Some of my latest thinking on the nature of love.
Dearest X,
My apologies for the slight delay in response. Life intervened, and I'm sure you know how (unpleasant) that can be at times.
Are you yourself Christian? I am, and it is quite fascinating how, in a religion based on love and salvation, hate and exclusion have come to define many churches. Not only that but churches also tend to be segregated by race and class, also flying the face of the universalistic message of the Gospel. It is quite difficult to be a faithful and devoted believer, and at the same time participate fully in a Christian fellowship. Many of those who profess to try believer hate the "sinner", and many who love the sinner seem incapable of believing in any sin (at all).
And you are correct: everyone does seem to be searching for their soulmate. This search is, of course, largely conditioned by the media images of what "happy" looks like both physically--you yourself pointed out some of the racist dimensions of that belief--and emotionally. What I have discovered, however, is that different people connect with people in different ways, and can be typed into four general categories. (These categories overlap somewhat, and most people are strong in two and weak in two.) The first set--thoughts and emotions--revolve around how communication occurs--whereas the second set--activity and certainty--turn on how the two lives unfold together.
Some people connected via their emotions and want a partner who is emotionally stimulating and pleasing. The ability empathize, be sad, get excited, and feel emotions in great depth and scope demarcate this group of people. (This is what most people mean when they say the word 'soulmate.') Not everyone falls into this category as there are some people who do not trust their emotions and therefore do not share as much with anyone, and there are people who emotionally stunted or immature (for any number of reasons).
Other people connect via their intellects. The ideal partners for these types are people to whom they can talk to about anything, who feel that their partner understands how they reason and perceive the world. Shared memories and sentimental paraphernalia mark these relationships. Nevertheless, since not everyone actively reflects on their lives, or don't live primarily in their heads, "mindmates" are not for them.
A third category of people connect via their shared experiences. What they do together--instead of what they think or emotionally share together--defines the relationship. These people, and I would count myself primarily among them (with a little bit of mindmate thrown in) are searching for companionship, that is, best friends for life who do a lot together and can rely on each other in good times and bad. Not everyone is looking for people to do things with and in fact may prefer to have a set of activities their partner does not do.
The last category of people bond in times of certainty. Regular interaction, the home life, and regular patterns of behavior best typify these unions. Since you know that some people are more spontaneous than others--and will greatly suffer from too much certainty--these people aren't for everyone either.
Dearest X,
My apologies for the slight delay in response. Life intervened, and I'm sure you know how (unpleasant) that can be at times.
Are you yourself Christian? I am, and it is quite fascinating how, in a religion based on love and salvation, hate and exclusion have come to define many churches. Not only that but churches also tend to be segregated by race and class, also flying the face of the universalistic message of the Gospel. It is quite difficult to be a faithful and devoted believer, and at the same time participate fully in a Christian fellowship. Many of those who profess to try believer hate the "sinner", and many who love the sinner seem incapable of believing in any sin (at all).
And you are correct: everyone does seem to be searching for their soulmate. This search is, of course, largely conditioned by the media images of what "happy" looks like both physically--you yourself pointed out some of the racist dimensions of that belief--and emotionally. What I have discovered, however, is that different people connect with people in different ways, and can be typed into four general categories. (These categories overlap somewhat, and most people are strong in two and weak in two.) The first set--thoughts and emotions--revolve around how communication occurs--whereas the second set--activity and certainty--turn on how the two lives unfold together.
Some people connected via their emotions and want a partner who is emotionally stimulating and pleasing. The ability empathize, be sad, get excited, and feel emotions in great depth and scope demarcate this group of people. (This is what most people mean when they say the word 'soulmate.') Not everyone falls into this category as there are some people who do not trust their emotions and therefore do not share as much with anyone, and there are people who emotionally stunted or immature (for any number of reasons).
Other people connect via their intellects. The ideal partners for these types are people to whom they can talk to about anything, who feel that their partner understands how they reason and perceive the world. Shared memories and sentimental paraphernalia mark these relationships. Nevertheless, since not everyone actively reflects on their lives, or don't live primarily in their heads, "mindmates" are not for them.
A third category of people connect via their shared experiences. What they do together--instead of what they think or emotionally share together--defines the relationship. These people, and I would count myself primarily among them (with a little bit of mindmate thrown in) are searching for companionship, that is, best friends for life who do a lot together and can rely on each other in good times and bad. Not everyone is looking for people to do things with and in fact may prefer to have a set of activities their partner does not do.
The last category of people bond in times of certainty. Regular interaction, the home life, and regular patterns of behavior best typify these unions. Since you know that some people are more spontaneous than others--and will greatly suffer from too much certainty--these people aren't for everyone either.
