Funny Love Quotes Funny Love Pictures Funny Love Quotes and Saying Funny Love Poems: Funny Love Poems For Your Boyfriend Photos Pictures Pics Images 2013

Funny Love Poems For Your Boyfriend Definition

Source(Google.com.pk)

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.
Attachment and sexual attraction are relatively simple, constant and universal in all cultures and historical periods. They are built into the human body, as they are built into the bodies of other animals. They can vary in intensity, and in the degree to which they are expressed or inhibited, but they are basically one-dimensional. Not so with the cultural/cognitive/emotional basis for love, which has many dimensions, ramifications, and contradictions.
The Wisdom of Solomon
By far the most sophisticated version of this second perspective is proposed by Solomon (1976, 1981, 1994). There are many features of Solomon’s treatment of love that distinguish it from other writings. First, his analysis of love is conceptual and comparative: in his treatments, he examines love in the context of a similar examination of other emotions.

The way in which he compared the broadness of the meaning of love with the narrowness of other emotions, quoted above, is illustrative of his approach. Indeed, his first analysis of love occurred in a volume in which he gave more or less equal space to the other major emotions (The Passions 1976).

Locating love with respect to other emotions is extremely important, since many of the classical and modern discussions get lost in the uniqueness, and therefore the ineffability of love.
A second feature of his approach is that he provides a broad picture of the effects of emotion on the person undergoing them, in addition to the central feeling. He calls this broad summary “the emotionworld.” For example, he compares the “loveworld” to the “angerworld.”

The loveworld (Solomon 1981, p. 126) is “woven around a single relationship, with everything else pushed to the periphery...” By contrast, he states, in the angerworld “one defines oneself in the role the ‘the offended’ and someone else….as the ‘offender. [It] is very much a courtroom world, a world filled with blame and emotional litigation...” Solomon uses the skills of a novelist to try to convey the experience of emotion, including cognition and perception, not just the sensation or the outward appearance.
From my point of view, however, Solomon’s most significant stroke involves his definition of the central feature of love as shared identity.

(Solomon 1981, p.xxx; 1994, p.235): “ …love [is] shared identity, a redefinition of self which no amount of sex or fun or time together will add up to….Two people in a society with an extraordinary sense of individual identity mutually fantasize, verbalize and act their way into a relationship that can no longer be understood as a mere conjunction of the two but only as a complex ONE. “
By locating love in the larger perceptual/behavioral framework, and by comparing love with other emotions, Solomon manages both to evoke love as an emotion, and develop a concrete description of its causes, appearance and effects, a significant achievement.

His work suggests that the reason scholars decide that love is ineffable is because they treat it that way, a self-fulfilling prophecy that Solomon avoids.
At first sight, Solomon’s deconstruction of the concept of love may appear to be Grinch-like. Why remove the aura of ineffability, of sacred mystery by means of comparison with other emotions, by locating feelings within a larger framework of perceptions and behavior, and by invoking a general concept like shared identity? Perhaps this attempt is only one more example of what Max Weber called the progressive disenchantment of the world.
This is an important issue; we cannot afford just to shrug it off. Perhaps it is the price one has to pay for the advancement of understanding. But there us a further reason that is less obvious. One implication of Chapter 2 is that the broad use of the word love is a defense against painful feelings of separation and alienation. It is possible that the way that the idea of love evokes positive feelings of awe and mystery is also a defense against painful feelings of separation and alienation.
In any event, this chapter seeks to extend Solomon’s conceptualization of love as an emotion like other emotions. Solomon’s idea that genuine love involves a union between the lovers is not new. It is found, as he suggests, in Plato and Aristotle. It also appears in one of Shakespeare’s riddling poems about love, The Phoenix and the Turtle, as in this stanza:

The idea of unity is also alluded to in the first dictionary definition, quoted above, as “a sense of oneness,” and in many other conceptions of the nature of love. In current discussion, the idea of unity is referred to as connectedness, shared awareness, intersubjectivity, or attunement.
In order to develop a usable definition of love, I will draw upon both literatures, the one on attachment, the other on attunement.

For romantic love, a third “A” is needed, (sexual) attraction. Any theory of social integration, like attachment theory, assumes that humanness requires being connected to others. There is a vast literature supporting the idea that all humans have a need to belong (Baumeister and Leary 1995). Love is one form of belonging, friendship and community are two other forms. But in modern societies these kinds of needs are difficult to fulfil. Infatuation, heartbreak, and on a larger scale, blind patriotism offer a substitute: imagining and longing for an ideal person or group instead of connecting with a real one.