Jusunlee.com Forums
Show all 16 posts from this thread on one page

Jusunlee.com Forums (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/index.php)
- Love and Dating (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=22)
-- Does Love At First Sight Exist? (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=1651)

Posted by Zero-Sen on 05-07-2002 11:39 AM:

Does Love At First Sight Exist?

Does it? Is it possible to love someone at first sight?

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 05-07-2002 12:05 PM:

it is possible to think you love someone at first sight, and when your relationship develops and the love becomes real people might think it was love at first sight but it wasn't. (thats a real run-on sentence, sorry). I don't see anyway that could be possible. Loving someone from first sight is only on an aesthetic level, and love comes from something beneath that. Regardless, i do believe in attraction at first sight.

Posted by kRypTic_nABi on 05-07-2002 12:25 PM:

i think that what people may assume is love at first sight is really just a really strong attraction which will den lead to getting to knoe each other better..which will maybe lead into loving each other.

i dont understand how one can love another just by looking at their face..like the psycho sed..[ ]..love comes from a deeper feeling inside..and not from the "aesthetic level"

gOod question by da way~

Posted by TAIgrr on 05-07-2002 01:53 PM:

its rare..
but its possible :huh:

__________________
.

Posted by aznkid1008 on 05-07-2002 03:12 PM:

i find that hardly possible come on u just met wat just cause u 2 r cute means u will be happy 2gether longer then a month i dunno...

__________________
the fool is the one who thinks he is wise, yet the wise one is the one who thinks he is a fool

Remember the heros
Remember the lives
Remember the day
God bless

Posted by psyTeK ver. 2.0 on 05-19-2002 06:43 PM:

face the facts kids, love at first sight is 100% impossible. absolutely impossible. you are unrealistically setting a fate for your emotions when you see someone "at first sight" just due to physical looks. if its not lust, its just physical attraction. there's no previously acquired knowledge about the person's personality. real love has NEVER been spawned from pure lust/physical attraction. ever.

__________________
¢´ Face The Facts ¢´

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 05-19-2002 07:05 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by psyTeK ver. 2.0
face the facts kids,


How old are you? Just wondering, for you have called us all kids (if you couldn't figure why i inquired)

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by psyTeK ver. 2.0 on 05-19-2002 07:21 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman


How old are you? Just wondering, for you have called us all kids (if you couldn't figure why i inquired)


uhh, face the facts: i could just as easily have swapped out that word "kids" with "people" but i chose one of the two. i didn't intend to create an issue about maturity and age here by using that word, but seems you have. don't think too hard about it.

oh, and yeah. you make the assumptions to how old i am. i don't mind whatever your conclusion is.

__________________
¢´ Face The Facts ¢´

Posted by MellowYellow on 05-19-2002 08:36 PM:

no... i don't believe love at first sight exists. i agree with snowman(sorry i don't remember your name... david is it?)... you might have THOUGHT it was love at first sight after your relationship gets more serious
but i believe.... it's LUST AT FIRST SIGHT......
love at first sight... is superficial.... it's exactly what it says.... SIGHT.... about the looks.. not the person... you can't judge a person's personality based on how they look (well maybe how they dress).

Posted by daNNy LuV 1TYM on 05-19-2002 09:42 PM:

this question is similar to othr rhetorical questions like duz fate exist? is ur life predestined? can u change ur destiny? to a lot of pplz, thaz all just bullshit cuz they dun believe in that stuff. a lot of pplz dun believe in fortune telling eithr.

but as far as mai opinions go ~ definitely YEs!!! i believe in love at first sight. i believe in fate. i believe in destiny. is there a way u can actualli PROVE it? not exactly. there are many situations where the cause cud go to love at first sight, but sum1 will find them arguable -_- but i definitely believe in it. and i can't explain and won't attempt to eithr-i just do

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 05-20-2002 07:14 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by psyTeK ver. 2.0


uhh, face the facts: i could just as easily have swapped out that word "kids" with "people" but i chose one of the two. i didn't intend to create an issue about maturity and age here by using that word, but seems you have. don't think too hard about it.

oh, and yeah. you make the assumptions to how old i am. i don't mind whatever your conclusion is.


Well, it doesn't matter if you don't mind what the conclusion to what i'm saying is, cause i just feel like typing about it haha. Have fun i suppose kid.

I hope i'm not the only one growing tired of this guy and the fashion in which he imposes his ideals on everyone (your not imposing? I don't care, notice that when people post something, it's what they THINK or FEEL, not more FACTS hahaha. I find that hilarious by the way oh great PsyTek. In other words it's an opinion and if you just come up here and make a big deal about how your not imposing....it was never a big deal in the first place. And if you were to say i had made it a big deal by typing this much i can type a lot more cause i usually do).

So anyway, if you knew what the word kid meant it'd help you out a lot. Go look it up. If you do it will say something like "younger than oneself," "younger variety of a animal," or "to mock playfully or tease; to deceive in fun." (graci to dictionary.com btw). Now, watch me use it the right way: Get over yourself you arrogant kid. Now thats how you use the word. I'll connect the dots for you, kid matches withthe definition of "to mock" and also in teh sense of "younger than oneself." See how they tie into each other? Mocking because you seem lesser than one in maturity.

