Is Romantic Love Based on Reasons, or Is It Essentially Irrational? Essay Example

Introduction

The fact remains that it is impossible for romantic love to be rational; it can relate to a musical improvisation where we can compare two artists improving off tone another. They are fundamentally distinct but intertwined to each other. Neither of the artists can anticipate what move the other will take. Therefore, we can equate romantic love to these two artists or instead to players whereby as much as it looks irrational, we can conclude that it is particular rationality.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

A failed relationship or a broken heart affects or disrupts the human physiology, bereavement and sometimes may precipitate death. Romantic love can be exclusive because it involves intimacy, which encompasses feelings of attachment, and passion that consists of the connection and sexual attraction. The love of a friend and that of the person can be in several ways like rating the intensity of his feelings, examining the nature of his friendship, and also comparing other relationships.

One thing we should understand about love is that it is not a substitute for reality and it will not ask him to live in a fantastic version of it because it relates to real life. This relation to real life understands that there are good days and bad days and it naturally gets through them with style and sometimes with bitterness and angst. The only thing that hurts about love is that it does not break his heart but splits it open to make way for more to enter. It is a choice made every minute of every single day.

Question 1: Must romantic love by its nature be exclusive?

The question of whether love can reference to biological phenomenal is that it is a profound effect arguably on both our mental and physical state. A failed relationship or a broken heart affects or disrupts the human physiology, bereavement and sometimes may precipitate death. Romantic love can be exclusive because it involves intimacy, which encompasses feelings of attachment, and passion, which consists of the connection and sexual attraction. The love of a friend and that of the person can be in several ways like rating the intensity of his feelings, examining the nature of his friendship, and comparing other relationships.

Personal philosophical issues and problems raised by love are that the particular character of love is misleading in a way that someone love is private or an inner object that is unreachable using language. The facts say otherwise because love is personal and I would challenge the reasoning that philosophizing of love is not the same as loving. For instance "in one sense learn the language of love and never be in love" (Rhee's 1969). It is quite confusing when trying to learn the language of love when someone has not experienced love in other relationships like friends and family or somewhat experiencing other people in love. In that aspect, we can conclude that personal problems encountered in love indicate entirely different from the philosophical questions raised about it. Workings through these questions we may get clarifications about love or perhaps cloud our judgment justify what's at stake in our personality.

Question 2: Is it possible to maintain your identity if you are in love?

The question of whether a person can maintain his or her identity while in love is yes, but still, the means to the end is unpredictable. With the proper balance of previous relationships with the current one, sustainability and personal ethics are crucial. Love does not exist for what we possess but what is underneath our skins. The ethics and moral philosophy on whether romantic love is morally permissible are the prohibitions and general rules that apply. Judgment on our behaviors contributes quite a lot on our conscious development.

The actual statement philosophically is deciding or defining what counts as love specifically. I can argue that it is elucidating to see something like love in different situations. It marks a distinction between philosophical issues in respect and that of personal nature. It is a belief there must be a single general feature that runs through instances that relate to love. The main point is to recognize the context of how questions arise and clarification of the kind of issues. We often ask ourselves what is love or instead are we feeling love or maybe it is merely infatuation, for a person experiencing love for the first time it creates a wonderment of the question that is these really what it feels when someone is in love with a dismissive gesture.

Question 3: Must romantic love by its nature be exclusive?

The actual statement philosophically is deciding or defining what counts as love specifically. I can argue that it is elucidating to see something like love in different situations. It marks a distinction between philosophical issues in respect and that of personal nature. It is a belief there must be a single general feature that runs through instances that relate to love. The main point is to recognize the context of how questions arise and clarification of the kind of issues. We often ask ourselves what is love or instead are we feeling love or maybe it is merely infatuation, for a person experiencing love for the first time it creates a wonderment of the question that is these really what it feels when someone is in love with a dismissive gesture.

Generally, the experience of love gauged in the language we speak which is the reaction to the recognition of personal decision and the actual meaning of these words. Analytical philosophy within conceptual analysis reveals underlying principals and conditions that define the correct language to use when expressing one's feelings. When criticizing the aspects of language about love, it is merely the expression of the existence of experience.

We cannot make a stipulation of whether something is love or not or when somebody cheats her wife and finds it as less of a problem in his marriage; he says it was not intentionally. The fact remains that, if someone cheats on her wife and pretends that he is not hurt because he did not mean to hurt her, it is an impression of lack of personal values other than love. In order not to contradict philosophical facts, it is not a matter of somebody loves, or we love, but it is the notion that they are in love.

Bibliography

Wittgenstein, L. and Rhees, R., 1969. Philosophische Grammatik.