I first learned about the struggle between Calvinism and Arminianism and also between freewill and determinism, and I questioned how a God would just determine a certain amount of people to be in heaven. I realized after struggling for a couple months that love is a choice because those people also must choose to love God and also even that God does not have to love anyone but he chooses to love people. So there is more freewill both on the individual’s part and on God’s part. It also seems to make more sense to me as I get to know both my girlfriend and parents more. There are some things about my girlfriend that I would not mind changing or that I do not like very much and the same goes for my parents. But despite their faults, I remind myself that I have chosen to love her and am choosing to love them as well. In this way, I think love as a choice is far greater than “falling in love” because I do not have to love my girlfriend or parents, but I choose to love them.

[dogtatokun]

Okay, please go ahead and love Stalin. Or this guy: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-attacks-22-kids-knife-china-school-article-1.1220230 Go on, choose it. QED

[mrpacman28]

I don't quite understand your reply here...

[dogtatokun]

My reply was this - love isn't a choice. If it was a choice, you would be able to love a horrible, evil person. Like Stalin. Or a guy who went and stabbed 22 children. Except that you can't. To love them you should be able to: be happy to see them, want them to be happy, think about them fondly, respect them, value them. But you can't. Quod erat demonstratum (QED)

[mrpacman28]

But I am able to love a person like that, if I wanted to love them like that. It is one thing to say that you cannot love them in that way, which I would believe, but it is another thing to tell someone else that they cannot love a person in that way.

[Eh_Priori]

[STA-CITE]> My reply was this - love isn't a choice. If it was a choice, you would be able to love a horrible, evil person. Like Stalin. Or a guy who went and stabbed 22 children. [END-CITE]I can choose to walk wherever I wish. I can walk up the road, down the road, upstairs downstairs, across a field, on a treadmill or into my living room. But I cannot walk on water. Does that mean I don't really choose to walk? Limitations on choice do not mean there is no choice.

[disitinerant]

I can walk on water. When it freezes.

[spiffyzha]

OP implied that he/she was Christian. I believe "love thy enemy" is a noteworthy tenet of Christianity, especially in that it is particularly challenging to do so.

[dogtatokun]

Sure. I was a Christian too. Despite all the mental gymnastics I did, I never quite managed to choose to love an enemy. I've also never met anyone who could choose to love someone.

[spiffyzha]

I could never do it back when I used to be Christian either. I'm getting a bit better at it now, but that's still sort-of a work in progress. Edit: I should add that emotions aren't *always* a choice. Sometimes they just show up and do things. But also, sometimes they *are* a choice.

[dogtatokun]

I want to see a situation where they are a choice. I can't just accept the idea of it without any proof. To me the idea of choosing to love someone is like choosing to see blue where there's red. Impossible and unnatural.

[mrpacman28]

The idea that there is some force that cause me to "fall in love" with or without my will is what I'm questioning. It's not ignorance. I believe there is always a choice. Present to me a situation where there is not a choice.

[spiffyzha]

Well, to be fair, I don't think it really works that way for romantic feelings towards someone you've known for a relatively short period of time. But for a more abstract, 'agape' type of thing, you can absolutely choose it. Say I'm going to choose to love [this guy](http://www.theweeklyvice.com/2009/05/man-high-on-pcp-eats-sons-eyeballs.html?m=1). It's pretty difficult, because that is some really fucked up shit, and I keep getting distracted by being angry and horrified, and then empathizing with the kid (which is good) at the expense of the father (which is not what I was going for). But I think it feels....sort-of sad. Like, I would have wanted so much better for that dude than for him to be the guy who has to always live with the knowledge that *he ate his son's eyeballs*.

[dogtatokun]

So basically, when you try to love a person like that, the best thing you can do is feel pitty ''sort of sad'' [STA-CITE]> But I think it feels....sort-of sad. Like, I would have wanted so much better for that dude than for him to be the guy who has to always live with the knowledge that he ate his son's eyeballs. [END-CITE]But he **is** the guy who ate eyeballs, not the guy you want him to be. That guy doesn't exist, it's just a projection of the kind of guy you would be willing to love. (very similar would it be when you think you love a woman, she is a cheater and a liar, but you love the idealised projection of her who isn't cheating and lying. But that person isn't actually her). So no, I remain unconvinced that you are able to choose to love a random person. If what you feel is love, than love is meaningless. You can choose to do loving acts to someone, you can empathise with them, put yourself philosophically in their place, but love? Nah.

