A series of thoughts I've been turning over in my head while I scrape popcorn from the ceiling, tear down the ugly ceiling beams, cover the paneling with drywall, plaster and prime and paint, and so on: it keeps the hands busy and frees the brain to ponder at length. Okay, pondering has reached maximum capacity and now I am at point of please to be getting additional inputting.
Here's the premise: you've met someone, and are solidly falling-in-love -- whether that be a love-at-first-sight or gradual drift from friends into something deeper. You might safely say that this person is "the one" for you; the first flush of lust/infatuation has become the brink of something longer-term.
Alrighty, now let's say someone you trust -- or at minimum has authority satisfactory enough to you -- explains that you are not, in fact, in love, and your experience/emotions are due to A) a magical spell, B) a drug/medicine, or C) due to tagging an ineffable instinctual landmine. (The last being inescapable/unstoppable akin to non-autonomous functions like heart-beat and breathing; I leave it open to your interpretation whether the landmine could have been avoided in the first place.) Those are the three options for externalities, with me so far?
What do you think would be the one aspect of your relationship that:
1a. Would prove to you that your relationship would continue -- as true love (forgive the romanticism but what else to call it?) -- even if A/B/C were removed from the equation?
1b. Could not be duplicated/mimicked by A/B/C and therefore by its existence indicates your love is real?
(I break those out because A/B/C may only inculcate but without damaging upon withdrawal: much like potting soil may boost a seed's preliminary growth but that at some stage the plant could survive on sun, water, soil without additional fertilizers.)
2a. Would the means make any difference in your reaction -- that is, whether the in-love is thanks to magical whammy, misfired neurons, or survival instinct gone haywire?
2b. Which of the three would be most offensive as a means of manipulation (or is it all-the-same)?
2c. Which would you consider most easily forgiven? (eg, "I can accept drugs but if you magic on me, that's way worse".)
3a. Would it make any difference if your in-love state were caused by a specific person's actions (as opposed to honest mistake/accident like tripping a long-dormant spell or drinking the wrong medicine)?
3b. Which would be worse: to learn it was purposeful, or that it was purely accidental?
4a. If you knew it was purposeful but didn't know the perpetrator's identity would not-knowing be better (or worse)*?
4b. Would you try to find out the perpetrator's identity, anyway?
4c. What if the perpetrator were the person you'd fallen in love with?
As an addendum to that last one, I find myself applying #1 and #2 specifically to the situation upon learning the falling-in-love was due to artificial causes. Would even determining that it's 'true love' be irrelevant, due to considering such acts/intentions completely unforgivable?
* the 'better or worse' idea could be applied to your sense of integrity, or to your faith/trust in the relationship... it could be that not-knowing assuages your sense of autonomy yet also causes you to doubt whether this person is really the one for you.
Here's the premise: you've met someone, and are solidly falling-in-love -- whether that be a love-at-first-sight or gradual drift from friends into something deeper. You might safely say that this person is "the one" for you; the first flush of lust/infatuation has become the brink of something longer-term.
Alrighty, now let's say someone you trust -- or at minimum has authority satisfactory enough to you -- explains that you are not, in fact, in love, and your experience/emotions are due to A) a magical spell, B) a drug/medicine, or C) due to tagging an ineffable instinctual landmine. (The last being inescapable/unstoppable akin to non-autonomous functions like heart-beat and breathing; I leave it open to your interpretation whether the landmine could have been avoided in the first place.) Those are the three options for externalities, with me so far?
What do you think would be the one aspect of your relationship that:
1a. Would prove to you that your relationship would continue -- as true love (forgive the romanticism but what else to call it?) -- even if A/B/C were removed from the equation?
1b. Could not be duplicated/mimicked by A/B/C and therefore by its existence indicates your love is real?
(I break those out because A/B/C may only inculcate but without damaging upon withdrawal: much like potting soil may boost a seed's preliminary growth but that at some stage the plant could survive on sun, water, soil without additional fertilizers.)
2a. Would the means make any difference in your reaction -- that is, whether the in-love is thanks to magical whammy, misfired neurons, or survival instinct gone haywire?
2b. Which of the three would be most offensive as a means of manipulation (or is it all-the-same)?
2c. Which would you consider most easily forgiven? (eg, "I can accept drugs but if you magic on me, that's way worse".)
3a. Would it make any difference if your in-love state were caused by a specific person's actions (as opposed to honest mistake/accident like tripping a long-dormant spell or drinking the wrong medicine)?
3b. Which would be worse: to learn it was purposeful, or that it was purely accidental?
4a. If you knew it was purposeful but didn't know the perpetrator's identity would not-knowing be better (or worse)*?
4b. Would you try to find out the perpetrator's identity, anyway?
4c. What if the perpetrator were the person you'd fallen in love with?
As an addendum to that last one, I find myself applying #1 and #2 specifically to the situation upon learning the falling-in-love was due to artificial causes. Would even determining that it's 'true love' be irrelevant, due to considering such acts/intentions completely unforgivable?
* the 'better or worse' idea could be applied to your sense of integrity, or to your faith/trust in the relationship... it could be that not-knowing assuages your sense of autonomy yet also causes you to doubt whether this person is really the one for you.