Biography Of John Van Epp 's Ram Plan

Love is unique in its striking ability to be a driving force in dictating interpersonal relationships. It patterns behavior and orients individuals towards their distinct, unique attractions. According to Velleman, love penetrates deeper than one’s qualities; it extends to one’s rational will, or the essence of a person. To him, though love appears to have particularity, it is also a moral emotion. Kolodny subscribes to the relationship theory, asserting that an ongoing, interpersonal, and historical relationship with a relative is a part of the reason for love. In Kolodny’s view, the existence of the true self is irrelevant, as is the morality of love. Both Velleman and Kolodny disprove the quality theory; however, their perceptions of love and its morality differ. I believe that Kolodny is correct in his view that morality is irrelevant to love and that there must be factual reasons for love. Although it is enticing to believe that one is attracted to the essence of another, the essence is not motivation enough for love. The relationship theory takes into account the motivation needed to love a particular person from a historical, interpersonal, and ongoing perspective.

When one looks at romantic love, one would conclude that it is a social dyad that brings about certain responsibilities between two people in a relationship such as honesty, protection, openness and expressions of love. (William, 2008: 76). Contrasting with

The human idea of love is quite possibly the most misunderstood in today’s society. Love can be between a man and woman, mother/father and their kids, or even really good friends. However, these relationships of love go through many interactions and stages to start and progress. Many psychological events must occur and be worked through in order to be successful. All relationships must endure the five perspectives of human behavior. These perspectives are biological, learning, social and cultural, cognitive, and psychodynamic influences.

“’Yes, but how often the happiness of marriages founded on reason crumbles to dust because the very passion that was disregarded makes itself felt later.’ said Vronsky. ‘But by “marriages founded on reason”, we mean marriages between those who have both passed through that madness. It’s like scarlet fever: one has to get it over.’” (125)

It is often said that all good things come to an end. Relationships come and go, and some mean more than others. In fact, there was even a relationship model developed by a communication researcher by the name of Mark Knapp. In his model, he goes through what seems to be presented as a smooth step transition from each stage in which a relationship eventually evolves into. As I studied this up then down ladder model, I began to realize that I ought to build up some strong calf muscles, because my relationship sure has climbed up and down a few flights of stairs. Mark Knapp believes that relationships go through multiple stages, the uphill stages being initiation, experimenting, intensifying, integrating, bonding, then relational maintenance. On the flip side, Knapp believes the descending stages to be differentiating, circumscribing, avoiding, and eventually, termination.

The ability to love is possibly one of the most recurring aspects of humanity. Everyday people fall in and out of love with each other 's personalities, opinions and lifestyle choices. In his novel 1984, George Orwell depicts a dystopian, loveless society. The technology, newspeak, and doublethink force conformity on Oceania, the setting of the book. The lack of diversity in people creates a world, where there isn’t any reason to love anyone else. Family relationships that were formerly built with love, support, and loyalty are ripped away and replaced with distrust, anxiety and hostility. Sexual relationships no longer have love or pleasure, which makes them mean virtually nothing, except the hope of

Marriage has been a heated controversy for the past few years because people often marry for the wrong reasons. Anyone who thinks of an ideal marriage would think of two people loving each other and sharing a personal bond or goals together. Marriage is regularly defined as the legally or formally recognized union of two lovers as partners in a personal relationship. This definition remarks there is an actual connection between two people in marriage, but do people actually consider this when committing to “love” and “support” their partners forever? As research and studies have shown, people ultimately get married for many reasons, except love. This philosophy can be easily applied to the short poem, “Marriage” by Gregory Corso. In this emotional poem, the author argues marriage is more effectively understood or known for culture and convenience rather than through the abstract considerations of love. Here, we can identify people generally decide to marry for the incorrect reasons, for instance the story of the author himself. Corso finds himself confused multiple times, wondering if he should marry to not be lonely, for tradition and for his physical and mental health. He disregards love, a relationship or a connection with his future wife. General ways of convenience like loneliness, health and economic status between cultural stereotypes and religion are usually the true reasons of why people chose to have the commitment of marriage with another person.

Hazan and Shaver (1987) proposed the theory that ”Romantic love is an attachment process.” (Hazan & Shaver, 1987), which the individual will experience differently depending on the attachment history that has been formed by the internal working models based on the social interaction with caretaker as an infant. According to Bowlby, these internal working models are essential for attachment patterns throughout life from childhood till adult love relationships (Fraley, 2010).

In Katherine Porters “The Necessary Enemy” through her analysis of the modern construct of what some people may call “Romantic love” also provides us with a cursory history of the evolution of marriage throughout the years and its implications as far as couple interactions are concerned. Although she poses the question, her insufficient response still begs for an answer: how did what she called “Romantic love,” possibly find its way into marriage? Porter only begins to describe the present circumstances by differentiating the ideas of accustomed invocation of “hate” and the idealistic “Romantic love” but provides a useful insight into the impeccable nature of humans, we create our own sufferings out the bad experiences we find some semblance

The stark divide between love and marriage shown right the way through cannot be comprehended fully by the twenty-first century reader: in today’s society marriage and love are mutually exclusive - you very rarely get one

Forming close relationships is the most important thing humans do. Our entire lives are made up of the successful efforts and the not so successful attempts. The most unique and tricky type of relationship to form and maintain is the romantic relationship. In the chapter, Relationship Connection, Harvey and Pauwels give us an in depth analysis of a tool that can help romantic couples maintain and increase closeness. This idea is called minding the relationship or minding. Minding, according to Harvey and Pauwels, is the “reciprocal knowing process that occurs nonstop throughout the history of the relationship and that involves a complex package of interrelated thoughts, feelings, and behaviors”.

be with each other and fall in love with each other. The Knapp’s development model Harry

While people are often able to identify when they feel the emotion love, love itself seems to defy definition.  In her polemic “Against Love”, Laura Kipnis argues that love cannot exist as traditional expressions of love such as marriage, monogamy, and mutuality.  However, in her argument, she defines love incorrectly by equating love to expressions of love. This definition lacks a component essential to understanding the abstract concept of love: emotion. Recognizing love as emotion helps us realize that, contrary to Kipnis’ argument love by nature transcends all expressions of love. Love is subjective and exists in any and all forms. In her argument that love cannot survive as conventional expressions of love, Kipnis ignores the nature of love as emotion in favor of equating love to different expressions of love. Love is a force which exists above expressions of love; a true understanding of love can only come from an assessment of how individuals, not societies, respond to the emotion.

Poovey exhibits a nice pace in her essay by following up her thesis with an immediate example breaking down Emma Woodhouse’s view on marriage and love. Poovey states that Emma’s reluctant nature to marry is her awareness that based off her current social status marriage couldn’t give her anything she already has

Our innate tendencies affect out behavior patterns in the life cycle. From love, sex, and marriage and the change from societies to past and future times. The discoveries of why we have mating traits and how they are used in many meanings such as a smile or the way a person speaks with their body. The forces of culture and environment take part in human involvement in the world. While men and women start to change roles and rights are broaden in a marriage. Along comes divorce in which happens so often in societies because of many reasons. What we have inherited is from out ancestors and it repeats itself in every life cycle. The expedition of the book Anatomy of Love goes through the past to future on love, sex, marriage, and divorce and how it relates to modern societies.