I wrote this in Kriegsphilosophie in relation to my views about marriage:
Ultimately I don’t believe in love, I believe in intelligence. For me, it is not the love that makes me love a person so to speak, it’s the intelligence found inside. A majority of Westerners still focus on that love is required to love in a relationship. That I happened to love someone is more of a side-effect of what I found inside a person, rather than love itself.
I guess what I really want to say is that I am aiming a social critique against the notion of how we view love. A lot of people say, “it’s nice to love”, but is it really the love we should be living for? Love, just like marriage, is just a symbol given a meaning, but I think a human being can be meaningful without symbols.
And I thought I could challenge some Christians with their view about love as a symbol as well, if you really read what I said carefully.
Love has no meaning outside a cultural context. Humans give it an instrinsic meaning because we believe in its meaning. For an animal, love is equal to air, simply because an animal cannot understand the symbolic meaning humans attach to love in their respective cultures.
If we also look at how Christians actually behave to their countrymen, it also turns out that the person they are projecting their love to is rather secondary. It rather seems to be the communal notion of love that is important than actually loving people, where the persons to whom you are projecting the love to are more important then the love you are projecting. That means that love itself becomes redundant as a symbolic carrier, and it would furthermore mean that you are more genuinely interested to those you are talking to instead of “spreading love”, and telling people how much “you love”. Because it seems what you are really after are just people who too, share this view inside a community, so in reality, it at least feels like you don’t really care about the people at all as long you have an agreement about the “love” itself.
This also holds very true in regards of what I have previously experienced. Remember, this is a challenge, not necessarily a claim I made to attack anyone or anyone’s beliefs.
Welcome! If you're new here, before you open your mail program to fire up a nasty email, you may want to first read our FAQ to avoid being ignored. If you like the content, we hope you will to subscribe to our RSS feed. Stay open minded!
If you don't like the content of this website on the other hand, kindly fuck off.
The Antichristian Phenomenon



May 31st, 2009 at 11:49 pm - Edit
The emotion "love" and the social construct are two separate things. The emotion is a personal experience and cannot be questioned. Emotions aren't logical from the egocentric viewpoint, they just happen. So if Christians feel a genuine love for their god or neighbor, it's real love. Even if this love originates from delusional thinking.
I can't believe I'm actually defending Christians here. I guess I'm just spreading the love…
June 4th, 2009 at 7:26 pm - Edit
Yes, that's true, I am not questioning their ability to feel love, I am questioning their ability why love has to be in the middle and why not the person. Maybe that was a bit unclear?
June 5th, 2009 at 3:42 pm - Edit
Hmm, I still don't understand where you're coming from. Doesn't their holy scripture state that one should kill everybody who doesn't follow the rules, and love everybody else equally? I think "follow the rules of the fairytale or die" is pretty much geared towards individual, personal oppression. Those pesky Christians keep telling you about the love, because the alternative isn't that nice to tell potential church members about.
June 5th, 2009 at 5:23 pm - Edit
Yes, but looking at such aspects only complicate this very discourse at least, don't you think?
And few Christians advocate such a stance anyway.