Poll is your love conditional or unconditional

[Gengar]

Unconditional (if animal)

Conditional (if human)

 

[Deleted Member 76607]

There is only one right answer btw

 

[over0]

but if you love everyone you don't truly value human connections as they're all "the same" to you

She's just fakedeep

Literally adapting her life philosophy of off a fucking anime/manga

 

[tuberculosisinmybal]

No, I fully agree with you on that. Modern day is too fast and transactional.
I also find your point very interesting.
If “true unconditional love” is defined as “love that transcends all conditions, even the identity of the beloved,” then it is indeed impossible, because love is a relation, and relations require relata.
In an ontological sense, our partner has to be our partner first in order for us to love them, and that is inescapable. The ordinary understanding of the word “conditional,” which you connect to something as deeply bound to a person as their personality, makes sense. At this level, the condition is not whether they change or not, but simply that they are the ones who possess the personality I fell in love with. In that way, it feels like a trade: your personality for my love.

What I mean by “unconditional love,” however, is this: my goodwill and care for you do not depend on your actions toward me or on any benefit I receive from you. Under that more grounded definition, unconditional love is absolutely possible I think.
Parents feel it toward children, soldiers toward comrades, and sometimes lovers toward each other. The condition of “you must exist as you” is trivial, of course it is you. But within that framework, the love itself is not transactional.
So it can exist (for the sake of answering the question - does it exist in the first place or not) but I too think, it is quite rare.

it is definietly a trade, you love the person you think your partner is, and if they completely change the condition is gone in my opinion, "which is not like oh you shoplifted i don't love you anymore" but more worse things like exploiting your trust or your kidness or let us call it love towards them, if i notice that someone is just exploiting my kindness and giving me nothing in return, why should I continue to love them. but if the coniditions are met there is always a possibility to love someone without expecting anything in return.

if you start doing things just to get some exchange from your partner it is already over before it began imo, you should do things to see your partner in a better mood or better place and not "if i do this i will get this"

the love you give your kids is one of the least conditional loves in my opinion, obivously there are also people who make it conditional but i would say in general the things you do for your kid don't depend on anything you get in return, you want to see your kid healthy, happy, etc.

with comrades i can agree too but there the situation is not a everyday thing, if your life depends on eachother then it will be unconditional obviosuyl

that it's quite rare is sad, because we should love eachother more in general, have more empathy towards other etc. but that's sadly in what our society has turned into, if you are too nice you get exploited. but love and genuine friendship still exist, it's not like it died out completely.

 

[Randomized Shame]

What I mean by “unconditional love,” however, is this: my goodwill and care for you do not depend on your actions toward me or on any benefit I receive from you. Under that more grounded definition, unconditional love is absolutely possible I think.
Parents feel it toward children, soldiers toward comrades, and sometimes lovers toward each other. The condition of “you must exist as you” is trivial, of course it is you. But within that framework, the love itself is not transactional.
So it can exist (for the sake of answering the question - does it exist in the first place or not) but I too think, it is quite rare.

I think there's a differences between true love vs unconditional love. For love to be true, it has to be with the understanding that your feelings towards them is not based off of a transaction. I think if your love is transactional, it's by definition (to me) not love for another person, it's love for a specific outcome or desire. To love someone is to want that someone to be happy, even if that's at the expense of yourself sometimes. To love something is to base your feelings off of how an action or item makes you feel.

Sometimes there's an argument if love can be true without unconditional love. Some people make the argument they're the same thing, and some people (like me) make the argument it's not the same thing but it's very similar.

The nature of humans makes it nearly impossible to be unconditional. I think the closest we have is parents loving their children, and in most cases I think it's mainly mothers loving their children. It's impossible to remain predictable, and consent to loving a specific version of someone does not mean you'll love every version of them. Even if you gave unconditional love to one version, it does not mean they'll always be that person.

Alzheimer's is a good example in a way. Family members report the hardship it takes to care for someone who looks like someone you used to love, but is not that person anymore. Objectively you understand that person is not who you knew them to be, and you can always remember them for who they were. In many ways, people will take care of that lost version of that person because of the love they had for a previous version of them, but you will still hear caretakers/family talk about the resentment they hold towards this new version, even though they know they can't help it. It's because even in a world where someone can't help it, in a world where you loved someone with everything you could, it's hard to love a version of someone who you did not agree to love.

It's not always out of hatred for the person, sometimes it's done out of grief for the person.

Love is complicated, but you should never shackle yourself to the thought of having any emotion unconditionally. For life is not fair, and life has conditions.

