What’s the difference between love and true love in your context?
Love at first sight was explained in my class by the teacher that by an act of fate two soulmates are to meet together somewhere at some point in time and recognize each other as soulmates.
My, but this thread is full of cynics…
Love at first sight exists. It happens. Just because it hasn’t happened to you personally doesn’t mean it isn’t out there. My husband tells me he didn’t believe in love at first sight before we saw each other. And yes, there was a feeling of recognition. Weird, but that’s exactly what we felt. At the risk of sounding sugary in the extreme, everything else really did become background music.
It’s been 7 years, and aside from a frustrating inability to beat the jerk at chess, I’m still in love with him.
Come now. There are at least three schools of thought on subject…
Cynic: Love does not exist–it is merely a manifestation of self-interest.
Skeptic (Realist?): The state of lust seems to corollate with chemical reactions, while the state of love might be defined as an investment of self into the interests of another.
Idealist/Romantic: Soulmates exist as a metaphysical construct, and love therefore can exist at first contact… perhaps even before.
I’ll take the skeptical position. Without a real knowledge of the investment, love is at best a blurry image, at worst a mirage. We wander about the world without glasses, without clear knowledge of the things we look at. Who can view a piece of meat and determine with certitude that it is safe to eat by mere appearance? Sure, if the thing is raw and turning green, we know its bad, but even a seemingly cooked hamburger can be teeming with Listeria. So it is when we look at others; the substance of what lies in the interior (and that which is of the greatest import) can not be determined by sight alone.
Unless one either believes in some sort of mystical tie between souls, or has such a loose and youthful definition of love that includes mere infatuation, love at first sight (as defined) makes no practical sense. Love without the willingness to make the sacrifices of love isn’t really love at all. Take this as a litmus test: let us imagine you see someone from afar and “know” this person is “the one”. You find out a name, but you never talk to him or her. Then you read in the paper the next day that this person was in a crippling car accident, that there was permanent brain damage and paralysis. Do you spend the rest of your days feeding this person with a spoon, wiping up the drool, and changing adult diapers? Or do you say, “Oh, that’s so sad!” perhaps if you’re really devastated you visit once or twice, and then get on with your own life, searching out another “one”?
If it’s the latter (as most people would suspect), and subsequently you find your “one” after going through many candidates, the obvious conclusion is that the concept of that “one” is merely (as previously stated) observational selection–that you think your theory was confirmed by a single success in spite of the multiple candidates for the position of “one” that were conveniently dismissed.
Sure, if you have faith that God has preordained some souls to get together, you can end up with the idealist position. And don’t get me wrong, it’s pretty and romantic and would be really nice if it were true. But it doesn’t seem to me to be very likely, particularly when I don’t consider the existence of God or souls very likely either. The fundamental assumption of an ordered or disordered universe generally leads you to one or the other conclusion, not necessarily mere cynicism or idealism.
I don’t think that anyone can honestly say that they know the “right one” from just seeing them for the first time. I do however believe in lust at first sight and I think that is what most people consider to be “love” at first sight these days. You can not even begin to understand someone comepletely and/or fall in love with them, just by taking a look at them. Silly people, confusing lust with love.
To be honest, I feel concern for people who say they feel love at first sight, they seem so vunerable and dare I say it…a bit desperate. How can you possibly feel that way when you don’t know the first thing about them?
I once felt an intense physical attraction to someone at first sight, but love…no way!
True case in point. I met Mrs.Phlosphr whilst waiting tables during grad school. I was not dating anyone at the time, she was not dating anyone. I started at the restaurant, the day I walked in I looked at her, she looked at me, we both thought " Damn, she’s/he’s Hot!!" Tsssssssss…
We have been happily married for 8 years now.
Our first date was the night we met, we have never spent a night apart in 2874 days.
Will someone dispute that this was not love at first sight?
Sexual desire- yes. Affection, admiration, devotion- yes, yes, yes. I knew these would be there once we got to know each other, as did my wife. So we knew before speaking to one another.
We are intelligent people - we did not jump into anything, but we had a strong personal affection for one another, and after getting to know each other, we both found out we shared the same interests…etc…etc… She’s a psychologist, I’m a psychologist. She’s and Gemini, I’m a Sagitarius… I doubt anyone could convince me otherwise as to our immediate affection for one another.
