English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

=))))))))))))))

1derful weekend 2 all!

2007-11-03 02:42:48 · 42 answers · asked by enki 4 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

42 answers

Neither, Enki, if one knows the rules to engage in love

For me, love is a SHARING between two hearts, where a piece from one is exchanged in equal portions with another, and together, these pieces will beat together in harmonious tandem.

There should not be anything selfish about love. Another person’s heart is not a property to be won or owned, and neither is it one’s own heart is something another should be allowed to take away. On the other hand, love is simply a bonding that would bring two hearts closer together so that they would seem to beat as one. They would encourage each other to beat more strongly for each other and they would survive together.

Even in an event of a separation or when a love is nullified, the heart within us would remain beating on its own, because it had never been given entirely away in the first place. It will simply become a little broken, but nothing that won’t mend over time.

Always remember that to love another, one must learn to know and love oneself first. It is also important for our survival, to know that all on the face of this world is simply borrowed and temporary in nature; we never know when the things dear to us will be taken away. So it is best that we would prepare ourselves for it and never to fool ourselves with promises of eternity. Simply be grateful of the love known, and know when to let go…

2007-11-04 19:10:49 · answer #1 · answered by shahrizat 4 · 7 0

Can One WIN a Heart that isn't 100%? Would You Want a Heart that Wasn't 100%? Would You Want To Buy a Painting That Wasn't 100% Completed? The Typical Man or Woman These Days, Have Loved & Lost, Thus Making Their Heart a Little Colder Each Time To Shelter the LOSS of Tommorrows Heartbreak. Remember, That First Love (Comparitive to God) How They Was All You Could Think About, After They Got Home From Work They Was The One You Wanted To Be With, You Put Aside Selfish Wants and Needs For Them, Etc. Then, As If Everything Was Going Great, 6 Months Later They Cut it Off? Therefore, The Next Mister or Misses Right, Even Though you Decieve Yourself Into Thinking Their is No Difference, You Don't Love that Person as Much and The Tolerance for Anything is Way Less. So, Yes, In a Sense The Person Who 'WON' your Heart Initially Caused You To LOSE a Piece Of It For Later Relationships. THIS is Why Second & Later Marriages are Less Successful Than First. Look up The Statistics, They Have Like a 50-60% Chance of Failure.
"To Love & WIN, That is The Real Deal, To Love & LOSE It Had Been Better To Never Love at All."

2007-11-03 10:37:36 · answer #2 · answered by ? 5 · 1 1

I can look at your question as: What a sweet question or what a horrific question? it can be either of these can't they? Depending on the person's point of view and what they are feeling at the time. If ones heart is broken than it is more likely that they will view this question as horrific but if they are in love they will most likely look at it as sweet, it is the same with the answer. If you are in love it can be winning ones heart and if you have been heart broken then it would be as losing ones own. For those who are in the middle ground then they could look at it either way or say both. my self i would pick both because i am a realist but also because I am a romantic at heart and lol a softie a you know. Oh well what can i say I mixed up. hello sweety I like this question, it has taken me back to some wonderful moments and some not so wonderful moments but then again they are a part of me and they are my memories so I cannot say that I regret them. thanks enki for stirring them up. take care dear HUGs to you and many well wishes. Hope all is well. drop by any time if you want. I'm must admit you surprised me in doing so the other day but it's okay it wasn't bad at all. tttyl and take care okay?

2007-11-03 04:02:56 · answer #3 · answered by fire and ice 4 · 1 0

In Utopian world, love is supposed to be sharing your heart with somebody else's heart.
However, in reality...loving might not result in winning all the time, but always without fail ending up in losing the heart of your own. For love is not something that you can give and still retain within yourself...as when you give it out...you give away your own heart that will belong to the receiver's heart forever. You can't take it back. It's given. It's permanent. It cannot be deleted or undo as in computers. If the receiver is gone, the portion that you gave...be it a whole or a half or a quarter of your heart will be gone too. You can't get it back from any Recycle Bin...Until sometime your heart may become whole again, you might find your heart again and use it to love again. ;-)

2007-11-03 04:12:55 · answer #4 · answered by Dark Dickinsonian 4 · 0 0

Love isn't about winning or losing a heart... Love is: two people willingly placing their hearts in each other's hands, whilst promising one another that it will be kept protected and treasured always. It's through such a promise that the two hearts actually become one.

