Is Love Eternal?

[Alia]

Romantic love 'lasts just a year'

The raised levels of the protein tailed off after a year or so

Some couples may disagree, but romantic love lasts little more than a year, Italian scientists believe.
The University of Pavia found a brain chemical was likely to be responsible for the first flush of love.
Researchers said raised levels of a protein was linked to feelings of euphoria and dependence experienced at the start of a relationship.
But after studying people in long and short relationships and single people, they found the levels receded in time.
The team analysed alterations in proteins known as neurotrophins in the bloodstreams of men and women aged 18 to 31, the Psychoneuroendocrinology journal reported.

The love became more stable. Romantic love seemed to have ended

Piergluigi Politi


They looked at 58 people who had recently started a relationship and compared the protein levels in the same number of people in long-term relationships and single people.
In those who had just started a relationship, levels of a protein called nerve growth factors, which causes tell-tale signs such as sweaty palms and the butterflies, were significantly higher.
Of the 39 people who were still in the same new relationship after a year, the levels of NGF had been reduced to normal levels. Report co-author Piergluigi Politi said the findings did not mean people were no longer in love, just that it was not such an "acute love".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4478040.stm

I thought love was suppose to be eternal, never ending, lasts forever. It only lasts a year?

I read another article about love where it said there were three types, Limerence ~ this is obsessive lust basically, Loving Attachment ~ the long term relationships, and Unconditional Love ~ that which we feel for our children. Even in this article it put a time limit on love lasting as long as 6 months to 2 years.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1105827,00.html

So I'm wondering... Is there such a thing as love? Or am I mistaken?

 

[j d worthington]

Re: Is Love Real?

My own take ... there is no single thing that can be called love. It's an entire conglomeration of emotions that, mixed together, have been given that name. As long ago as the Greeks, there were plenty of distinctions being made.... And as far as "romantic love" lasting such a "short" period ... I'd say that in the vast majority of cases, this is quite true. I've run into exceptions, though, now and again, but only a handful. It's something quite wonderful to see, when it happens.

Don't expect the "high" or the euphoria to always be there, but it can return now and again, and sometimes for long periods. Part of that depends on how much the people involved are willing to work at keeping such a thing alive, through little things... notes left to each other, tiny gestures of kindness, a rose plucked fresh with dew, a special piece from a book, a poem or brief story written by one for the other that expresses honestly what they feel, what it is they see in the other that they love... And a commitment to make it through the rough times (though this absolutely has to be mutual; if one side is willing, and the other is not, it cannot work). I have to agree with something Ellison said: "Friendship is better than passion.... Lust works wonders, it puts apples in your cheeks, ... but it ebbs and flows. Friendship sustains and enriches and stays constant." If the two can go together (and they certainly can, but all too often one is lust is mistaken for love) then it's an incredibly strong thing, and is likely to last. But it also takes being able to say, even when you are at your bitterest odds with each other, that at base you wish each other well... then there's a very good chance of it being real, and lasting for good.

"True Love" as we've been taught to believe in it -- if it exists at all -- is almost as rare as anything one can imagine. It's an ideal, not a reality. But is love real, and can it last? Despite my tendency to cynicism, despite having been mauled by that tiger more than once so that I was left with my entrails down around my ankles and have enough scar tissue to have been through several battles ... I'd have to say, unequivocally, "YES. It does. It can." And, as saccharine as it may sound, for all of you, I wish you that happiness...

 

[CarlottaVonUberwald]

i think love is a rubbish word invented by people who make a lotta money out of valentines day.

however i do believe some people are more compatable than others whgich is basically what i am told 'love' is

 

[jackokent]

What an interesting thread.

I definately believe love is more than being compatable. There are very few people I am not compatable with but also very few I love. Conversly I love people I am not in the least compatable with ie my whole family.

Can you put a label on love. Someone once told me you can't describe love, you just know. I thought that was rubbish at the time but I stronly believe it now. It's probably personal to everyone so eveyone feels it in a different way and in the same way one man's happiness might look like another persons hell I guess love will defy a universal description.

I think it's a lot more than chemicles too. Just my 2pence worth.

 

[j d worthington]

As far as a workable definition of love itself, or what I think is meant by love in the context of this thread, I'd say that the best I've run across is from Heinlein (and I may not be quoting this correctly, as my Heinlein is all in storage these days): "That state of being in which the happiness of the beloved is essential to one's own well-being." That, I think, is about as close as one can get to defining what we mean when we use the word "love".

 

[mosaix]

As far as a workable definition of love itself, or what I think is meant by love in the context of this thread, I'd say that the best I've run across is from Heinlein (and I may not be quoting this correctly, as my Heinlein is all in storage these days): "That state of being in which the happiness of the beloved is essential to one's own well-being." That, I think, is about as close as one can get to defining what we mean when we use the word "love".

That's a good definition j.d. but that could define both the love of parents for their children and also the love between the parents and the two aren't the same. So, in my view there's some element missing from the definition.

