Formal Mormon Theology

[I Have Questions]

It sounds like you are conflating love with attraction.

Not at all. I most definitely know the difference.

Can you give an example that demonstrates that love sneaks up on you?

[Gadianton]

A will to power and joy for another person is a manifestation of love.

Doesn't that cast love as a feeling? I looked at the Webster's definitions of love yesterday and couldn't find one that could easily escape being a feeling.

[Ego]

A will to power and joy for another person is a manifestation of love.

Doesn't that cast love as a feeling? I looked at the Webster's definitions of love yesterday and couldn't find one that could easily escape being a feeling.

If love is most fundamentally a feeling then I think it is a feeling that motivates action, so at least also a will. Yesterday I was doing a little more thinking about how love might be the principle behind non-dualism in consciousness, an impetus to break down barriers between subject and object. That takes it even further away from the realm of feeling and more into the realm of consciousness. When the brain runs its systems it often has hormones effecting it, but which would be exclusively identified as love hormones like Oxytocin? Yet even if a person is angry and full of adrenaline that anger might be directed towards a bear attacking their loved one. So they punch the bear but out of love. Conversely what about habits that aren’t particularly arbitrated by hormones but are still loving like me making dinner for my wife? Does regularity count as a feeling?
I’ve also already presented a possibility for how the theology might look different if live is a feeling instead, but in the end I think we need a narrower definition of feeling to truly get to the bottom of this.

[Gadianton]

I'm all for your love/pride dichotomy, it really is very TBM, and Mormons may have a unique way of talking about love, love as an action and a matter of will. I wonder if there are some seeming differences in perspective that amount to semantics more than anything. Take a mission. On my mission we were taught to "love the people" of our stewardships. In one way of speaking, I knock on the door, the guy answers and starts yelling, but I love him anyway by trying to understand where he's coming from, finding some common ground, and though the door slams I find myself wishing the best for him. In another, the guy answers yelling, I try to understand where he's coming from, try to find some common ground, and though the door slams, I find myself wishing the best for him, as I'm left with a modest feeling of love.

In both accounts, my "will" seemed to factor in. Extending to the romantic situation, I'm not going to get hung up over whether I loved my spouse by making dinner and listened to problems, even though I was the target of anger or whether I committed to my spouse by making dinner and listening, even though I was on the receiving end, and the act of service and the resulting understanding from listening factored into a resulting feeling of love.

I think where the break in perspective would come is if the person is saying that our actions don't factor into love in any way. In other words, serving my wife (or another person) isn't going to factor into love, period. And there are good cultural reasons for taking this perspective. American cinema and pop music very much portray romantic love as something that isn't in the control of the protagonist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuNIsY6JdUw

exhibit A is a classic trope of a guy pursued by both the untrustworthy seductress and the trustworthy girl next door, and coming to the epiphany that he loves the girl next door. Whether it's a Taylor Swift song, about a hundred movies from the 80s, or Charlton Heston in The Ten Commandments choosing Sephora over Nefretiri.

What they all have in common is the guy ultimately didn't do anything to "earn" the love of his pursuers, he just went around being a stud, which struck them with love. He, in return, was struck with love as he chose the hottest option. The real twist is that in what would otherwise seem like a moment of wisdom, where the gentleman picks the trustworthy mate, CupidMe's arrow flies as it's revealed the girl next door is objectively hotter than the seductress! Taylor Swift, after taking her glasses off and putting on a dress, is prettier than "high heels" girl. In her bio, the actress that played Sephora had been dubbed "the most beautiful girl in the world," she was going sleeper in homespun clothes while Nephetiri dressed sexy and was forward. Note that Mary Ann was considered more attractive than Ginger. Even in the Church movie Johny Lingo, the dirty slave girl he paid ten cows for was objectively prettier than the others he didn't pick once she took a bath.

Does regularity count as a feeling?

A broader issue here is with libertarian free will; what really is a will? from a determinist perspective, will itself is a feeling.

[Dr. Shades]

Not at all. I most definitely know the difference.

Can you give an example that demonstrates that love sneaks up on you?

Yes. The way you fell in love with your current partner instead of just waking up one day and deciding to love someone, then picking her (or him?) out at random off the street and then forcing yourself to love her (or him) by sheer act of will.

Doesn't that cast love as a feeling? I looked at the Webster's definitions of love yesterday and couldn't find one that could easily escape being a feeling.

If love is most fundamentally a feeling then I think it is a feeling that motivates action, so at least also a will.

Wrong. You have will to act or not act on the motivator, but the motivator is still a feeling. You don't will the motivator itself into existence.

[canpakes]

Can you give an example that demonstrates that love sneaks up on you?

Yes. The way you fell in love with your current partner instead of just waking up one day and deciding to love someone, then picking her (or him?) out at random off the street and then forcing yourself to love her (or him) by sheer act of will.

If love is most fundamentally a feeling then I think it is a feeling that motivates action, so at least also a will.

Wrong. You have will to act or not act on the motivator, but the motivator is still a feeling. You don't will the motivator itself into existence.

I suspect that these proclamations about the mechanics of love get a bit fuzzier for people who have children, or are in difficult relationships with children or parents.

[I Have Questions]

Can you give an example that demonstrates that love sneaks up on you?

Yes. The way you fell in love with your current partner instead of just waking up one day and deciding to love someone, then picking her (or him?) out at random off the street and then forcing yourself to love her (or him) by sheer act of will.

But that’s not how it happens. You become attracted to someone, and at some point you commit to investing in a serious effort to see if love for that person grows from that investment. The starting point is a determination to put time and effort into a person, love comes after that.

[Dr. Shades]

Yes. The way you fell in love with your current partner instead of just waking up one day and deciding to love someone, then picking her (or him?) out at random off the street and then forcing yourself to love her (or him) by sheer act of will.

But that’s not how it happens. You become attracted to someone, and at some point you commit to investing in a serious effort to see if love for that person grows from that investment. The starting point is a determination to put time and effort into a person, love comes after that.

So you're saying love will automatically come after such effort is invested in anyone?

[I Have Questions]

But that’s not how it happens. You become attracted to someone, and at some point you commit to investing in a serious effort to see if love for that person grows from that investment. The starting point is a determination to put time and effort into a person, love comes after that.

So you're saying love will automatically come after such effort is invested in anyone?

I’m not sure where you’ve read that. I certainly didn’t claim that.

The determination to spend time with a person to see if love grows doesn’t guarantee it will. You don’t walk down the street and realise that you love the complete stranger stood next to you in the coffee queue. You might feel an attraction towards them. You might be brave enough to strike up a conversation. That conversation might lead to a realisation that there’s a mutual attraction. You both might then make a determination to invest some time in seeing where it goes. That determination and investment might lead to love. It might not from either your or their perspective. You might have to follow that pattern with a number of people to whom you are attracted before it does grow into love for both of you. But if you don’t make that initial determination, and don’t invest that time, love won’t force itself upon you in a vacuum.

I guess you see it differently, but you’ve yet to explain why.

[Dr. Shades]

I guess you see it differently, but you’ve yet to explain why.

You just did it for me:

That determination and investment might lead to love. It might not from either your or their perspective.