Is it possible to romantically love more than one person at a time?
Debate Rounds (4)
2. The human has three mating drives: lust, love, and attachment; all three desires are strong, deep, emotional desires to connect with another person, contain a pleasurable feeling due to an emotional attraction, and create a feeling of elation, all of which are included in the definition of romantic love.
3. When a person has a lustful desire towards another person, this can be found as the strong, emotional desire to connect with that person that is described in the definition above. (And also the emotional high and exhilaration [part of the definition] experienced once the sexual relationship is achieved.)
4. In one"s desire to have a loving connection with another person, for example a monogamous relationship, you can find the expressive and pleasurable feeling from an emotional attraction, and the emotional high, exhilaration, and passion when with your lover, as described in the definition above.
5. If you"re feeling any two of the three human mating drives towards two different people, you are romantically loving more than one person at a time.
6. Once you feel as intense of a love as described above, the case of a breakup does not mean the feeling vanishes.
7. When a breakup between person A and person B ends badly, this could prolong the feeling and desire person A has to connect with that person; when you are not allowed something, you want it even more.
8. If person A is now comfortably in love with person C, although never fully healed before starting the new relationship with person C, the feeling of elation, exhilaration, attraction, and the desire to connect will be present if the previous lover comes around, concluding that the romantic love still remains.
9. In the case of the Fundamentalist Mormon religion, plural marriage is common and acceptable, and actually believed to be necessary in order to reach their "celestial kingdom," the highest of heavenly kingdoms.
10. Fundamentalist Mormon"s religiously believe it is a necessity to connect with more than one person, and create eternal loves.
11. The Mormon families raise children, and last together for lifetimes.
12. Therefore, it is possible to romantically love more than one person at a time.
1. This is the definition we agreed upon for romantic love.
9-10. These are facts about the Fundamentalist Mormon religion.
2. This is true because across cultures, religions, and the varying personality types of humans, the biological desire to love and have affection remains, however may be shown in different ways. For some it may be a desire to have a sexual relationship in order to feel love, for some it may be a relationship based solely on the emotional feeling of love, in which they do/do not have sex, and for some just the feeling of attachment to another human being.
3. This is true because wanting to have a sexual relationship with another being defines within itself: the strong desire to connect with the other person, an expressive and pleasurable feeling from an attraction to the other person (clearly if you"re having a sexual desire), and an emotional high and the exhilaration and passion when being together (once the act is completed).
4. This is true because being in love is defined synonymously with romantic love, as defined in statement 1.
5. This is true because all three of the mating drives are defined by the definition of romantic love.
6. This is true because many things happen while being in love. The relationship could have been made up of happy, romantic times, made of memories that cause butterflies at the thought, or it could have been made up of all horrible times, arguments, and emotionally traumatizing experiences. Whether it is either of the two, or a mix of both, a relationship is not easily forgotten, like any long endured experience.
7. It is a human tendency to desire more of what they can"t have. While this may not always be the exact case, it is most commonly shown that one person will still desire the other after a breakup, proving that the desire remains even if repressed deep down.
8. If you never really get over somebody, their mere presence will hinder a sensation in your body, remnant of the previous love you shared. This concludes that the love still remains, and person A currently loving person C does not affect that.
11. It is part of the Fundamentalist Mormon beliefs to create multiple eternal love connections in order to reach the most heavenly kingdom, which they call "Celestial Kingdom." One may argue that there are cases in which Mormon families will divide and not last lifetimes with children, but there are many more proven cases in which they do not break up, and therefore it is a possible claim.
2-3. While this may be true, lust is very different from love and must be separated. Love is the feeling of attraction to something whether physical or not. Lust is strictly strong sexual need. It is often short term in within relationships and a lack of it leads to frustration which leads to additional relationships. If lust is included in the definition of romantic love, the lack of lust in a relationship disqualifies it as a relationship held by romantic love.
4. This is a recitation of the definition. It doesn"t state whether this is possible amongst multiple people.
5. I discussed love versus lust in my statement of premise 2-3; Lust and attachment could also only be carnal and not necessary love. For example, men and women often feel lust and attachment in BDSM clubs and other such practices without being romantically in love with their master/slave.
6. If this is the case, you are indeed still seeking solely one person meaning that another will most likely not satisfy the feelings that still remain after the break up. Desire is simply a craving and is quickly sated once achieved and is as fleeting as lust is. It can easily be sated alone. Humans can desire many things at a time, but romance is singular no matter how many desires spring up throughout a relationship.
7. Being romantically involved with multiple people is considered adultery and unethical across many religions and practices. Desiring more than one romantic partner is an act of greed and selfish manipulation.
8. If Person A is indeed in love with Person C, Person B or C would only satisfy their lust and not actually be their romantic love interest.
9. Therefore, it is not possible to romantically love more than one person.
4-5. In premises 3 and 4, I broke down the feelings and descriptions of lust and love to conclude my point in premise 5: If you are feeling these two feelings, with two people, you are by definition romantically loving two people. It may be hard to re-evaluate the definition we mentally possess of romantic love, but by the definition we agreed upon for the sake of this debate, a lustful relationship is classified as romantic love. As well as if the location you are in happens to be a BDSM club, the definition does not have any exceptions.
