Is it possible to romantically love more than one person at once?
Debate Rounds (4)
2.) Intimacy is a close familiar, affectionate, and personal relationship with another person. Based on this definition, you can be intimate with a friend, where as intimacy is not limited for only sexual relationships.
3.) Sexual relations are not required to have romantic love.
4.) People can not control their emotions towards another person. They can although control their behaviors. However romantic love is based only upon feelings, behaviors in this case are irrelevant.
5.) Monogamy is defined as the practice or state of being married to one person at a time.
6.) People can be in monogamous relationships and still be romantically involved with other people. There does not need to be any interactions whatsoever to romantically love someone. It is based only on feelings, thoughts, and desires.
7.) A person may be able to divide their feelings into more than one person. For example: You may love John for certain reasons, and you may love Mike for different reasons. There are not justifications that one must combine all of their feelings into only one individual.
8.) It is not morally wrong to romantically love more than one person at a time. In most religions, it is only shameful to go against monogamy. However, as I stated in premise 5, it is possible to be in a monogamous relationship and without going against any vows, also romantically love other people.
9.) Therefore, it is possible to romantically love more than one person at once.
Premise 2,3,5,6, and 7 are Non-controversial.
Premise 2 and 5 are based on definitions. Premise 3 regards to the definition of romantic love, where sex is not a component. Premise 6 simply states that based of the definition, there does not need to be any physical interaction to have romantic love, merely emotions. Premise 7 states that there are no restrictions of merging all of your feelings solely into one person, it is possible to feel different emotions towards different people.
Premise 4 and 8 are Controversial.
Premise 4 can be argued against since there are precautions to take in order to prevent feelings, depending on the person and their state of mind. Premise 8 can also be debatable considering thoughts and desires as acts of betrayal to your significant other.
2.) It is true that intimacy does not depend solely on sexual relations. However, romantic intimacy differs from non-romantic intimacy. Where as, romanticism usually involves physical intimacy which is characterized by passionate attachment and sexual activities. Non-romantic intimacy involves romantic friendships that DO NOT include sexual activities or passionate attachment.
3.) I agree that sexual relations are not necessary in order to experience romantic love. However, the desire to share your body with someone usually derives from romantic intimacy not non-romantic intimacy.
4.) People cannot control their emotions towards other people. Romantic love is based on significant characteristics of the beloved, therefore being romantically in love with two people would entail that the additional love is based on different characteristics. The two loves would be considered contradictory rather than complimentary. In conclusion , no one can control their emotions, but romantic love is entailed to ONE INDIVIDUAL , you may feel other types of love for other people but not romantic love.
5.) Monogamy is defined as the practice or state of being married to one person at a time. But it also entails having one sexual partner , and one mate at a time.
6.) It is possible to remain monogamous in a relationship, while loving another individual. However that form of love may be : storge the love of affection and fondness, phillia the love of friendship and strong exsiting bond, or agape the love of self sacrifice and unconditional emotions. However, Eros the love of romance is defined as "wanting a woman and wanting a particular woman". You may only experience Eros with one individual at a time.
7.) There is no such thing as dividing the same type of love with more than one person. As I stated before there are four major types of love. You may experience different loves with different people. You may experience phillia love towards John , and storge towards Mike. But eros will only be experienced with one individual at a time since it entails particular characteristics at a particular time in your life.
8.) In conclusion, love is a complicated emotion that is difficult to understand. There are different types of love and you can love people differently. Romantic love can only be experienced with one individual at a time. People often confuse intensity, infatuation, and lust for romantic love.
9.) Therefore, it is not possible to romantically love more than one person at a time.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Premises 1 and 5 are not controversial.
These two premises rely solely of definitions of each discussed term.
Premises 2,3,4,6,7,8 are controversial
These premises may be argued depending on a persons view and beliefs of love, intimacy, and monogamy.
3.) I do not agree with you. Regardless of the desires and urges one can feel towards another person for sexual activities, it is still just an emotion. No action needs to take place in order to be considered as romantic intimacy. Thus, sexual relations are NOT required to have romantic love.
5.) Monogamy can entail having only one sexual partner, but as I stated in Premise 3 Sexual relations are irrelevant in romantic love.