[spiffyzha]

Well, it goes a little bit beyond pity. It extends to me hoping that he can somehow manage to come to terms with what he's done some day. I want him to forgive himself without minimizing what he's done. I want him to learn from this and use it to become a better person. [STA-CITE]> You can choose to do loving acts to someone, you can empathise with them, put yourself philosophically in their place, but love? Nah. [END-CITE]Okay, but if you go so far as to empathize with them, put yourself in their place, and do loving acts for someone, then in what sense is that not love?

[dogtatokun]

[STA-CITE]> It extends to me hoping that he can somehow manage to come to terms with what he's done some day. I want him to forgive himself without minimizing what he's done. I want him to learn from this and use it to become a better person. [END-CITE]I can feel those things for him too, but I don't love him. I wish everyone, no matter how wretched can try to become a better person. but that's empathy, not love. [STA-CITE]> Okay, but if you go so far as to empathize with them, put yourself in their place, and do loving acts for someone, then in what sense is that not love? [END-CITE]Because there is no actual loving feeling behind it. For example, if a robot is programmed to say loving things to someone, exactly like a person would, does that robot feel love? No. The actions are separate from the cause from which the actions come from. Same with you choosing to do loving thing to a person. When you love someone you want to do them out of love. In your case, you would simply be going through the motions, because you want to love them. You see in in marriages in which love has dissapeared. You still care about your SO, you do things to make them happy, loving things, you feel empathy towards them, but the love is gone, and the connection is broken. Since you would be able to feel empathy towards anyone. and if you so choose, you could be doing loving things to anyone. But the love would not be there.

[spiffyzha]

A robot couldn't feel empathy, either. And that's the thing--once you have empathy for someone, feeling love is just a tiny step over. In fact it's so close by that I don't actually understand the distinction you're making. It's not romantic love, and it doesn't mean that you let eyeball-eating-guy babysit your children. It's more like, a genuine emotional feeling of wanting the best for someone.

[payik]

The only possible answer is that it's obviously not true. Why the hell do you think so?

[JonWood007]

I can only comment on my own experiences, but I will say it's not a fully conscious choice. There's a strong emotional component to it driven by biology, and even the most logical people can be susceptible to it. You may recognize your feelings are illogical, but such feelings at times...overwhelm logic. I remember not really wanting to feel the way i felt, but that I didn't have much of a choice in the matter. I should mention my mindset is different than you though. I don't accept theology at all, being an atheist (I struggled with christian doctrine for a while and ultimately found it to be illogical and not representative of truth), and think the uses of philosophy are rather limited. I approach knowledge claims more as a scientist, and am more convinced by data and observation than philosophical arguments. We have evolutionary drives that are biological in nature that make us fall in love. And these feelings can be involuntary and illogical in some cases.

[elgringoconpuravida]

Really? cause for years, i was absolutely still in love with my x, while wanting nothing more in life than to get away from her. And i'm not a weak-willed person; if there was 1% of choice in that equation, o believe i would have acted on it and exploited it to get me away from that situation.

[learhpa]

I do not experience love as a choice. Your mileage may vary. I experience love as something which *chooses me*; I meet people, I interact with them, and after a bit, for some of them, I love them. It really has no rhyme or reason - I can't predict who it's going to be, and I can't really tease out a specific algorithm which I follow. It's almost as though an external force is driving me, and I can attempt to resist or not, but resistance is futile. That said, I have choices about *how to follow up* with that love, and what to do about it, and whether or not to do the work required to keep the relationship going. But that's not about the *creation* of the love, it's about the *maintenance*.

[arsonist86]

You have obviously yet to fall in love. The term "falling" in love is quite accurate, as the feeling you get in your chest is almost indistinguishable from taking a downward leap or cresting the top of a roller coaster. I have also felt a "rising" out of love. A great feeling of freedom and personal happiness returning after a bum relationship. New growth from old ashes.

