|
|
Post by milkman's baby on Aug 21, 2010 19:38:52 GMT -5
Hold your horses before you think I'm gonna gush about lovey dovey fairytales.
I was speaking with a friend who told me about her sister. Her sister did some internship in Switzerland. In Switzerland, she met a man from Iraq who spoke not a word of English or any European language for that matter. Just Arabic. How someone can function in a country without knowing any part of the language always baffled me. But anyway, they apparently "fell in love." I asked my friend how that was possible, if they couldn't verbally communicate. She says they used a lot of body language. I still say it's not possible. If it was they claimed, wouldn't this be lust and not love? Because the entire relationship would be based off physical appearance. How would they really get a glimpse of each other's personality?
What I'm really asking here is, do we need verbal communication to love someone?
|
|
|
|
Post by davidbleo on Aug 22, 2010 2:03:50 GMT -5
You can see what the other person does, where he/she goes... how he/she moves... a lot of things!!!... things in which you cannot lie... words mean nothing sometimes!! =)
|
|
palavore
Full Member
I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold posts.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Posts: 298
|
Post by palavore on Aug 22, 2010 2:29:30 GMT -5
Are you saying that deaf people are also romantically handicapped.  Actually, I think gagging couples would probably solve half their relationship problems. Sometimes there's a real need for symbolic action and self reflection. Anywho, people will love anything. Animals, rocks, imaginary people, rocks, and animals--especially if they don't talk back. It's less of a negotiation and hassle that way. It's what the purists call "unconditional love". Those emotions are supposedly older and more universal than human language. Love is innate and doesn't need to be taught, though it can be unlearned through modern society. The problem is actually opposite for me. I'll exchange enticing glances with someone. They look kinda nice. They give off a nice aura. Then they open their mouth (and speak) and I lose all interest. Language is such a turn off for me... Oh yeah, then there's my quote. Language is a deception. Wittgenstein (a western philosopher) described reality as the totality of facts as represented through language (Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus). Then he went crazy as a hermit later on in life and declared that language was meaningless. I sympathize with his violent swing in position. Unlike people who form an opinion (or philosophical position) and hold that opinion (preaching that opinion) until they die, Wittgenstein was always thinking. Where is love? Point to it. You can't. Language is an invisible pointing and an imaginary dissection. For those who have found "love", the pointing is over for what they are already holding. What they are deciding is its value--not its conformity to language. What is it worth to me? Do I want to keep it? Language is a spectator to these human desires. We didn't need language and modern science to tell us that decisions occur in the most subconscious areas of our brain. These facts are secondary to experience. It's like introducing a mother to her child. She made her greetings before they were even born. So was language conceived in the presence of this affection. Why else would humans need to reinforce in thousands of dialects this previously unspoken emotion with an "I love you" for no other reason than love? Woo... that got kinda windy. How totally unsexy. Lol... |
|
|
|
Post by milkman's baby on Aug 22, 2010 5:54:45 GMT -5
The problem is actually opposite for me. I'll exchange enticing glances with someone. They look kinda nice. They give off a nice aura. Then they open their mouth (and speak) and I lose all interest. Language is such a turn off for me... Well I'd say a good 3/4 of humans I meet on this planet I would prefer to not hear speak. But if there's only supposed to be one soulmate for me, I guess it wouldn't matter by my logic of love would it. Language is deceitful in the bounds of formality and protocol. This becomes more visible in cultures where the notion of tact is stressed, and hence the true thoughts and ideas of the individual are not really sent through the mouth or they are worded and interpreted too differently from the second individual. Nevertheless, the original premise behind language and speech was to convey ideas and thoughts to make lifestyles and community living easier. So in a sense, I am trying to say that today we have butchered this premise of language by adding both official and unofficial rules and regulations of what is fair game and what is faux pas. How can you find love if the significant other never gave any verbal indication of loving you? I can see how body language and all the smirks and flirtatious giggling would have done the job some centuries ago when such behavior was only acceptable between a