Don't take offense though, i wasn't intending to make it an issue of maturity. I could have easily replaced the word kid with man/womyn, k? See how feeble your response is? You weren't trying to make an issue of maturity? I really don't think thats the case. You are correct in that you could have not used that word, and if you didn't want the same connotations to come along with the word then why did you not use the word people? My guess is that you wanted to use the word kids, and not people but when somebody challenged the maturity level issue (hah, if i can call it challenging) then you resorted back to the same old Chuecop answer of "i didn't do it." You use the word to bring about connotations of mocking or the other being younger than you. Is that not a reasonable assumption? If you call us kids, you must be older than us in some way. That assumption is valid and

uhhhh (i wasn't going to do this haha, but here goes) face the facts: you used the word with the intent of the connotations the word brings, but you don't want to be challenged by it so you just chuecop out of it. You don't want me to think about it? Nah, i didn't think about it that long, and this didn't take that much time to write seeing as your posts have so many contradictions and holes i can fill in (leaving for you to just run away again kid). Anyway, Look at what i said. That is not a big assumption, it's me asking a question "How old are you?," so in fact you made assumptions about me interpreting the word as it applying to us being younger (so you do know what it means!).

Anyway, later kid. (Man, this isn't up to my usual calibur haha, i need to work on it )

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by Crazydeb8ter on 05-20-2002 09:19 AM:

Btw, psycho, that statement that he made falls under the fallicies of "red herring" or "trivial objections"

haha thought you'd find it interesting...

__________________
ni pour ni contre; ça m'est égal

"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/ Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say./ The oldest hath borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long."
King Lear (V.3.300-304)

Posted by psyTeK ver. 2.0 on 05-20-2002 03:06 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman


Well, it doesn't matter if you don't mind what the conclusion to what i'm saying is, cause i just feel like typing about it haha. Have fun i suppose kid.

I hope i'm not the only one growing tired of this guy and the fashion in which he imposes his ideals on everyone (your not imposing? I don't care, notice that when people post something, it's what they THINK or FEEL, not more FACTS hahaha. I find that hilarious by the way oh great PsyTek. In other words it's an opinion and if you just come up here and make a big deal about how your not imposing....it was never a big deal in the first place. And if you were to say i had made it a big deal by typing this much i can type a lot more cause i usually do).

So anyway, if you knew what the word kid meant it'd help you out a lot. Go look it up. If you do it will say something like "younger than oneself," "younger variety of a animal," or "to mock playfully or tease; to deceive in fun." (graci to dictionary.com btw). Now, watch me use it the right way: Get over yourself you arrogant kid. Now thats how you use the word. I'll connect the dots for you, kid matches withthe definition of "to mock" and also in teh sense of "younger than oneself." See how they tie into each other? Mocking because you seem lesser than one in maturity.

Don't take offense though, i wasn't intending to make it an issue of maturity. I could have easily replaced the word kid with man/womyn, k? See how feeble your response is? You weren't trying to make an issue of maturity? I really don't think thats the case. You are correct in that you could have not used that word, and if you didn't want the same connotations to come along with the word then why did you not use the word people? My guess is that you wanted to use the word kids, and not people but when somebody challenged the maturity level issue (hah, if i can call it challenging) then you resorted back to the same old Chuecop answer of "i didn't do it." You use the word to bring about connotations of mocking or the other being younger than you. Is that not a reasonable assumption? If you call us kids, you must be older than us in some way. That assumption is valid and

uhhhh (i wasn't going to do this haha, but here goes) face the facts: you used the word with the intent of the connotations the word brings, but you don't want to be challenged by it so you just chuecop out of it. You don't want me to think about it? Nah, i didn't think about it that long, and this didn't take that much time to write seeing as your posts have so many contradictions and holes i can fill in (leaving for you to just run away again kid). Anyway, Look at what i said. That is not a big assumption, it's me asking a question "How old are you?," so in fact you made assumptions about me interpreting the word as it applying to us being younger (so you do know what it means!).

Anyway, later kid. (Man, this isn't up to my usual calibur haha, i need to work on it )


face the facts,
calm down... seriously. i didn't read all of ur reply cuz it was a little long. i wonder if everything you wrote made you become satisfied with yourself. *shrug* hmm.

__________________
¢´ Face The Facts ¢´

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 05-20-2002 05:09 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by psyTeK ver. 2.0


face the facts,
calm down... seriously. i didn't read all of ur reply cuz it was a little long. i wonder if everything you wrote made you become satisfied with yourself. *shrug* hmm.


face the facts
i'm not mad, and i never was. A word to the wise psyTek, long messages does not equal aggravation of any kind. Rather, it was a simple rebut (look through the debate forum and you'll see long responses of all kinds, and i'm never mad).

Am i satisfied? nah, i don't get satisfied by posting on here like you do (you stated on some other thread, or this one that you do i believe). I'd encourage you to try and respond to what i posted actually, you've been doing a good job of running so far. So btw, you haven't told us how old you are? So what is the answer? I'd like to know.

btw, Hahah that is correct victor . Thank you ^^.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 05-20-2002 05:10 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by MellowYellow
no... i don't believe love at first sight exists. i agree with snowman(sorry i don't remember your name... david is it


yep, my name is david

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by MellowYellow on 05-20-2002 05:24 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman


yep, my name is david


haha sorry...you know how my memory is.... PBOING~... haha...
i'll remember it for sure now

oh yea but anyway.. what happened in here? jeez...

the "facts" are: love at first sight doesn't exist.. unless you believe that attraction= love..... you don't know ANYTHING about the person at first glance... well you might know some things.. but that would be assumptions....

and if you do believe that love at first sight exists. maybe you're just shallow....

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:48 AM.
Show all 16 posts from this thread on one page