Monday, 20 May 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Definition

Source(Google.com.pk)
 When Jung challenged him to name the curative aspect of psychoanalysis, Freud answered very simply “Love.” This answer is very much in harmony with the definition of love that will be offered in this chapter.
Modern scholarship is more evenly divided between positive and negative views than classical discussions. Hatfield and Rapson (1993) distinguish between passionate love (infatuation) and companionate love (fondness). Both Solomon (1992) and Sternberg (1988) distinguish between love and infatuation. They note that both involve intense desire, but that love also involves intimacy and commitment. Kemper and Reid (1997) also distinguish between what they call “adulation” and what they see as later stages, ideal and romantic love. Like Persons (1988), they seem to assume that beginning with infatuation is likely to lead on to love.
In my experience, infatuation mostly leads to more infatuation, either with the same or different persons.  For Solomon and for Sternberg, love is highly positive and complex; it is infatuation that is simple and negative. As we shall see, this distinction may be too crude. But, if refined, it could be a step toward the development of a workable concept of love.
A very detailed and precise analysis of the meaning of the word love in English is provided by Johnson (2001). He shows that the vernacular word implies three different kinds of love: care, desire for union, or appreciation. These three forms, he argues, may exist independently or in combination. One limitation of his approach is that it does not include the physical component of love, attachment. Another is that it is atheoretical, in that it is based entirely on vernacular usage in the English language. Although it is useful to have such a detailed treatment, it still leaves the analysis of the meaning of love located completely in only one culture.
Kemper (1978) analyzed the way in which social relationships generate love as well as other emotions, in terms of status and power.  The awarding of status, which is crucial in Kemper’s theory, will be important here also, since it is an aspect of shared identity. Power, however, does not seem to be involved in love as defined here, since shared identity means its absence. Although I agree that most emotions arise out of relationship dynamics, Kemper’s theory seems to deal only partially with shared identity, and not at all with attachment, attraction, and empathic resonance (attunement).
Perhaps the best empirical study of romantic love, and certainly the most detailed, is by Tennov (1979), who interviewed hundreds of persons about their romantic life. She found that the great majority of her subjects had frequently experienced the trance of love, like the one in Sappho's poem. However, Tennov does not call this state love or even infatuation. Instead she used the word “limerance,” which refers to a trance-like state. Perhaps aware of the many ambiguities in the way the word love is used, Tennov seems to have wanted a neutral term, rather than the usual one.
The conflict between the different points of view described above is the result, for the most part, of the broad sweep covered by the word love. The argument is a confusion of meanings, since the various sides are referring to different affects. Those who see romantic love as pathological are considering the affect that I prefer to call infatuation and/or the sex drive, without considering other aspects of what is called love. This usage is perfectly proper in English and French (but not in Spanish). Most references to “falling in love” or “love at first sight” concern infatuation. And with regard to lust, recall that one of the dictionary definitions of love is “A feeling of intense desire and attraction toward a person with whom one is disposed to make a pair; the emotion of sex and romance,” which is entirely about sexual desire.
On the other hand, those authors that stress the positive aspects of love focus on the emotional and relational aspects, companionship and caring. I will consider these aspects under the heading of “attunement,” the sharing of identity and awareness between persons in love. As should become clear in this essay, this is only one part of love, even non-erotic love.  Perhaps there will be less conflict and confusion if we can agree on a definition of love that is less vague and broad than vernacular usage.
Two Components of Love
The social science literature on love is divided into two separate schools of thought. The first school focuses on biology. This school holds that attachment, a genetically endowed physical phenomenon is the basis for non-erotic love, and that sexual attraction, together with attachment, are the twin bases of erotic love. The idea that the dominant force in love is attachment and/or sexual attraction is stated explicitly by Shaver (1994), Shackleford (1998), Fisher (1992), and many others. This idea has strong connections with evolutionary theory, proposing that love is a mammalian drive, like hunger and thirst.
A further frisson for this school of thought has been provided by recent discussions of limbic communication (Lewis, et al 2000). According to this work, persons in physically close quarters develop physiologically based resonance, body to body. One striking example they cite concerns women roommates whose menstrual cycles gradually move to the same date. Lewis and his colleagues urge bodily resonance as the dominant component in love. They also explicitly link it to attachment theory (idem, pp. 69-76). From this point of view, love is a constant and a universal, from individual to individual, in all cultures and historical times.
Various studies both of humans and animals have suggested that attachment is primarily based on the close relationship of infants to their caretakers. In close quarters, usually with their parents, the infant seems to imprint on those two persons, and anyone else in close and continued proximity. Although not all of the causes of imprinting have been established, touch, body warmth, and especially the sense of smell are prime candidates. Several studies suggest that an infant will select its own mother’s milk over the milk produced by other mothers, probably based on smell rather than on other senses. This sense of smell may be carried with us as long as we live, even if only far below the level of conscious awareness.  As adults, we may still become attached to others because of their smell, even if we don’t realize it. But there are undoubtedly other roads to attachment as well, as will be discussed below.
There is a second major school of thought, however, that gives little or no attention to a physical basis for love. This school proposes that love is largely a psychological/ emotional/cultural phenomenon. In this perspective, love is seen as extremely variable and changeable, by individuals, social classes, and/or cultures and historical epochs.
Most of this chapter will be devoted to this second idea. Not because the first idea is unimportant. In the scheme of things, the physical basis of love is just as important as the cultural/cognitive/emotional one. My attention will focus mainly on the latter idea because it is much more subtle, complex, and counter-intuitive than the first. It is also a component which is more susceptible to intentional change than attachment and attraction.

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Images Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment