الخميس، 30 مايو 2013
Ah.R
What is love? It is one of the most difficult questions for the mankind. Centuries have passed by, relationships have bloomed and so has love. But no one can give the proper definition of love. To some Love is friendship set on fire for others Maybe love is like luck. You have to go all the way to find it. No matter how you define it or feel it, love is the eternal truth in the history of mankind.
Love is patient, love is kind. It has no envy, nor it boasts itself and it is never proud. It rejoices over the evil and is the truth seeker. Love protects; preserves and hopes for the positive aspect of life. Always stand steadfast in love, not fall into it. It is like the dream of your matter of affection coming true. 
Love can occur between two or more individuals. It bonds them and connects them in a unified link of trust, intimacy and interdependence. It enhances the relationship and comforts the soul. Love should be experienced and not just felt. The depth of love can not be measured. Look at the relationship between a mother and a child. The mother loves the child unconditionally and it can not be measured at all. A different dimension can be attained between any relationships with the magic of love. Love can be created. You just need to focus on the goodness of the other person. If this can be done easily, then you can also love easily. And remember we all have some positive aspect in us, no matter how bad our deeds maybe. And as God said Love all
Love can occur between two or more individuals. It bonds them and connects them in a unified link of trust, intimacy and interdependence. It enhances the relationship and comforts the soul. Love should be experienced and not just felt. The depth of love can not be measured. Look at the relationship between a mother and a child. The mother loves the child unconditionally and it can not be measured at all. A different dimension can be attained between any relationships with the magic of love. Love can be created. You just need to focus on the goodness of the other person. If this can be done easily, then you can also love easily. And remember we all have some positive aspect in us, no matter how bad our deeds maybe. And as God said Love all
Opening Yourself to Others
The effect of genuine, other-oriented giving is profound. It allows you into another person's world and opens you up to perceiving his or her goodness. At the same time, it means investing part of yourself in the other, enabling you to love this person as you love yourself.
The more you give, the more you love.
Many years ago, I met a woman whom I found very unpleasant. So I decided to try out the "giving leads to love" theory. One day I invited her for dinner. A few days later I offered to help her with a personal problem. On another occasion I read something she'd written and offered feedback and praise. Today we have a warm relationship. The more you give, the more you love. This is why your parents (who've given you more than you'll ever know) undoubtedly love you more than you love them, and you, in turn, will love your own children more than they'll love you.
Because deep, intimate love emanates from knowledge and giving, it comes not overnight but over time ― which nearly always means after marriage. The intensity many couples feel before marrying is usually great affection boosted by commonality, chemistry, and anticipation. These may be the seeds of love, but they have yet to sprout. On the wedding day, emotions run high, but true love should be at its lowest, because it will hopefully always be growing, as husband and wife give more and more to each other.
A woman I know once explained why she's been happily married for 25 years. "A relationship has its ups and downs," she told me. "The downs can be really low ― and when you're in one, you have three choices: Leave, stay in a loveless marriage, or choose to love your spouse."
Dr. Jill Murray (author of But I Love Him: Protecting Your Daughter from Controlling, Abusive Dating Relationships) writes that if someone mistreats you while professing to love you, remember: "Love is a behavior." A relationship thrives when partners are committed to behaving lovingly through continual, unconditional giving ― not only saying, "I love you," but showing it.
ocessing. Implications for a scientific definition and typology of love are discussed.
Prototype theory has provided insights into concepts central
to psychology, including behavioral act (Buss & Craik, 1983),
personality trait (Cantor & Mischel, 1979), intelligence (Neisser,
1979), social situation (Cantor, Mischel, & Schwartz, 1982), and
environmental setting (Tversky & Hemenway, 1983). The theory
has inspired important new approaches to psychiatric diagnosis (Cantor, Smith, French, & Mezzich, 1980) and personality
assessment (Broughton, 1984). The studies reported in this article are part of a larger project designed to explore the applicability of prototype theory to the domain of emotion concepts.
We had two related purposes. The first was to use the tools of
prototype theory to throw light on the elusive concept of love.
We shall have something to say about both the definition of and
typologies of love. The second purpose concerned prototype
theory itself. Prior demonstrations of a prototype structure in
concepts focused on superordinate concepts, such as fruit, vehicle, or emotion. Would the same results occur, we asked, for
basic-level concepts, such as apple, truck, or love? We shall
begin with the second issue.
Portions of this research were presented at the Annual Convention
of the Canadian Psychological Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, June 1988.