6. Your point is understood, but I beg to differ that one can still be in love with another person, and understand that he/she is not meant to be with that other. Therefore, while still loving that person and wishing one day things could work out, this person seeks to live their life currently and could possibly fall in love with another person. Do their previous feelings for the previous lover shut off that simply? Or are you saying it is not physically possible to ever fall in love again until you completely erase the feelings and history you had with your first love?
7. By all means, cheating is 100% unethical, quite possibly the worst thing you could do to a person, which causes trauma that is irreversible, trust issues for (possibly) ever, and the pains and heartbreak of an emotional abusive relationship. But the question at hand is not whether it is ethically and/or morally correct, but if it is possible.
8. I guess you are stating that if you are in love with one individual, another could only satisfy you in a lustful manner but not in a loving one; that once you love someone, you cannot come up with the love for another. I disagree. This would mean our love metaphorically fills a beaker and once its maximum capacity is reached, we cannot love any more or else our love will metaphorically spill out over this beaker, and forget this whole metaphor, it just does not make sense. It is very well possible to not be with an ex-lover anymore for a given reason, still possess a romantic love for that person, but fall in love with another, because your love does not have a limit.
10. Therefore, it possible to romantically love more than one person at one time.
4-5. Practitioners of BDSM are not always couples and they do not participate long-term. Most involve themselves in the activity outside of the home. These cannot be considered relationships, yet alone romantic ones, if it is an activity that is paid for.
6. If you are still seeking love based on your definition on solely one person, then yes, you are not fully over the person and can"t move on. The additional relationships are only substitutes and will never satisfy you like the person you"re still in love with did. You may share interests with another person and gain pleasure during intercourse, but your attention will always be on the person you still love. Love is often defined as a desire to spread your genes with another person or thing and it is possible to not want to share your genes with someone who you like to sleep with and are emotionally attached to.
7. I agree
8. This isn"t in regard to how much love you are putting into a person, it"s more on the effort. It is tiring, time consuming, and stressful to manage dealing with multiple relationships and the human body simply can"t manage it. While love doesn"t necessary have a capacity, it can"t be distributed equally when you can only manage so much.
9. Jealousy will also always be an unavoidable issue in romantic relationships and where there is jealousy, there is lost love. If it occurs in singular romantic relationships, no doubt it will occur tenfold in multiple romantic relationships. As stated in 8, it is impossible to divide time and devotion to multiple partners, which will lead to them becoming unattached and no longer loving the person enough to trust them.
6. There are actually people who are addicted to the life of having relationships with more than one person, and we can tell this by looking at men that can never stay faithful. Sometimes, it is because they desire different things from different people, but like in the definition, it could be any of those such as, the desire to have a deep connection with someone, the exhilarating feeling when in the presence of someone, the expressive and emotional attraction towards someone. So we cannot say it is impossible to be fully involved in multiple relationships when it happens quite often.
8. This is correct. It will be exhausting and the jealousy will overwhelm one when trying to equally split time, devotion, care for multiple people. However, this isn"t something we consciously think of doing, but more so naturally do when loving someone. We go out of our way to see them, care for them, and while it may be hard to do for two people instead of one, it is definitely possible. For example, the side chick, who is aware she is a side chick, but is okay with it as long as her man spends the weekend with her. It is not logical, but it is possible.
9. Therefore, it is possible to romantically love more than one person at a time.
8. It is quite possible that the "side chick" could be a one-sided relationship, however, it is clear that the primary partner could negotiate time to spend with both. Good point.
1. Romantic love is defined as the expressive and pleasurable feeling from an emotional attraction towards another person; the deep and strong emotional desire to connect with another person, causing an emotional high, exhilaration, passion, and elation when you and your lover are together.
2. The human"s three mating drives: Lust, Love, and attachment, are all romantically driven relationships.
3. Different people participate in different combinations of these drives for their own reasons and needs, however participating in two of them with two or more people is romantically loving more than one person at a time.
4. As healthy human beings, we have a memory that does not allow us to just forget someone and all of the emotions we had towards them, just due to a break up.
5. As jealousy and devotion may interfere when trying to make time for two individuals whom you romantically love in order to maintain a relationship, it is possible.
6. Therefore, it is possible to romantically love more than one person at a time.
I do not agree that if you are in love with one person, another would only satisfy your sexual needs. Another person could also contribute to supporting you, caring for you, falling in a romantic love with you. Our love is not held in a hypothetical container with a limit as to how much is allowed to fill it. Our love is infinite and can be shared amongst multiple people if we choose to. I do agree that jealousy and devotion may interfere when trying to make time for two individuals whom you romantically love in order to maintain a relationship, but it is nonetheless possible. I agree that it is 100% unethical to be romantically involved with more than one person, on the circumstance that your initial lover did not agree to such a relationship, that it is not clear that person would want that type of relationship, and that you are not doing it behind their back.
2.If different drives are necessary and only two out of the three requirements, someone will be left out, resulting in the opposite of the above definition.
3.Although you say we cannot forget love, it is very well possible to be detached, which according to your definition, will not qualify as a romantic love relationship.
4.I still believe that it will be taxing and extremely difficult to balance multiple relationships equally due to the constant commitment and devotion needed.
5.Therefore, I still disagree that it is possible to romantically love more than one person at a time.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.