That is not love at first sight. In fact, the fact that you both say that the fact that you both thought the other one was “hot” proves that it was not love at first sight. You both found each other attractive, when you first saw each other so, you decided to go on a date to see if you had anything in common. Love develops as you get to know someone, not just because you go “Damn he/she is hot!”
I beg to differ tears. As with any emotion it is defined by degrees. Did we have *strong affection for another * - yes. *attraction based on sexual desire * - yes. So by definition, by only meeting even one facet of the definition we experienced love at first sight. One need not meet every facet of a definition to be described by it therein.
OK…I see the problem. You are all attempting to apply logic to an emotion. This simply does not work. One cannot attempt to explain as complex an emotion as love with something as fallible as logic. It doesn’t fit the parameters.
Saying “you cannot love someone until you get to know them better” is (I’m sorry) twaddle. What on earth does getting to know someone better have to do with your emotions? I have loathed people on sight before, and my continued interaction with them has only served to cement that feeling.
I realize that I am quite new to this board (and very happy, by the way, to be here), but it seems to me that this is something that can be overanalyzed. Intellectualized into the ground, as it were. There’s nothing wrong with trusting your instincts and feelings on occasion.
I will certainly admit that a certain amount of lust was involved, but it was a secondary emotion, not what I first felt at all. Nor will I try to tell you there’s no conflict…there is!! No such thing as happily ever after. You have to WORK at relationships. And at this time, when instant gratification is the norm, making a marriage or relationship work is even harder. But, once again, this has nothing to do with original, at-first-sight feelings.
Love at first sight happens. It is, however, rare. There are so MANY people…most of them defensive, and rightly so, I mean, there’s some really twisted people out there, that it happens, I think, less frequently than it used to. Which is kinda sad.
I’m know what I felt. What I still feel. Getting to know this person has only changed the intensity of that feeling, not the feeling itself.
Phlosphr, I quite agree. It was, indeed, love at first sight. Those who have never felt it will never know, nor will we ever be able to explain that feeling to (their)satisfaction.
Maureen - Welcome! You will get along just fine here, you prove yourself a philosopher worthy of contending words on any topic here on these boards. Your “Love Acumen” seems quite genuine.
**BTW - I’d be forced to say this about her even if she didn’t agree with me. 
Look, you can not feel love for someone based on sight alone, if you do you are a very shallow person indeed. I’m not being to logic about this subject, you just can not feel love for someone at first glance. What you feel is attraction to their body. If you base your love around this feeling of “love at first sight alone,” then your relationship is very shallow. To truly love someone, you have to know about them, not just how they look or act. You have to discover their personality, intelligence, likes/dislikes, fears, hopes, dreams, wants, needs, and so on. Without understanding the other person, love is just an empty expression.
Love is blind. Like Maureen said, “One cannot attempt to explain as complex an emotion as love with something as fallible as logic.” How does one explain love? Who is anyone to tell someone else that he/she is not in love? TearsOfGlass what makes “love at first sight” so shallow? Because you haven’t experienced it?
Phlosphr- Thank you kind sir!!
Tears…HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I’m so sorry, but I must laugh. You cannot tell me how I felt. You have no way of knowing. No one can say for certain how anyone “feels…”
I didn’t say I fell in love with how the man looked or acted. I said I FELL IN LOVE WITH HIM. On sight. We were introduced. We looked at each other. That was it. All it took. As the song goes. I’m sorry you consider me shallow; your underestimation of me will be your undoing.
As for discovering that person’s wants needs, etc. ad nauseum: Yes. That came with time. As all things do.
A little background: I had been married before. To someone I liked, did not love on sight. Ditto for my husband. We had both been divorced about a year, and had both pretty much decided that we preferred being bachelors; no romantic (I did not say physical) entaglements were desired by either of us at that time. We are not children. Nor were either of us “desperate,” we were both seeing people, as the kids say. Those other attractions became…what’s the word? …
insignificant.
Again: I am not saying we haven’t had our challenges. But that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Those came down the road. The fact is, we fell in love. At first sight. The fact that it hasn’t happened to you, my dear, does not mean it doesn’t exist.
Tears Said:
You like someone who has been hurt. I discovered the personality, likes/dislikes, fears, hopes, dreams, wants, needs, and so on over time with my wife. But cite my example above, and see that attraction is with-in the definition of love. We felt love when we first saw each other. To say love is an empty expression is completely false and quite sad. Never driven by a car that you really liked and said “Oh I love that car.” You only saw it right?