 

[Azathoth]

I read another article about love where it said there were three types, Limerence ~ this is obsessive lust basically, Loving Attachment ~ the long term relationships, and Unconditional Love ~ that which we feel for our children. Even in this article it put a time limit on love lasting as long as 6 months to 2 years.

The Greek philosophers - and subsequently, Christian theologians - wrote about this particular subject way before anyone else. They divided love into four categories: Eros (romantic, lustful love), Storge (familial love), Philia (love within the context of a friendship), and Agape (mostly a Christian concept; unconditional love). Heh, maybe we could add a fifth love - the sadistic and obsessive kind of love.

The perfect relationship between spouses will include all four loves, yet each love (save for Agape) is contextual. There's a time and a place for Eros, and young lovers must quickly realize that. I think it *is* possible for the romance to last forever, but realistically, daily problems will soon supercede the all-consuming lust of a youthful relationship. Personally, I think that is what causes the changes in biochemistry, rather than a mere time limit.

 

[SalmaSadek]

Note: A Religious-based Point of view ---

I deeply believe that Love is only Eternal when the bond between the two lovers is closely connected or rooted to an eternal idea. The most likely eternal idea that connects couples for 20+ years is a comon belief of serving a supreme being (God), & this mandates elevating above trivial matters that might undermine the feelings of love between them.

 

[Saltheart]

No (if you mean the funny sensations), the chemicals produced by lust fluctuate and exponentially decay as time goes by. Attracion isn't eternal. But love can be as long as lovers make the effort to stay true and loyal. Despised popular belief, "Love means never having to say you're sorry" is utter BS. You have to apologize and compromise with each other. "Love" can only last as long as people put each other's feelings above their own. Love, in its purest form, has nothing to do with attraction.

 

[Stormpirate]

Re: Is Love Real?

Don't expect the "high" or the euphoria to always be there, but it can return now and again, and sometimes for long periods. Part of that depends on how much the people involved are willing to work at keeping such a thing alive, through little things... notes left to each other, tiny gestures of kindness, a rose plucked fresh with dew, a special piece from a book, a poem or brief story written by one for the other that expresses honestly what they feel, what it is they see in the other that they love...

This is what I agree with. My husband and I have been together 14 years (married 7). We had the giddy love in the beginning, and it settled into a more comfortable love. Right now we've crossed back into giddy love. I'm always excited to see his name on my cell phone when he calls me, and excited to see him when I get home. Part of this I believe stems from the fact that we work opposite schedules, and only see each other a day or so out of the week.

I believe "romantic love", in the giddy sense, does only last a short time. Once you become comfortable with a person, that sense of awe and mystery is going to decrease, especially when you move in together and ALL your secrets are bared!

 

[j d worthington]

Re: Is Love Real?

This is what I agree with. My husband and I have been together 14 years (married 7). We had the giddy love in the beginning, and it settled into a more comfortable love. Right now we've crossed back into giddy love. I'm always excited to see his name on my cell phone when he calls me, and excited to see him when I get home. Part of this I believe stems from the fact that we work opposite schedules, and only see each other a day or so out of the week.

I believe "romantic love", in the giddy sense, does only last a short time. Once you become comfortable with a person, that sense of awe and mystery is going to decrease, especially when you move in together and ALL your secrets are bared!

Yes, it will decrease, but I know from experience it doesn't go away altogether as long as there's an effort to work at the relationship. And even when it seems to have faded considerably, it really can come back as fresh as the beginning, and at the most unexpected times. And yes, I know what you mean: just seeing the name sends a pleasurable shiver up and down the spine, and you feel the heart race again.... Those feelings aren't there every moment, but they can be surprisingly frequent, even in marriages or other relationships that last decades. It may be rare, but it does happen. And for my part, I think it's worth taking a chance on....

 

[carrie221]

I think that if this is true then a major point of our life is gone... Love influences a lot of what we do and why we do things.

I don't think it can be measured... science and love I do not think connect

 

[Whitestar]

I think that if this is true then a major point of our life is gone... Love influences a lot of what we do and why we do things.

I don't think it can be measured... science and love I do not think connect

Agreed. The key to a successful relationship is honesty and communication. If you have those two traits, you're shiny.

 

[Briareus Delta]

Agreed. The key to a successful relationship is honesty and communication. If you have those two traits, you're shiny.

Urgh, this thread is yee-uk. Romantic love of the hearts and flowers type is a comparatively recent invention. As for any other kind, I can only say this: monogamy is not our natural state. This is why long-term relationships are such hard work and why so many marriages fail, now that society has removed the 'stigma' from divorce. Adultery these days is common and not really stigmatised either (in the modern parlance, referred to as 'cheating' - doesn't sound quite as serious as adultery, does it?).

It seems to me that in these matters, the veneer of a civilised society is rapidly wearing thin and we are returning to more primitive behaviour. Love is basically a state of mind and is the myth that is just about holding the whole thing together.

That may seem like a pessimistic view but, hey, I had to get this thread away from all the mushy stuff somehow......