6.) I do not agree. Love is a very general word. There are many types of love as you described. However, according to the definition we both agreed on, Romantic love does not state a particular woman, the components in the definition describes emotions that one can feel for more than one person. It is a very general definition that people can agree to feel this way for more than one person at once.
7.) This just brings me back to my point in premise 6. Regardless of the different types of love, the definition states that to have romantic love the major components are intimate affection and passion. Therefore, you may have an intimate affection and a little passion for John, and small amount of intimacy and strong deep Passion for Mike. Both considered to be romantic love, however in different situations and most importantly with different people.
8.) My point is romantic love is not clarified as feelings one must feel for only one person, but as feelings one must feel towards a person in order to be determined as romantic love. With that said a person may feel this way towards more than one person, either in different amounts of feelings towards the different people, or completely equal amounts. There are no rationalizations that romantic love MUST be narrowed to only a singular person.
3.) Regarding to the different types of intimacy, I am specifically speaking on the romantic intimacy where involves physical intimacy which again usually involves sexual relations. So on that note, sexual retains in this situation is not irrelevant and is an actual factor when it comes to romantic love.
6.) I understand that we agreed on the definition, however the components in the definition does not describe the emotions one can feel for more than one person. In fact going back to my 2nd premise, there are different types of intimacy, and with those different types of intimacy people can experience it with different people. However people can not share the same intimacy with different people. Therefore, you can romantically love more than one person at once.
7.) I completely disagree, although the definition states what we both agree on, it is inevitable to ignore the facts that suppress the definition. Such as the different types of love. Having that said, my previous arguments are completely relevant in saying that like intimacy, you can have different types of love with different people. But you can not romantically love more than one person at once.
3.) No, sexual relations is not a factor of romantic love. I understand you trying to point out that sexual relations is relevant. I will give you that. It may be relevant. However my point is that is it does not NEED to be relevant. Thats the key word". NEED. In order to have romantic love one does not NEED to have sexual relations. You may have sexual relations and still have romantic love, yes. At the same time you may also not have sexual relations and still have romantic love. It is not a necessary component of romantic love.
6.) You are not understanding what I am trying to prove. You have not given me any rationalizations to prove why to each types of love must only be shared with one person. Regardless of intimacy or love, you can share each of those with different people at once.
3.) I understand what you are trying to prove . However regarding romantic love, going through the definition with in the definition, romantic intimacy involves physical intimacy. In physcial intimacy, the components include passionate attachments and sexual activities. This proves my point where you said interaction is not needed for romantic love. Since you agree to according things to definitions, it is NEEDED for romantic love.
6.) I have given you rationalizations and I will give you more. As I already stated there are four types of love. And Eros the love of romance is specifically for a particular person. Also romantic love is based of a persons characteristics. So you can only romantically love a particular person who has those characteristics. You can not romantically love more than one person with different characteristics. This all just proves my point that romantic love is a personal attachment that you can experience with a particular person. Therefore, You can not fall in romantically fall in love with more than one person at once.
6.) If we were debating about the types of love and the types of intimacy I would agree with most of the things you are saying, however this debate is on Romantic love. Therefore you arguing about the types of love is not helping you trying to prove that is it impossible to romantically love more than one person at once. I strongly stand by my argument that it is possible to romantically love more than one person at once.
4.)People have no control over who they fall in love with and the amount of people they fall in love with. It is under their control, whereas it is not very much preventable to romantically love more than one person, it just happens upon your emotions towards certain people.
7.) I still stand by this premise that people can divide their feelings within more than one person. Under the elements of roman love, you can feel stronger towards one person in passion and stronger towards another person in intimacy. Though there are no rules of the quantity of how many people you can love at once romantically.
8. ) Thus, It is possible to love more than one person at once.
6.) The types of love are my rationalizations which I am trying to prove to you for why it is impossible to romantically love more than one person at once. It is completely relevant in this argument because in fact romantic love is indeed a type of love aka Ethos, which is proven to be shared with a particular person. Thus proving my point completely.
7.) Therefore, as my final conclusion it is not possible to love more than one person at once.
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.