[cfourier]

I actually agree that love is a choice, but I disagree with your reasoning and your application. So that you understand where I'm coming from, I was raised Catholic, though that's not my personal faith. I'm a neuroscience undergrad with a psych minor. I like to think that Love is something that is built. Sometimes you will feel it, and sometimes you may not, but that doesn't mean that what you've built isn't still there, so you have to make the effort to love your SO even when it's not the first thing you feel; you have to respect your Love. You mention in one of your posts that the kind of passionate love that people "fall into" is fleeting. Psychologically, this has been framed in a sort of trinity of things that make up a sustainable love. IIRC, it's passion, intimacy, and commitment. I feel like your post is claiming the importance of one branch (commitment) at the expense of another (passion). Ideally, they should both be present in any significant relationship. Commitment without passion can be empty, and passion without commitment can be 'puppy love.' In addition, I just want to bring up many circumstances in which people get "hung up" on exes or, even worse, continue to love someone who is damaging to both involved. These individuals can make the hard choice to sever ties with the person hurting them, but that won't necessarily result in a change in the way they feel about him or her. Essentially, love **is** a choice because choice is a component of Love. Attraction (on a chemical AND psychological level) is another component, and so is intimacy/shared experiences & knowledge. So while I don't think you were entirely wrong to begin with, I hope that you can expand your view in recognition that Love is a complicated, multi-faceted phenomenon.

[mrpacman28]

∆ Sorry for the late reply but your comment really gave me food for thought. Looking at love neither as just a choice or just a feeling but perhaps as both seems to be a more whole view.

[cfourier]

No problem! :) & thank you for the delta

[DeltaBot]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/cfourier

[DangerousMind]

You've mixed up the meanings of love. It is slightly misleading because you can love a person in several ways and God in different ways. Falling "in love" with a person is not true love at all; this is when a person finds someone attractive amd genuinely feels high from all the chemical releases. This lasts for a short period of time but becauseof how great and ppwerful it makesa person feel it is what has grabb the meaning of "falling in love" because of all the romabce thatcomes alon with it via media portrayal etc. Loving a God is based on a God:sdoctrine and your conscious value of it,and loving a spouse post-earlylove is more choice because you are in your normal state of mind and actually evaluating the person. This is what the term means, and it is misleading but you definitely can "fall in love" as i'vs described, to someone you find attractive.

[disitinerant]

You are not really in love. Love is passionate. Your heart is drawn as though by some unseen force to their heart, and your body is drawn similarly to their body. It is pure magic.

[mrpacman28]

I have felt that type of love before. But it is fleeting I think. It does not last a lifetime as in the individual lover does not feel that 100% of the time all the time. Still, it is possible for the beloved to feel that the lover is passionately in love. But It is hard for love to be passionate when that person directly hurts you and hurt is inevitable in a relationship.

[learhpa]

Of course that kind of passion doesn't linger 100% of the time all the time. That would be exhausting. But ... I've been with my husband for twelve years, and there are still days and times when my heart is drawn in exactly that passionate way. Granted, that's anecdote and not data; but I see no reason to assume that I experience love in a way different from how other people do. [STA-CITE]> But It is hard for love to be passionate when that person directly hurts you and hurt is inevitable in a relationship [END-CITE]I agree that there's no such thing as a valuable long-term relationship in which neither side is ever hurt; such a thing is a mirage. But that doesn't mean that love can't remain passionate, I think; we hurt each other because we're human, but we love each other because we're human, too.

[moonflower]

If you are talking about choosing to act in a loving manner towards someone, then yes, that is a choice, but if you are talking about *feeling* love, then no, that is not a choice ... I strongly believe that we cannot choose our feelings, we can only choose how to act when we have those feelings So you could, in theory, find someone quite repulsive, and yet still treat them in a loving manner ... but you cannot choose to actually *feel* love for them If it was that easy, there would be far less misery in the world ... folks would be choosing to love their spouses instead of having affairs and getting divorced

[mrpacman28]

It seems as though I would be a victim to my emotions then. What about my reason and logic then? I believe that I have control over my emotions and I am able to decide if something makes me angry or sad. [STA-CITE]> If it was that easy, there would be far less misery in the world ... folks would be choosing to love their spouses instead of having affairs and getting divorced [END-CITE]This is kind of what I'm getting at because if people just realized that it was a choice that they made then they would not have to rely on some "mysterious force" to keep them in love. Instead, the responsibility would be on themselves to keep the love going and to keep loving the other person. It wouldn't be just a feeling that disappears and it wouldn't even depend on the other person. It would be solely a personal, individual responsibility. And I too agree that there would be far less misery in the world.

[payik]

I'm sorry, don't take it as an insult or attack on you, but have you been diagnosed with a personality disorder?

[learhpa]

[STA-CITE]> Instead, the responsibility would be on themselves to keep the love going and to keep loving the other person [END-CITE]It's my responsibility in my relationship to behave in a loving way and to act in ways that promote bonding. But those are *acts*, those are things I *do* ... they are not feelings. I can help create a fertile ground for certain feelings, but I can't create the feelings themselves.