Ok, sure, you can debate away “love at first sight” with your argumentation. But then again, I am sure I can find people (I am too lazy myself to do that kind of thing) to debate away the existance of love.
Just like people are always trying to debate away altruism.
Both Maureen and Phlosphr experienced and retold their stories of love at first sight. That’s enough evidence for me to believe it exists 
Maybe “love” at first sight isn’t possible IF we define love as having the attributes of a much deeper appreciation and feeling of connectivity than would be possible within the first minutes of seeing a person for the first time, but then, we’re probably haggling over semantics at that point.
I do know this much:
On the first day of high school, which for me was 10th grade in a school which had two junior highs feeding into it, I walked into Biology class and saw “her.” Instantly – and I mean instantly-- the thought formed in my head, “There’s my wife.” Now, I know how that sounds, and believe me, it sounded pretty odd to me at the time.
It wasn’t merely lust at first sight, either… but rather the odd feeling that I’d found my wife. I’m not much for mysticism, but no rational explanation makes sense for that immediate feeling. It wasn’t so much physical attraction, either, although I certainly found her pretty.
Cutting to the rather obvious chase, our 18th anniversary is coming up on Sunday. 
I think the “love at first sight” theory gains additional credibility in my case because although we did date in high school, and were each other’s “first” (ewwww— T.M.I, our teenage daughter would say )we went our separate ways for college, both had other relationships, and so on. But I knew, just like I did on that first day of school, no one else was really “wife material” – they were, by definition, just girlfriends.
I have never been able to explain the process that led me to think that thought on that day in high school, and I’ve had no other epiphanies before or since with that kind of clarity and conviction.
Does love at first sight exist? Probably not, if you consult only a dictionary or a psychology textbook. Me… I’d prefer to ask my wife.
The Discover Channel had a program on the biology of sex a few years back. A researcher was interviewed, who noted that:
Old couples (who’ve been together a very long time, and are therefore themselves old) often report that afffection like holding hands gives them similar joys to sexual activities in their youth. “OK”, I hear you say, “their memories aren’t so good!”
Certain key chemical notes, usually released during & after orgasm, rise dramatically in their bloodstreams when they hold hands, etc. - thus partially vindicating the claims of similarity between “sex-then” and “cuddles-now”.
These chemical notes /don’t/ show a dramatic rise in most young couples who are engaged in similar G-rated affection, /except/…
Couples, who claimed to have “fallen in love at first sight”, are sometimes the exception: new to their relationships, yet they show the same long-term bodily responses to each other’s gentle presence.
So, in so far as science can so far document the bodily responses to love, it does seem to verify that “love at first sight” occurs. At least according to the Discover Channel’s research.
And as for myself, I think 95%* of the time it’s really “lust at first sight”, and nothing more. However, this doesn’t discount the remaining 5%. Count me in as a convert, believing it can happen (maybe only possible for some people - i.e., can’t happen to George, but highly likely for Bill).
I find it sad, that you all are attacking me because, you say I have never experianced “love” at first sight. I’d like to tell you, that you are extremly wrong. When I was younger, I did believe in “love at first sight” and I experianced it a couple of times with a few people, but do you know what happened? I got to know those people and found out that they were not as attractive to me as I had origanally thought. Love is a complex emotion and I never disagreed with that. In fact, that is why you shouldn’t believe in “love at first sight” because, love is more complex then that. You can not just look at someone and go, “Oh my god, she’s/he’s so hot. I love her/him.”
Personally, I find love at first sight much more plausible than lust at first sight, because I have to know someone fairly well to formulate any sort of sexual attraction to them, but I often get resonances of kinship from people at first meeting. (Of a number of different varieties than the one I had when I first encountered my now-husband.)
I’m pretty far out on the bell curve on the whole sexual attraction thing, I know, but I also know that I’m not the only one over there.
I’m not attacking you, Tears. I’m just telling you: It happens. Whether you choose to believe it or not based on some past unpleasant experience is up to you. As for “OMG, s/he’s so hot!”, well, if that’s all you felt when you fell in “love,”…THAT AINT IT! it’s deeper, past the physical, and on a completely different level.
I can tell you this: closing yourself off to any experience (love, happiness, joie de vivre) pretty much excludes you from it. Is he really worth being miserable the rest of your life?