Unconditional Love-How would you describe it? (page 15)

talesin

the'60's pyschedelia , sex, drugs and rock-n-roll !!!!

w00t!

I wanted to be a hippy sooo much, but Jehovah wouldn't let me.

:D

Sol, I’d like you to consider that instead of solely applying the combined individual meaning of each word, let’s look at the word-phrase defined by the person who coined the phrase, and the meaning they applied to it’s term. IMHO, that would be a better barometer to measure by, than your personal opinion or mine.

Fine, but did you notice that what you posted confirmed that UL means exactly what I've been saying all along?

Further, that article points out the pitfalls of chasing/endorsing an belief in UL:

He (Fromm) taught that a person must love himself, accept himself, and esteem himself in order to reach his highest potential. He did not see love as coming from outside himself. He said, "I am loved because I love."

Note how he's expressing having unconditional love for ONESELF, not others. But even there, that's a dangerous belief: should Jeffrey Dahmer unconditionally love himself after killing those people, or should he feel remorse/regret for being the kind of person who was capable of committing the crimes that he did?

Fromm naively believed that a father's love was always conditional - upon success, good behaviour, etc - while a mother's was unconditional, and couldn't be forfeited by sins or transgression. His ideas were refined in the 1960s by the humanist psychologist Carl Rogers, who suggested that therapists should try and offer their clients "unconditional positive regard".

So Eric Fromm, the person who coined the term, was characterized as "naive" by psychologists who followed for claiming that a mother had unconditional love and the father had only conditional love (that's a limiting view, at best: it was 80 years ago). Note how famed psychologist Carl Rogers abandonded the term UL, seeing the concept as workable and romantic, and suggested therapists use a more moderate phrase, "unconditional positive regard".

But check the events that have transpired since in the world of psychology, and you'll find that Carl Rogers' work has been equally criticized and blamed for having led to a generation of child who were raised by parents using his idea of "unconditional positive regard", as expressed by sayings like, "I'm OK, you're OK" back in the 1960's and 70's. It reached it's peak with initiatives to not use grades in schools, or teacher not being allowed to mark students papers with red pens (deemed too shocking).

The problem wasn't using the word "love" (and problem fixed replacing it with "positive regard"), the problem was the "unconditional" bit. That approach has widely been viewed as a failure, as it created a generation of self-entitled individuals who feel they are entitled to the better things in life, regardless of what they do. They feel they have an intrinsic worth such that they deserve the finer things in life (a mansion, nice car, etc) regardless of what they do. It made sense in an era of American exceptionalism, where there was plenty of excess to go around, but those days are over for many.

For MOST people (who aren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth, AKA trust fund kids), real life doesn't go like that....

talesin

Still, I am known to be one of the local 'old hippies', so my wish is fulfilled! :P

still thinking

WOW KS...that certainly is a warped view of unconditional love. You are painting it as selfish. And at worst...excusing bad behaviour or being 'spoilt'

What a sad world when we need to dismiss anothers feelings of unconditional love as being ego centric, or compare it to excusing bad behaviour. There is no excuse for committing crimes...and I would argue, that if you really loved yourself you would not behave like that. All the people I have ever met that have been criminals have been very unhappy people that showed no real love or compassion towards themselves or others. They have been self centered, but not self loving.

Coming from a perspective of not loving and respecting myself for years...to loving and accepting myself for who I am. I feel compelled to point out that in my case, I have been much more able to give love now that I love myself. And it is unconditional.

If I choose to love someone, I place NO conditions on them. They may leave my life. But that does not mean I will stop loving and caring about them.

My exhusband and I went through a particularly nasty divorce. And yet now. I can honestly say I don't hate him although I was very angry and hurt before. I still care about him as a human being. And that love is unconditional. I would never wish him harm. It is not a deep romantic love...it is a love of mankind. Of course I don't feel much love for people that murder or do other horrible things. But I don't feel compelled to love them either. I choose who I love and what type of love I have for them. I decide if I want to place conditions on that love...or not.

That is not a place of weakness...that is a place of strength.

rip van winkle

Oh K Sol- How is it you are missing the point made? You are the one who opposed the argument based on the word use of "UNconditional" and to prove your point, provided it's definition.

While we conceded we knew the definition of the individual word, we also understood that the term "Unconditional Love" carried a specific meaning in our day. You, however would not and still will not concede that it is so. So, who are you like, Sol?

And I find that when your argument is flawed and disproven;you then go elsewhere to deflect or you don't answer the challenge. In any event, you have yet to graciously concede the point to the side opposing you.

But not tonite, dear King. I will answer in the morrow.

talesin

Well, if we want to play word games, let's go!

RE: a phrase meaning something completely different than the individual words, here's an example that immediately came to mind ....

Military Intelligence

Okay, may we concede that we all know what intelligence is? No? Here's Webster's definition:

1 a : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations b : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests) 2 : mental acuteness

Now, let's not forget that the military is the place where the acronym SNAFU originated. Situation Normal All F***** Up.

But, military intelligence refers to, again from Webster's:

Noun	1.	military intelligence - an agency of the armed forces that obtains and analyzes and uses information of strategic or tactical military value
	2.	military intelligence - information about the armed forces of another country that is useful in planning and conducting military policy or military operations

... not necessarily having anything to do with "Intelligence".

King Solomon

While we conceded we knew the definition of the individual word, we also understood that the term "Unconditional Love" carried a specific meaning in our day. You, however would not and still will not concede that it is so. So, who are you like, Sol?

Wha'? You yourself found and presented the evidence proving that Fromm's definition of UL was what I said it was, but has been relegated to the dust-bin by modern psychiatrists; you don't accept the very evidence you present?

I actually AM aware of the history of psychology, and the changes in accepted theories that have taken place over time; I've read books by the people you cite (eg Maslow is well-known for his hierarchy of needs, still considered a model of benefit to use).

But hey, if you or others want to stick with discarded disproven science as your model of human interactions, be my guest: it's no skin off my nose (just like it's not if JWs want to believe their happy clap-trap: aside from family members, it's really no concern of mine). Heck, we had a poster recently trying to strawman the field of psychiatry by saying it was enthralled by Freud, as if THAT were true. You seemingly have a same love affair with Fromm's thinking from 55 years ago. C'est la vie.

Just don't confuse your 'resistance to evidence' with 'unconditional love for an idea you'd LIKE to be true': there IS a World of difference, and the latter is more akin to JW's belief system (with a guaranteed pet lion awaiting on the other side) than you'd probably care to consider.

still thinking

It's true for me...and not even remotely like the JW's belief system.

I really don't see what pet lions have to do with it....

I am not resisting evidence either...in fact...quite the opposite.

King Solomon

For all you proponents of unconditional love, here's something to consider:

http://austin.culturemap.com/newsdetail/07-28-11-00-13-unconditional-love-a-recipe-for-relationship-failure/

And just realize that if you follow Carl Rogers advice to love yourself unconditionally, that means there ARE scenarios where you'd be forced to place your needs above someone else in order to save yourself (as mentioned above in this thread, in the case of spousal abuse). In fact, a moment's thought should make one realize that you cannot love yourself unconditionally and love anyone else unconditionally, too, as there'd be times when prioritization is needed, and under those circumstances, someone is going to be forced to come out on the short end of the decision....

Unconditional Love-How would you describe it?

Share this