 

[nun]

Alzheimer's is a good example in a way. Family members report the hardship it takes to care for someone who looks like someone you used to love, but is not that person anymore. Objectively you understand that person is not who you knew them to be, and you can always remember them for who they were. In many ways, people will take care of that lost version of that person because of the love they had for a previous version of them, but you will still hear caretakers/family talk about the resentment they hold towards this new version, even though they know they can't help it. It's because even in a world where someone can't help it, in a world where you loved someone with everything you could, it's hard to love a version of someone who you did not agree to love.

to add on to this example - i work in healthcare, specifically with dementia and Alzheimer's patients.

there are several married couples who have only the dementia partner in our unit, so they come to visit their partners often. there are two examples, husband A to wife A and husband B to wife B: both husbands visit their wives every single day. they both will do anything necessary to make sure their wives aren't just alive, but comfortable and happy.

husband A has a very exhausted look in his eyes every visit. his love is genuine, he makes the conscious effort to visit his wife who is no longer his wife. with Alzheimer's, you do NOT get to choose what comes and goes. you can't just "relearn" how to think or remember either. they have a family history, and he's admitted that there was a long term fear that it would happen to his wife. he genuinely accepted that this is their life. but he's still exhausted, still sad. it's because it's difficult to watch her decline. to not know who he is some days. he still shows up. to me, this is true love. but the condition is that they don't live together anymore and that it was to the previous version of his wife. had he been her only caregiver, I think he would come to resent her.

husband B is gentle, and his wife doesn't recognize him at all. but he will speak to her lovingly, with a genuine smile on his face. he isn't sad or discontent with who his current wife is. he gave a speech at an event recently, and his speech centered around two themes: his wife had zero family history, and was incredibly healthy. it's due to her healthy decisions that she can still walk, even if she can't read or does not know where she is walking to. her Alzheimer's is far, and the fact she can walk without much assistance (besides from guiding or redirecting) is genuinely rare and astounding. the second theme was that she will be donated to research once she passes, hopefully aiding in how to keep people with Alzheimer's able to walk. able to communicate. their quality of life will never be the same, but she isn't miserable. his condition is hope. he hopes that her life will help somebody in the future. without this, i don't think he'd be as dedicated as he is.

 

[Randomized Shame]

to add on to this example - i work in healthcare, specifically with dementia and Alzheimer's patients.

there are several married couples who have only the dementia partner in our unit, so they come to visit their partners often. there are two examples, husband A to wife A and husband B to wife B: both husbands visit their wives every single day. they both will do anything necessary to make sure their wives aren't just alive, but comfortable and happy.

husband A has a very exhausted look in his eyes every visit. his love is genuine, he makes the conscious effort to visit his wife who is no longer his wife. with Alzheimer's, you do NOT get to choose what comes and goes. you can't just "relearn" how to think or remember either. they have a family history, and he's admitted that there was a long term fear that it would happen to his wife. he genuinely accepted that this is their life. but he's still exhausted, still sad. it's because it's difficult to watch her decline. to not know who he is some days. he still shows up. to me, this is true love. but the condition is that they don't live together anymore and that it was to the previous version of his wife. had he been her only caregiver, I think he would come to resent her.

husband B is gentle, and his wife doesn't recognize him at all. but he will speak to her lovingly, with a genuine smile on his face. he isn't sad or discontent with who his current wife is. he gave a speech at an event recently, and his speech centered around two themes: his wife had zero family history, and was incredibly healthy. it's due to her healthy decisions that she can still walk, even if she can't read or does not know where she is walking to. her Alzheimer's is far, and the fact she can walk without much assistance (besides from guiding or redirecting) is genuinely rare and astounding. the second theme was that she will be donated to research once she passes, hopefully aiding in how to keep people with Alzheimer's able to walk. able to communicate. their quality of life will never be the same, but she isn't miserable. his condition is hope. he hopes that her life will help somebody in the future. without this, i don't think he'd be as dedicated as he is.

People sometimes get caught up on what it means for something to be conditional. Sometimes the conversation becomes "Can I love someone if they intentionally hurt me?", "Can I love someone if they became someone I don't recognize?" and so on. A lot of us would like to say yes to those questions, or at least be open minded to loving someone under those specific conditions.

Though unconditional means despite everything, no matter what, and it's just not realistic. You need motivation to care for someone, and love is not motivation, it's a feeling. Emotions/feelings can die out, regardless of what you want to happen. Your examples are pretty good for that reason. No matter how they felt, they still loved them; but loving those new versions of them came with new conditions, because the previous conditions no longer applied.

