The saying goes ‘better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all’. Do you agree?

Browsing responses (4)


Erny in English

" better to have loved and lost than never to have loved...

Love is ubiquitous. Songs and other media tell us that love is a goal worth achieving. People are saying that love is inherently good so we should thrive it. I think that this notion is naive. The citation conveys the impression that people should long for love instead of not loving at all. it even goes further. The saying claims that love itself outweighs the loss of it. The message of this saying is in my opinion misleading. First, love is a narcisisstic force. I think about love as a fixation on a person which is replaceable. After loosing love ,people are searching for love again. The person longs for another object to satisfy the intense urge to reexperience the thrill again. This state of mind is neither good nor bad. But it allows to progress my argumentation. If people love somebody , there will be often the fear of loosing it. When we think about love ,then we also think about loosing " the love of my life". The media contributes to this notion by singing about their "loved" person who left them. In Addition, nearly every soap-opera ,for instance Greys Anatomy, creates their "thrilling" storyline with "failed love". We are all the time confronted with love in its negation (lack of love). People want love and are searching for it. When they find it, they want to perpetuate it. Therefore people who have loved, are stuck in a perpetuating circle. They want to replicate the same conditions when they first felt this feeling/ met the object of love. People who never loved are not in a perpetuating circle. They stand outside thus they can observe the lovers from a different point of view. The saying implies that love can be lost. But should an "intimate" relationship be a fleeting one ? Loosing someone means that a person or both come to the conclusion that the condition where they are now does not correspond with the situation while they had met each other. We can say that this love is embedded in (unconcious) narcisissitic conditions ("Fulfill me !"). If the conditions are not fulfilled , the relationship is "lost" In my opinion it is not a kind of love that I want. For me, people who are outside of this perpetuating circle have a higher chance having a relationship which fulfills more and is sustainable. For people inside ,it is more difficult. The aim in my opinion should be finding "agape". Agape is a kind of love which is not narcisissitic. It is love that does not want something from the other person. It is unconditional love. This love is an ideal and it is questionable if somebody can attain it completely. Though the saying implies another type of love which is called "eros". It is passion ( In german we would say: "Leidenschaft ,die Leiden schafft"= passion which creates suffering) , it is a fleeting feeling. Sometimes agape and eros are mixed so it is difficult to differenciate. A person who observes love from the outside does not confuse easily agape with eros like other people. Maybe, they do not experience the bitter sweet feeling of eros but they have a wider scope of thinking how they can attain a higher level of "forever lasting love" which the media tries to recreate unsuccsessfully.



Apr 21

3 min read


loganjled in Korean


네, 특히 요즘에 동의해요. 현대에 일상 패터너 만나고 싶려면 여러 사람와 사귀야 해요. 왜냐하면 사람들은 너무 많은 것에 영향을 받아요. 당신의 사귀고 있는 사람 무슨 기차 갖고 있는지 잘 몰르겠어요, 그래서 결혼하기 전에 그 사람과 함께 살는 걸 주전해요. 소셜 미디어와 인터넷은 파트너를 장기간 유지하는 걸 거어렵게 만들었어요. 이제 사람들은 비현실적인 기준을 가지고 있고 주목 끌는 걸 노력해요.



Apr 15

1 min read


Ducky in English

Is Better to Trying it

Is better to have loved and lost, or not to have never loved? I think is better to try it and love, although this love doesn't work. Is very sad to live a long life without a bit of love. When people is young, it is more easy fall in love. With the pass of years is a bit more difficult to meet the ideal person. One of the most important things in life, is to find to perfect person, at least for you, to share it. Some times it works and in others not, but if it works the life is very more funny.



Apr 11

1 min read


Monsieur_Elephant in Russian


Я попробую перевести тему, на которую я хочу ответить здесь: "Говорят, что лучше любить и проигрывать , чем никогда не любить. Вы согласны с этом утверждением?" Во фильме (и книге) "Имя розы", сюжет которого расследование монаха Уильям Баскэрвилский в то время средневековия, персонаж Адсо Де Мэлк (юченик Уильяма) влюбляется в молодой крестьянке, а Уильям ему спрашивает: "Адсо, ты уровен, что ты не перепутаешь любовь со страстью?" По мнению ученного монаха, который конечно знал традиционную разницу греческого происхождения между "ерос" (чувственной, эротической любовью) и "агапэ" (братской, духовной любовью), очень плотский "ерос" — обмачив, тогда как настоящая любовь происходит из сердца. "Ерос" — только желание владеть кем-то, но "агапэ" — личное чувство братства. Очевидмо, это очень христианское мнение. Но это показывает что-то интересно: есть разные понимания слова "любовь". Кстати, я считаю, что старые языки (как греческий язык) точнее, чем наши, чтобы рассказывать о любви, но это другая тема. Я имею в виду, что мы называем ошибочно "любовь" разные чувства, которые на самом деле страсть или просто плотское желание. Ошибка ещё общее в наше время, где "любовь" стал видом поверхностного потребительства. Мы встречаем с людьми на Тиндер и других аппликациях, "потребляем" их и сразу после, забываем их. Несмотря на это, мы все любим (кроме психопатов, может быть). Есть 1000 разных манер любить. Мы не должны резумировать лубовь плотскому челанию. Конечно, "ерос" — красив, магический, но часто, самые глубокие, устойчивые и настоящие виды любви не относятся к страстью, которую возможно видеть в многих голливудских фильмах.



Mar 17

1 min read

Why not write a response in your studying language? We believe in you.

Practice writing

Global journal statistics

  • Total journals: 39237
  • This month: 876
  • Today: 0