[moonflower]

If your own experience is that you are able to choose how you feel, then I can't argue with that, but do you believe that everyone potentially has this ability and that they are simply not using it?

[mrpacman28]

Yes. I believe most people seem to believe that an individual "falls in love" as if by some mysterious force or that any feeling is uncontrollable. I believe they are controllable.

[moonflower]

So how exactly does that work - what do people have to *do*, in practical terms, to achieve this ability?

[mrpacman28]

TBH I'm not too sure. Practically as in 'hey lay out some steps for me to get this ability' I don't think I could. Also honestly, now that I think about it, part of it comes from the freedom I have in my faith.

[moonflower]

The reason I was asking is because when people do try to explain how this ability is achieved, they usually very accurately describe the process of *suppression* of natural emotions by a sustained exhortation to act *as if* they feel the desired emotion

[mrpacman28]

Ah I see. I wouldn't say it is a suppression of emotions. I admit there is at times a struggle between two or more emotions but I think that's where the choice comes in? Or am I then suppressing one of the emotions by choosing the other?

[moonflower]

If you are feeling an emotion, and then you struggle to stop feeling it, I would say that is suppressing it, yes ... if there is any physical or mental effort involved in ''choosing'' your emotions, you are suppressing your true feelings and exhorting yourself to feel a more desirable emotion True emotions flow effortlessly without interference from intellectual thoughts and judgements

[mrpacman28]

∆ I spent the day thinking about what this meant. Your method of asking questions to lead to the true point worked very well here and it caused me to reexamine my emotions and what I think of them. Your comment alongside /u/cfourier 's comment helped to change my view. I still think that love is a choice but now also that there is another aspect of it that is effortless emotion that flows.

[Eh_Priori]

[STA-CITE]> I strongly believe that we cannot choose our feelings, we can only choose how to act when we have those feelings [END-CITE]I don't think we have direct control over our feelings, but we definitely have indirect control over them. You can talk yourself out of being afraid, for example, or calm yourself down when you are angry. In broader terms you can take steps to become a less anxious or hateful person. With love you can't neccessarily control the initial reactions, but you can make choice about the kinds of people you wish to invest love in. You can choose to leave a relationship with someone you still love, and you can control whether you will mourn that relationship for a month or a year.

[learhpa]

[STA-CITE]> You can talk yourself out of being afraid, for example, or calm yourself down when you are angry. [END-CITE]I wouldn't describe that as 'control over my feelings'. In both examples, I feel something, and then I *react* to it, and what I'm controlling is my reaction to my feelings, what I do in response to them. Not the initial feeling itself.

[moonflower]

Yes, I agree that what we do in response to our emotions will affect subsequent emotions to some extent, but that is not the same as choosing how to feel, it is acting in ways which will be likely to elicit more desirable emotions ... there is a limit to what can be achieved with that behaviour though: you still can't choose to feel romantic attraction to any given person

[shiav]

Its a chemical thing your body does to force you to procreate and continue the species. After the creation of enough progeny your body settles into phase 2, long term love. This is more culturally based as eons ago apes decided two was the necessary number to raise and support children and themselves at the same time. Feel free to choose whatever you want, but evolution designed you to fall hard for three years and fuck that person a lot in those three years to have as many children as possible before settling into "ok im happy now lets raise these things". And I did love my wife at first sight. And I have been hers for twenty years because some idiot ape evolved the chemicals needed to be happy in the presence of another to raise three healthy kids with her.

[mrpacman28]

I get what you mean by that "phase 2 long term love" (if that is a real phase, though I'm not trying to doubt you, I just haven't heard of it before) but I'm not really doubting the existence of love, more that there are potentially multiple spouses you or I could have had but out of them all, you and I choose the one we are with. As kind of a side note, doesn't that make love more special?

[Nepene]

Most people don't chose their spouse from multiple women. They meet someone sexy, have their feelings grow because they spend a lot of time with them, and marry them. Even if they were with multiple women it might not be a choice. One women would be more fun so they would spend more and more time with her and get stronger and stronger feelings till they were exclusive. If they did make a choice, that wouldn't make it more special for most women. To make a choice they would need to double dip. So the man would be saying, essentially "I am fucking a lot of women, and you are slightly more sexy than the average one so I am choosing you." The role of reason is more of a stop sign than a go ahead one. You meet sexy people, and if they have serious issues your brain says no. Hopefully then your emotions align with your brain. Not many people think themselves into love though.