The Instigator
missjones
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Truth_seeker
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Love Does Not Exist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Truth_seeker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/16/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 580 times Debate No: 60532
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

missjones

Pro

My argument is that love does not truly exist. This is a debate open to anyone. State your specific objection and then I will expand.
Truth_seeker

Con

I will argue that a certain kind of love exists.
Debate Round No. 1
missjones

Pro

What I am stating is that there are certain feelings that one person can have for someone else. It is a feeling that may, in certain cases, surpass gender, creed and class, relations, nationality, race etc. It is one of the strongest feelings that man may possibly hold. However, this is not what people describe as "love". Love is commonly defined as an unbreakable bond that say, a couple with a marital status share. But almost all emotions are inconstant, variable, and are always in a state of flux. What I believe people say "love" is, is simply a feeling that does not fade, and relies on constant hard work and effort. But this is not the same as "love" what people commonly say is something that may strike you, something that you can not shake no matter what you do. Something that is "meant to be".
Truth_seeker

Con

That kind of love exists in the world. Many relationships fail because of the lack of love. Trust, confidence, honesty, loyalty, commitment, effective communication, courage, love, boundaries, forgiveness, reconciliation, you name it are all part of love. The reason why relationships fail is because people lack these things. Feelings because of gender, creed, religion, family, nationality, appearance are all superficial and will eventually fade in time, but that is not love, that is lust/infatuation. Love is complete acceptance of another person's flaws and strengths.

My sister is very confident, considered to be very attractive by many guys, very straight-forward, honest, trust-worthy, loyal and committed, an effective communicator, loving, has boundaries, etc. while her boyfriend is considered to be very unattractive and lacks alot of confidence, has a brain disorder, always plays games, seems very unsociable, etc. but they love each other and have been together for more than 2 years. I've also met people who been together for over 30-40 years.
Debate Round No. 2
missjones

Pro

No, this is what I am saying, there is not love as well as lust/infatuation, as you state. Just because you have "feelings" for another person, it does not mean that it is either love or lust. I am saying that there is not true love, but I am not saying that therefore it must be lust. It is still possible to feel a connection with another person, a bond, without being lustful after them. It's about something deep inside, simply a static feeling, nothing more. I agree that relationships fail because of a lack of effort, as well as the attributes you mentioned. But these are not all a part of "love". They are simply qualities some people possess, while others do not. Your sister, as you mention, feels a connection to this man, however this feeling can simply be brought back to science, and how her particular mind works. The way you feel towards someone else may be because of certain similarities in both of your pasts, or your general lifestyles. This explains couples and the relationship they share.
Truth_seeker

Con

I argue that many forms of love do not exist, but there is one which is defined according to Wiki as "the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another"

The fact that it can be brought to science does not deny it's existence, but confirms it. Abstractly, you admit that love exists. It's the particular past experiences and lifestyles that bring people together. Only true love can do that. I've seen it happen though it's very rare because people are caught up in self. People will focus more on pain, grudges, insecurities, trust issues, etc. (including some of my friends) rather than on love, so they never find it, but love still exists. The media and society paints an unrealistic picture of love. Romantic love does not exist. Love is in a small place, hidden from many. Love is the reality when you can completely appreciate the good and bad even if it is repulsive to society. Love is not about affection, sex, kissing, any of that, it's about simple communication and compromise. It's based on compassion and loyalty.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by missjones 2 years ago
missjones
Thank you very much for debating with me Truth_seeker, your points were very valid and have given me a broader outlook on the matter.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Love does not exist in the sense it's a thing - it's a result of many things, like a tornado does not exist; it's the result of many things that create what we call a tornado.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
missjonesTruth_seekerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: con gave at least one example of love's existence
Vote Placed by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
missjonesTruth_seekerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never gave a clear definition of what true love is so could never really argue that it doesn't exist.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
missjonesTruth_seekerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con showed that at least 1 type of love exists.
Vote Placed by Robert_Weiler 2 years ago
Robert_Weiler
missjonesTruth_seekerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Love can be defined in many ways (i.e. I really love this pizza). CON only had to show that at least one kind exists to win. She did so. However, both sides made a good argument.
Vote Placed by AlternativeDavid 2 years ago
AlternativeDavid
missjonesTruth_seekerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Overall I was pretty disappointed by both arguments. I was hoping to see some arguments regarding chemistry in the brain and the like. I have to give Con points though because I do not think Pro met her burden of proof.