2016-04-02 02:17:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

God, another good question Enki. I don't know how to answer this. Well, i'll be simple and sweet this time. Firstly, I think losing should never be in love. I mean, you never really do lose. Like you may lose the person u love, but u gain all that wisdom, and those memories. And winning, well, if losing isn't there, I don't see the point of winning being there. I think when u love someone, firstly you don't even know it. You just keep thinking, is it love? What is love? Is THIS love? But how can it be love? You know, you just keep thinking that and all the time ur saying that to yourself, that love just keeps growing. People say that there are a million types of LOVE. I say, theres no TYPE at all. If there are, then explain them to me. There aren't. Love is just love. a four letter word. But when u read it anywhere and say it, and the way that LLL sound and VVVV sound comes together it just makes it the most beautiful word in the world. LOVE. I LOVE saying LOVE.:-) And you know, I think where loving is concerned, my motto has always been... " You will fall in with a million people, but you will RISE in love, with only one." And winning someone's heart, for some strange reason, kind of sounds fake and decieving to me. losing ur own sounds more like a sad thing than a good one. Now I don't if loving is more u or the other person, but I think its more the connection between the two people. Like, for instance, when ur looking at someone and just lost there, they suddenly turn around and look at you. Then u shyly look away. It's connection. Or when suddenly you feel this jolt of electricity rush throught u when someone suddenly touchs u. Its funny, but I think we all have a certain connection with each other. For example, you and I. We have never seen each other and barely know each other, but everytime I read ur questions I feel like i'm actually getting to know u even more. See its funny. Love is like that. It's not weird, just funny. And again I say, I don't know about winning someones heart or losing your own and nor do I have the power to judge it, but I definately know that love is a connection. A connection that you'll have with everyone. But the electricity, with one. =)))))))))))))))))

2007-11-06 11:55:30 · answer #6 · answered by Stargirl 3 · 1 0

It's losing a piece of your heart. By that I mean you take time to care and share with that person. You choose to spend less time satisfying your needs and desires and give that time and dedication to another.

If there is no action, I wouldn't call it love. It may be infatuation, lust or curiosity, but not love.
And loving does not require a payback. Therefore, it is certainly not winning someone's heart. That is a selfish view of relationships. It's great when it happens, but not required for you to love (i.e. care deeply) for another.
And if you lose all your heart to someone, what about your needs, what about the needs of your children or your parents or your siblings? Do they not have a piece of your heart as well? That would be obsessive and immature.

Peace

2007-11-04 15:58:51 · answer #7 · answered by zingis 6 · 1 0

Hi Enki,
It's 'giving a little of your heart away' but the wonderful thing about our hearts is they're bottomless. You can never love too much. When a child might ask 'is there room in your heart for me' the answer is 'plenty'. I'm not losing my heart in giving it away as it will always be mine to share. To win someone's heart and even to lose your own makes love like a game or a competitive sport! I prefer to think love is something we can all share.
Pollyanna

2007-11-03 05:33:49 · answer #8 · answered by pollyanna 6 · 3 0

neither. when you love, it's not about winning someone's heart. it's because of love that you want that other heart to return your love. just because you win someone's heart does not mean you love someone, hence the misery of heartbreak

it's also not losing your own. the term "i'd give everything for you" or "i give my whole heart to you" doesn't mean you necessarily lose it. yes, you could get so wrapped up in a lost hope of someone loving you back that you lose yourself in teh search, but usually when you love, you give all your heart has to give, and you have to have a heart to keep giving what it can.

sincere love, yes, like your question both gives and takes. however, both in a good sense. you give love, and you take it. that why the cycle never ends in a lasting relationship

2007-11-04 13:29:35 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 2 0

Love isn't associated with winning or losing.
It is however, associated with sharing with another. That is why people speak of "creating a life together", "living together", "creating a union"--as bodies, material possessions, and even precious time are shared.

If one want a more unconventional life as that of a serious truth-seeking philosopher (as his life's only and sole aim), perhaps he would not want to fall in love and "make a family" (what women want). Many avant-garde artists, such as Cezanne of his time, left his family (wife, kids) to flee to the mountain and discover a new expression of light through strokes of brush and color,as precursor to impresionism.

It depends on the aim and motivation. In reference to the two in love, it is shared. In reference to what else the person could be doing and perfecting, weighty things are lost.

2007-11-03 04:33:13 · answer #10 · answered by Pansy 4 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers