Love to You, and Why?

What are you looking for when you want a relationship?

  • Companionship

    选票: 19 46.3%
  • A mate for life

    选票: 16 39.0%
  • F-ing buddy

    选票: 2 4.9%
  • A couple days or a(few) months

    选票: 0 0.0%
  • Other (feel free to explain)

    选票: 4 9.8%

  • 全部投票
    41

正在查看此主题的用户

I am diagnosed as schizoid.

It's rather difficult as I often don't really care about any kind of relationships.
Perhaps a very close professional relationship. To do things that need to be done.
But I can do it myself, most likely.
Go from point A to point B and do C. Done, see you next month.

But I'm not completely stupid, there's certainly another side to this personality.

Closeness at an emotional level with occasional physical contact. Mutual support. And that sort of stuff.


 
Úlfheðinn 说:
I've always found Robert Sternberg's theory of love pretty amusing.  :razz:

575px-Triangular_Theory_of_Love.svg.png


It's a longer theory to explain though, so perhaps after Turkey break I will post something more in detail, otherwise the wiki article offers a decent summary of his "Triangular Theory of Love."

Lol what is this? You only get to pick two kinda deal?
 
No it's just some abstract scale at attempting to quantify relationships. You can have "all three", as Consummate Love in the middle demonstrates.
 
Why the hell is passion + commitment considered fatuous?

Edit: Oh, never mind. Infatuated. But now I'm wondering why that word is as it is.
 
Fatuous means pointless or superficial. In "fatuous love", you've got passion and commitment, but no intimacy, which I suppose struck Robert Sternberg as signifying a "hollow" relationship.
 
ComingWinter 说:
Úlfheðinn 说:
I've always found Robert Sternberg's theory of love pretty amusing.  :razz:

575px-Triangular_Theory_of_Love.svg.png

It's a longer theory to explain though, so perhaps after Turkey break I will post something more in detail, otherwise the wiki article offers a decent summary of his "Triangular Theory of Love."

Lol what is this? You only get to pick two kinda deal?

It's more like your relationship has three values represented by (x, y, z) and all three must equal 100%, so if you increase one you reduce the others. The ideal relationship is (33.3, 33.3, 33.3) where emotional and physical attraction are balanced with monogamous obligations which would be graphed in the dead center of the triangle. "Fatuous love" is only sex and monogamy, "companionate love" is platonic and loyal but physically sterile, and "romantic love" is physically and emotionally intense, but open-ended and transient. The complete extremes like (100,0,0) etc., are just purely sexual flings; friendships without duties; or lifeless marriages of convenience and stability.
 
后退
顶部 底部