Unconditional Love vs. Conditional Love

[Nie]

If one would follow the items I mentioned forward, you would find the reasoning on why the childs welfare is of some importance and benefit to us.

Investment. You invest/take heavy losses early on but reap rewards later. You take a lot of beating and suffering now but you get what you want later out of someone.

Denial, by some humans in the effort to satisfy another need.

Theres so many... I do not deny that there is a need to care for another human, all that i am saying is that there is a reason for it for all of us and it serves us one way or another.

It is cheesier to tell a lover, "I love you unconditionally(I hope you do too coz thats what i want from you)" vs "I love you because I get these out of you....list of items here", it can make a lover think higher of you or something.

ok have to go, ciao for now

[Shiroi Tora]

Yes...those are all the wrong reasons.


Your confusion comes because you are taking the word unconditional to mean a lack of a conditions that YOU have....NO it means to not have a set of conditions for the CHILD to fulfill to get your love. 

You naturally get fulfillment from achieving your parental goals (positive reinforcement from the subconscious).  We are not talking of a lack of MOTIVES in the parent.

It is about having no hoops for the child to jump through before you give it love.   

[Nie]

Well if we are to go with semantics then I guess it is true and is what I am saying also anyway, the child doesnt need to actually do anything but merely exist for a parent to do those things in the typical setting atleast. Its like a burger, it just exists to be eaten it doesnt ask you to munch on it, right.

[Aspergers Girl]

I think unconditional love exists.

You can hate someones screw ups but still love THEM.

[Nie]

one can still love a person amidst their shortcomings if the benefits from the relationship still outweigh it. some benefits seem too simple actually that we dont even notice or take them into consideration - hence we think its really nothing, its really completely unconditional. at times we ourselves choose not to search within us why... because it leads to something unpleasant, its actually more logical to just look away - instances like, "why do you stay with this guy??? hes an ass", "oh i just love him, thats all" ... really... its actually more like the person gets something from this guy that makes it worth it to bear with his crap

i guess a thing to consider is... its debated on but what is love actually. coz different people see it in different ways. i forgot the show but one said, "to him love may be equal to having sex with someone while to you it may be giving up everything in this world for her happiness, but you both think youre in love and giving love but its not the same but both of you arent necessarily wrong"

this is why, i hate using this word; its so cheesy and so easy to say and bend in a real world setting.

and  something else to shiro, reasons dont necessarily need to be right or wrong. good for one as they say is a point of view. theyre just reasons, thats all there is to it. one human cannot simply so easily judge what is right for another for their variables are never teh same

[Shiroi Tora]

Please don't misunderstand....the only unconditional love I am espousing (as stated in the OP) is that to the pure and innocent....children and pets...and to those who are of not in their full capacity - not of their own doing. 

This does not apply to romantic relationships....I am for placing conditions on them...no infidelity for one.....now you need not hate them....but you may certainly leave...and eventually forget them...move on to better....rather than live in a betrayed existence.

[zenemu]

I think perhaps the confusion in this thread is simply that unconditional love, or indeed love hasn't really been defined very well. Love can be a very positive force and it can bring hope, peace, self improvement and any number of beneficial things, but equally other forms of love can be destructive and unhealthy. Many of the worst things that happen in day to day society are done in the name of love. I agree with Fiona when she says that you can hate someone and still love them, but I would also add that you can love someone and hurt or damage them, sometimes beyond repair.

Unconditional love probably does exist; perhaps the more pertinent question is should it?

[Shiroi Tora]

I think perhaps the confusion in this thread is simply that unconditional love, or indeed love hasn't really been defined very well. Love can be a very positive force and it can bring hope, peace, self improvement and any number of beneficial things, but equally other forms of love can be destructive and unhealthy. Many of the worst things that happen in day to day society are done in the name of love. I agree with Fiona when she says that you can hate someone and still love them, but I would also add that you can love someone and hurt or damage them, sometimes beyond repair.

Unconditional love probably does exist; perhaps the more pertinent question is should it?

Love is the placement of someone before themselves.   Their life...happiness...welfare.  Nothing short of that is love.  It is NEVER bad.   Evil may be done in the NAME of love...it however...is not love.   

Should Unconditional love exsist?   

We could not exist as a people, long term, without it.   It is what allows mothers to make the sacrifices they do.   We would degrade as a species were it not true.   Ever see mother animals with their young....many will fight to the death to protect them.   Love is instinctual....hormonal....but the reason doesn't matter.   We as humans act on love in many ways...but always for the betterment of the other.  Should any other action take place...it is not love...period.

[zenemu]

Perhaps, but that does rather make the assumption that unconditional love is a mutual thing - it isn't always. Equally as you pointed out earlier in the thread, love is dependant on certain chemical and biological conditions, which can change or be altered either through experience, environment or a natural biological progression. Many mothers for example have no apparent natural bond with their children and although sometimes this is nothing more than post natal depression, in other cases that never changes. Personality types also come into play.

[Kresjah]

[I started writing this post before the latest reply, but was interrupted by a phone. I won't change it though, but just keep in mind that what I say may have already been touched upon by the time this is out there :p]

I would not say that it is the lack of a definition of love (or unconditional love) that makes this debate a flurry of confusion, but rather the lack of definition for what a condition actually is. It simply seems that what one sees as a condition, another does not.

Take for example these two simple question: Is instinct a condition? Can instinct be overridden?

I know that some would say no, which leads to "instinctual love" (in lack of a better way of saying it) qualifying as unconditional; the maternal instinct. This "unexplainable" love is unconditional. As a sidenote; what about the situations where a mother doesn't love her child? Wouldn't this mean that unconditional love is possibly to defy as if it was a condition?

Then there are those who'd answer yes to it. Some could even take it to the extremes stating that there is no free will, just perception of will through "advanced natural reactions" (chemicals, electromagnetics, etc.) in our bodies. That makes everything a condition, thus by that definition unconditional love can not exist. Heck, I'd even say that puts the whole concept of instinct at question.

There's a ton of other answers in between the extremes but the actual arguments are, for the moment, besides the point. My point here is that the confusion seems to lie in the definition of what a condition really is. Not only that, who are to decide what is wrong and what is right? This seems to me to be an abstract concept (that is unless one adopts the "no free will" concept), am I right? If so, how does one prove the correctness of something abstract like this?

It looks to me that if there is to be any hope of this discussion turning into anything constructive, there needs to be an agreement to what certain definitions actually entail; most of all what "conditions" mean. Otherwise I believe this confusion will just continue, with no one getting anywhere.

A little side note too:
I haven't re-read what I've said earlier in this thread, but I'm gonna guess that I'm as guilty as other people here in stating ones own opinions as if it was fact. Whether it really is intentional or just being passionate about the discussion to the point that one might forget that it can be perceived as "I am right, you are wrong", I can't really know... but it does seem that the further this debate has gone (without having re-read it all, so going by memory here), the more I feel that the posts are moving towards that stance. Maybe we should (myself included) consider

[Shiroi Tora]

Perhaps, but that does rather make the assumption that unconditional love is a mutual thing - it isn't always. Equally as you pointed out earlier in the thread, love is dependant on certain chemical and biological conditions, which can change or be altered either through experience, environment or a natural biological progression. Many mothers for example have no apparent natural bond with their children and although sometimes this is nothing more than post natal depression, in other cases that never changes. Personality types also come into play.

No...actually, it is the Mother's love for the child which is unconditional (should be)...the child must learn to others more...his wife...and his children.  There will always be a special place for mom in the child's heart....but it is from parent to child where the unconditional love must lie for humans to prosper.