 

[RottingCarrie]

If I was in love with someone only way I'd fall out of love is if they r***d our kids

 

[Transposon]

Alzheimer's is a good example in a way. Family members report the hardship it takes to care for someone who looks like someone you used to love, but is not that person anymore. Objectively you understand that person is not who you knew them to be, and you can always remember them for who they were. In many ways, people will take care of that lost version of that person because of the love they had for a previous version of them, but you will still hear caretakers/family talk about the resentment they hold towards this new version, even though they know they can't help it. It's because even in a world where someone can't help it, in a world where you loved someone with everything you could, it's hard to love a version of someone who you did not agree to love.

Ah. That last paragraph instantly reminded me of Kafka’s The Metamorphosis.

I definitely agree that the kind of unconditional love we desire often stands at a crossroads with the love we are actually capable of giving.
Coming to terms with that truth can be striking.

 

[limo8]

@limo8

Hi @over0

 

[over0]

Hi @over0

Hi limo how are you?

 

[kifykify]

Hi limo how are you?

 

[kifykify]

Hi limo how are you?

 

[limo8]

Hi limo how are you?

Good but a lil sleepy got only 5 hours of sleep last night and its history class rn but chilling tbh thank you for asking what about you

 

[limo8]

View attachment 187491

I did say that

 

[over0]

its history class rn

Low inhib limo

thank you for asking what about you

I'm good just eating carrots and chilling

 

[kifykify]

I did say that

High IQ moment

 

[limo8]

Low inhib limo

I'm good just eating carrots and chilling

Just like a rabbit

 

[kifykify]

Just like a rabbit

 

[limo8]

Rite?

 

[cindythetvisleaking]

what is love

Baby don't hurt me

 

[limo8]

Baby don't hurt me

We think alike

 

[Deleted Member 82545]

brutal 50 50 pill

 

[apatheia]

---

~—• Rea •—~​

---

brutal 50 50 pill

I have the power to change the tide...

 

[Newday]

Everyone who picked the top option will have an unhappy life and I hope will die is a grizzly death. But yes my vote is true at heart, it is absolute. Conditional love is not love, you should love your partner as a father loves their child or vice versa. Though that doesn’t mean tolerating everything, it is unconditional but presence and closeness depends on honesty and respect. It doesn’t mean abandoning yourself neither, you must stay true to who you are, always.

Very insightful, very. Watch this, it’s very fitting.

 

[apatheia]

---

~—• newday •—~​

---

Everyone who picked the top option will have an unhappy life and I hope will die is a grizzly death. But yes my vote is true at heart, it is absolute. Conditional love is not love, you should love your partner as a father loves their child or vice versa. Though that doesn’t mean tolerating everything, it is unconditional but presence and closeness depends on honesty and respect. It doesn’t mean abandoning yourself neither, you must stay true to who you are, always.

Very insightful, very. Watch this, it’s very fitting.

Well isn't all love pretty much conditional, at least at the start? Everyone has a certain set of boxes they want to tick off before dating someone.

Doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing.

 

[Newday]

---

~—• newday •—~​

---

Well isn't all love pretty much conditional, at least at the start? Everyone has a certain set of boxes they want to tick off before dating someone.

Not exactly, and I don’t, there is no need to tick off every one of my boxes, people aren’t machines in a safety examination. ‘Imperfection’ makes perfection. Modern dating has put this to an extreme though, very ridiculous, hence why dating apps are filled some of the most hollow people on the planet.

Doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing.

What you described can be interpreted in different ways, if you are meaning “I see someone and think they are attractive because of my type” then that isn’t anything ridiculous. Conditional lovers are transactional, they will give up on the slightest of problems, even the most superficial things. Conditional lovers are hollow at spirit, it is more like grading work than anything.

To put it simply, they are attracted to expectations of you and not you yourself. They are attracted to the transactions.

 

[apatheia]

---

~—• newday •—~​

---

Not exactly, and I don’t, there is no need to tick off every one of my boxes, people aren’t machines in a safety examination. ‘Imperfection’ makes perfection. Modern dating has put this to an extreme though, very ridiculous, hence why dating apps are filled some of the most hollow people on the planet.

What you described can be interpreted in different ways, if you are meaning “I see someone and think they are attractive because of my type” then that isn’t anything ridiculous. Conditional lovers are transactional, they will give up on the slightest of problems, even the most superficial things. Conditional lovers are hollow at spirit, it is more like grading work than anything.

To put it simply, they are attracted to expectations of you and not you yourself. They are attracted to the transactions.

Too many words on the screen right now, I will respond tomorrow.

 

[Xyn]

you should love your partner as a father loves their child or vice versa.

 

[Newday]

Not in the way you are thinking bruv

 

[pxe]

Naaaa what did blud mean by that

 

[Deleted Member 72595]

for you? unconditional

 

[Ruin]

it's a hard topic ngl

 

[Ruin]