From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Jun 26 2003 - 00:55:47 BST
Hey Platt, Steve and all,
As I recently wrote to Johnny, I'm just playing around with love=the levels
stuff as of right now....
> > RICK
> > Compassion is 'brotherly love'. It's the nonparticularized love that
we're
> > meant to hold for all people merely by virtue of their humanity.
PLATT
> Agree. I love humanity. But I could care less about my next door neighbor
> who is a total cipher.
> Steve:
> But loving all humanity includes loving an individual so I would say that
> we learn compassion through loving individuals and that romantic love is
> included, negated, and transcended in compassion...
RICK
I don't believe it does. As I said in my last post, I believe that
compassion precedes individuality and I think Platt's quip sums the point up
nicely. Loving humanity as a whole is a different proposition than loving a
given person on the basis of their particular individual characteristics.
Moreover, And if you'll go back in this thread to the original J.Campbell
quotes I posted, you'd see historical evidence which supports this notion.
Notions of agape were written in the scriptures 1000 years before amor
appeared on the scene. How would you explain this chronological emergence
if romantic love is 'included, negated and transcended' by compassion?
STEVE
...as lust is included, negated, and transcended
> in romantic love.
RICK
Disagree partly. I agree that romance 'includes' and 'transcends' lust (and
I would think it also includes compassion) but I disagree that it 'negates'
lust. I think it's healthy for romantic lovers to lust after each other
(that's a part of the experience).
WIM
Like Steve I tend to value agape/compassion higher than amor/romantic love.
It requires more of a conscious choice while amor seems to me more like
being a plaything of one's unconscious drives.
RICK
Interesting. I see it just the opposite. I think that amor requires more
of a conscious choice in the sense that you are now choosing BETWEEN
individuals on the basis of their particular individual characteristics.
Compassion on the other hand is non-particularized... it doesn't require any
choice, you're just supposed to feel it towards your fellow man by virtue of
his humanity. But I'll have to think about that some more.
WIM
You can 'lose yourself' in
both; in a sense it can both be 'selfless love'. You can also 'find
yourself', learn who you really are or want to be in both.
RICK
I agree with all of that.
take care
rick
Three grand essentials to happiness in this life are something to do,
something to love, and something to hope for. - Joseph Addison
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 26 2003 - 00:58:16 BST