man and woman with love interest. But today, body language, despite claims that it makes up 90% of our communication, is so immensely misconstrued and confusing that I would not see how two individuals from two different cultures could get a clue as to whether they both love each other. There are relationships that were brought on by force of nature, such as the mother and her child. These are forged relationships that are built in with maternal instincts and an applicable living situation. But a complete stranger - one who might even look very different from you and carry a different set of mannerisms and body language because of cultural differences - it would be an uncertain situation at the most. There are sexual relationships which can certainly arise without verbal communication. But love - love is a concept that must be blatantly brought up between the two individuals for confirmation and direction. And the only way I know to bring that up is by verbal communication. |
|
palavore
Full Member
I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold posts.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Posts: 298
|
Post by palavore on Aug 22, 2010 19:25:05 GMT -5
How can you find love if the significant other never gave any verbal indication of loving you? You would have to be blind if you needed to be told. I'd be skeptical at first if I were just told. Hmmm... do you get enough attention, sweetfart? Would a few whispers of sweet nothings into your ear complete the cake for you? Seriously, if words are the only form of love you are capable of giving, I'd consider you very limited in the "language of love". Prenuptial agreements would be an area where I expect couples to mince words and negotiate the terms carefully. But that would totally kill the mood and the marriage--even if it is important business. But if I fell in love with someone who did not speak my language, I would find some Still, you haven't responded to idea that humans are capable of displaying intense emotions and commitment to all sorts of objects, animals, and activities. To be requited verbally isn't required to kindle human passions. The men most successful in "love" seem put off the least by words and the resistance they sometimes put up. Anywho, Kinamand (Chinaman) is a 2005 film about a Danish plumber who falls in love with his Chinese wife--which was at first only meant to be a marriage of convenience (no hanky panky). They don't speak each others language. Maybe should check it out and see how two people from disparate cultures might connect emotionally. |
|
|
|
Post by milkman's baby on Aug 22, 2010 20:27:49 GMT -5
Still, you haven't responded to idea that humans are capable of displaying intense emotions and commitment to all sorts of objects, animals, and activities. To be requited verbally isn't required to kindle human passions. The men most successful in "love" seem put off the least by words and the resistance they sometimes put up. Perhaps this is a whole other topic, but what is love? Define it. The easy way out of this question would be to simply label love as a neurochemical con. I say love is not an emotion within itself, but rather it contains and causes emotions. Love is a concept and a relationship. In some sense, love is a philosophy. The love that you share with a non-family member that involves sexual attraction is a love that you must know is in possession. But to keep commitment and a genuine bond that is required of love you must be able to speak with the person to express not just your emotions but your ideas, the ways of your lifestyle, and your knowledge. I also do not think everyone is capable of loving in this sense, whether they are able to speak someone else's language or not. Despite how different a lover may be, there must be some common ground. And the ability to speak to the person should be by default the first step in common ground. |
|
|
|
Post by milkman's baby on Aug 22, 2010 20:33:43 GMT -5
Furthermore, I am curious to know whether you think there is a difference between the type of love that you shared with your mother as a child and the type of love that you share with a girlfriend/bf, wife/husband? Is the latter just the same type of love except additionally including lust & sex?
|
|
palavore
Full Member
I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold posts.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Posts: 298
|
Post by palavore on Aug 23, 2010 19:08:23 GMT -5
Sweetfart, those questions are best answered by dating around (not to be confused with sleeping around). Date all types. Talkative, quiet, down-to-earth, head-in-the-clouds, etc. Don't forget Middle Easterners ;D. You should figure out your own language of love--or how to speak it more fluently.
You can't really dismiss your friend's sister relationship as not being love without making some specific observations. And refrain from making generalizations as a substitute for some evidence. Group date if you need get in closer for more observation on the issue!
