Monthly Archives: March 2014

What does it mean to be Romantic?

Well the romantic period is a counter-movement to the enlightenment. Everyone was getting away from the catholic church and going towards the scientific method. However certain philosophers argued that humans are best left in their natural habitat, in nature. So you will find most works of art picture nature, and if i remember correctly, france (during a part of the Riegn of Terror) was in a state where the whole counrty was agaisnt the enlightenment, for nationalism and the romantic movement. Everyone was named after natural things (like dandilion, no joke) and the months were named oddly. I cant remember specifics but literal translations might be “no leaves” or something of the sort….

 

What does this have to do with the whole ‘romance’ idea? Well, to get away from the whole thinking thing. Whats the oposite of rational thought- emotion. side note: suicides were praised- this person felt emotions so intensely that they killed themselves. Romance is based on emotion.

 

Romantics dont do things for the phiscality, reasonability, or practicality. They do it because they feel something from it. Look at the whole rose thing. Romantics dont give them to potential lovers because “thats what lovers do”. They do it because giving someone a gift makes them feel some kind of joy. Another example, sex. Most people do it because it feels good, or thats the next step of the relationship or whatever. The romantic looks at the whole situation as ” im baring my complete self to another human being”, there is some strong emotion people feel for being able to get to this level with another human being. Two people are, quite literally, connected. And whether people admit it or not, there is an emotional bond that forms during it. (fun fact: i literally just justified sex as being romantic, you are welcome)

 

A true romantic could seriously see a person on one date, give them roses, and never see that person again. They still find joy in that night due the fact that they got to feel the wonderous emotions of a date, even if it be for one night. They could give a girl a rose and try for a single date. They would have only dated her for one night (even though they may want more), but they would still be completely happy that they got to experience true romance with her and possibly even prove to her that romanticism is real.

 

Romance is simply a preference of emotion over physicality.

Nobody Knows Anything

I’m so tired of hearing about scientists and christians arguing who’s correct about subjects, and condemning the other when they find out that they are correct. Nobody really knows anything, ill try to explain the best i can my case:

 

Back in the middle ages the paradigm was based on scripture. If you could not find it in the bible, it was wrong. You can actually find old maps based on the bible that have jerusalem in the center with barely any water, because thats what the bible said (for an image: http://www.edgeofenclosure.org/images/462_medieval-mapJerusalemCenterC1250.jpg) . Now, this is literally wrong, you can use your eyes to figure this out. Same with the heliocentric universe, this is true, however you would have been condemned to believe otherwise. The church ruled for like 1000 years. You were raised using scripture to explain everything. Anything that was counter to it was not fathomable. Take a look at Flatland, its kind of like that: They are all circles in a 2d world. Trying to say that a 3d sphere (science) really exists did not make any sense. Eventually scientists poked holes into this view on the world to where science became the new paradigm.

 

Currently we are still in the science paradigm. Its based on mathematics. Now math and numbers are theoretical and man-made construct (dolphins dont ‘count’). You could say that they are the equivalent to gospel and scripture: the basis of the paradigm. Science has improved our life in many ways, and we need to have gone through this paradigm to get to where we are headed. But there are holes being poked into our paradigm.

 

Quantum theory is starting to prove things that science said were impossible. This theory, however, is still based on mathematics (hopefully meaning that we’re on the right path) and uses it to prove its theory. The ideas of multiverses, time travel, and the same atom being in two places at once (which could explain the existance of separate consciousness or ‘the soul’) are now theoretically possible. 

 

Now eventually this may be proved wrong based on something completely different. But why must we cut eachother down on ideas that may be disproven in the future. Let the scientist believe what they want, the religious what they want, and whatever future theorists say.

 

On a side note about the bible and probably other relgious texts as well. It was written by MAN, a inherently flawed creature. Now christians (or other religions) believe that its God’s word, however, man assembled it. The catholic church actually has taken out alot of chapters (apocraphal texts), and what was put in the bible was decided by men in power. Food for thought. Just everyone stop fighting.

 

“Man is the only creature who will kill over ideology” – Robert Sapolsky

I love you, can we be in a relationship now?

Can someone really mean “I love you” when they say it before or the beginning of a romantic relationship? If to love someone means that you completely accept someone as they are, then yes.  If you really know someone before you are in a relationship or at the beginning of one. I do want to add a few disclaimers though:

–          Love is a mutual thing. Even though you really do ‘love’ them, if they don’t feel the same, then the relationship does not fall under love

–          Love at first sight cannot coexist with my statement. Because you cannot know everything about someone just by looking at them. “Love at first sight” tends to be a physical attraction that eventually becomes love; although there are times when you meet someone doing an activity that attracts you. For example: someone is at a charity event and you see into their character through noticing them do that- still that is not love, for you only know (or think you know) one aspect of that person

–          I do firmly believe that the statement has lost a lot of its meaning to people for the over- and dishonest- use of it. Chances are, when you were in high school and you said it, you probably did not mean it in this sense.

–          The love I’ve been talking about in this post is not bound to romantic relationships; it is the basis of all successful relationships. And to be honest the only difference between friendships and romances are physical attraction and possibly a closer connection.