Individuals are more than just their language, nationality, or religion. Those are what they call small pieces in the game of love. Hell, I love girls with funny accents, but that doesn't stop a bad personality from ruining it.
As for your question about mothers... No, I do not have an Oedipus complex. I have good relationship with my mother, a very intellectual relationship. So yes, I'd expect a lasting relationship to grow into something similar or better once the bunny stage (infatuation) is over. Also, as a rule you should never criticized your boyfriend's/husband's mother--even if he agrees with you. It's hard to explain, but it's a primitive male instinct so don't anger the caveman.
|
|
|
|
Post by rob on Aug 28, 2010 9:27:51 GMT -5
The problem is actually opposite for me. I'll exchange enticing glances with someone. They look kinda nice. They give off a nice aura. Then they open their mouth (and speak) and I lose all interest. Language is such a turn off for me... Well I'd say a good 3/4 of humans I meet on this planet I would prefer to not hear speak. But if there's only supposed to be one soulmate for me, I guess it wouldn't matter by my logic of love would it. Language is deceitful in the bounds of formality and protocol. This becomes more visible in cultures where the notion of tact is stressed, and hence the true thoughts and ideas of the individual are not really sent through the mouth or they are worded and interpreted too differently from the second individual. Nevertheless, the original premise behind language and speech was to convey ideas and thoughts to make lifestyles and community living easier. So in a sense, I am trying to say that today we have butchered this premise of language by adding both official and unofficial rules and regulations of what is fair game and what is faux pas. How can you find love if the significant other never gave any verbal indication of loving you? I can see how body language and all the smirks and flirtatious giggling would have done the job some centuries ago when such behavior was only acceptable between a man and woman with love interest. But today, body language, despite claims that it makes up 90% of our communication, is so immensely misconstrued and confusing that I would not see how two individuals from two different cultures could get a clue as to whether they both love each other. There are relationships that were brought on by force of nature, such as the mother and her child. These are forged relationships that are built in with maternal instincts and an applicable living situation. But a complete stranger - one who might even look very different from you and carry a different set of mannerisms and body language because of cultural differences - it would be an uncertain situation at the most. There are sexual relationships which can certainly arise without verbal communication. But love - love is a concept that must be blatantly brought up between the two individuals for confirmation and direction. And the only way I know to bring that up is by verbal communication. Quit the jibba jabba |
|
|
|
Post by penguinopolipitese on Sept 15, 2010 1:54:22 GMT -5
this thread reminds me why deaf people should be sterilized
|
|
|
|
Post by milkman's baby on Sept 15, 2010 21:54:46 GMT -5
this thread reminds me why deaf people should be sterilized Sign language is still a step ahead of the Iraqi and the American who can't convey a damn word to each other. |
|
|
|
Post by TeeHee on Sept 15, 2010 23:46:13 GMT -5
this thread reminds me why deaf people should be sterilized Sign language is still a step ahead of the Iraqi and the American who can't convey a damn word to each other. I'm assuming penguin was joking with that. But for record, as someone who was once in a relationship with a Deaf guy for almost 3 years and who was also training to be a sign language interpreter, I can attest to it that communication in [American] Sign Language is more than just a step ahead of the scenario you mentioned. Presuming that both/all parties involved know the language, it's got all the properties that define a language, and is not just some primitive form of communication as some people would assume. |
|
|
|
Post by penguinopolipitese on Oct 25, 2010 3:37:14 GMT -5
you assumed wrong
|
|
pelle
Junior Member
Posts: 175 
|
Post by pelle on Apr 19, 2011 13:25:48 GMT -5
I knew a couple that communicated almost completely through their children. We all wondered how they got along before they had children, or what was going to happen after they moved out. Turns out they get along just fine, and now their grandkids have started interpreting for them, so perhaps some things were meant to be.
|
|
Actually, I think gagging couples would probably solve half their relationship problems. Sometimes there's a real need for symbolic action and self reflection.