This research was supported by a University of Winnipeg Group II
grant (4100-000) awarded to Beverley Fehr and by a grant from the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada to James
A. Russell.
We thank Pat Keelan and Sandra Wolfram for their assistance in
data coding and Jim Averill, Michael Mascolo, and Phil Shaver for
helpful comments on a draft of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Beverley Fehr, Department of Psychology, University of Winnipeg,
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3B 2E9, or James A. Russell, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T1Y7.
Prototype Approach
Traditionally, the general terms of a language were thought to
denote categories of objects or events, each member of which
possessed features that were each necessary and together sufficient to define membership in that category. According to this
classical view, to know the meaning (sense) of a general term
(i.e., to have the concept associated with it) was to know at least
implicitly these necessary and sufficient features. A definition
could therefore be formulated by philosophical discussion or—
because the defining features were also in the objects or events
—by empirical investigation.
Although some writers continue to defend the classical view
(Armstrong, Gleitman, & Gleitman, 1983; Harnad, 1987;
Osherson & Smith, 1981), considerable psychological research
reinforces a growing skepticism over its plausibility as an adequate account of most concepts used in everyday speech and
thought (Medin, 1989; Mervis & Rosch, 1981; Smith & Medin,
1981). Rosch's (1975,1977,1978) proposal of a prototype account as an alternative to the classical view was followed by
various nonclassical accounts (Kahneman & Miller, 1986; Lakoff, 1987; Medin, 1989; Neisser, 1987; Smith & Medin, 1981).
Indeed, in one account, concepts are thought of not only as
ill-defined but as varying from one person to the next, and, for
the same person, from one time to the next (Barsalou, 1987).
We make no attempt in this article to differentiate within this
family of nonclassical accounts. Rather, our purpose is to continue to specify through empirical means the properties of
emotion concepts.
In previous research, we have compared the classical with the
prototype view in the domain of emotion (Fehr, 1982,1988;
Fehr & Russell, 1984; Fehr, Russell, & Ward, 1982; Russell,
1991; Russell & Bullock, 1986), but we are not alone in this
interest. Indeed, writers as far back as William James (1890/
1950,1902/1929) have viewed emotion concepts in a way more
compatible with a prototype than
Prototype theory has provided insights into concepts central
to psychology, including behavioral act (Buss & Craik, 1983),
personality trait (Cantor & Mischel, 1979), intelligence (Neisser,
1979), social situation (Cantor, Mischel, & Schwartz, 1982), and
environmental setting (Tversky & Hemenway, 1983). The theory
has inspired important new approaches to psychiatric diagnosis (Cantor, Smith, French, & Mezzich, 1980) and personality
assessment (Broughton, 1984). The studies reported in this article are part of a larger project designed to explore the applicability of prototype theory to the domain of emotion concepts.
We had two related purposes. The first was to use the tools of
prototype theory to throw light on the elusive concept of love.
We shall have something to say about both the definition of and
typologies of love. The second purpose concerned prototype
theory itself. Prior demonstrations of a prototype structure in
concepts focused on superordinate concepts, such as fruit, vehicle, or emotion. Would the same results occur, we asked, for
basic-level concepts, such as apple, truck, or love? We shall
begin with the second issue.
Portions of this research were presented at the Annual Convention
of the Canadian Psychological Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, June 1988.
This research was supported by a University of Winnipeg Group II
grant (4100-000) awarded to Beverley Fehr and by a grant from the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada to James
A. Russell.
We thank Pat Keelan and Sandra Wolfram for their assistance in
data coding and Jim Averill, Michael Mascolo, and Phil Shaver for
helpful comments on a draft of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Beverley Fehr, Department of Psychology, University of Winnipeg,
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3B 2E9, or James A. Russell, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T1Y7.
Prototype Approach
Traditionally, the general terms of a language were thought to
denote categories of objects or events, each member of which
possessed features that were each necessary and together sufficient to define membership in that category. According to this
classical view, to know the meaning (sense) of a general term
(i.e., to have the concept associated with it) was to know at least
implicitly these necessary and sufficient features. A definition
could therefore be formulated by philosophical discussion or—
because the defining features were also in the objects or events
—by empirical investigation.
Although some writers continue to defend the classical view
(Armstrong, Gleitman, & Gleitman, 1983; Harnad, 1987;
Osherson & Smith, 1981), considerable psychological research
reinforces a growing skepticism over its plausibility as an adequate account of most concepts used in everyday speech and
thought (Medin, 1989; Mervis & Rosch, 1981; Smith & Medin,
1981). Rosch's (1975,1977,1978) proposal of a prototype account as an alternative to the classical view was followed by
various nonclassical accounts (Kahneman & Miller, 1986; Lakoff, 1987; Medin, 1989; Neisser, 1987; Smith & Medin, 1981).
Indeed, in one account, concepts are thought of not only as
ill-defined but as varying from one person to the next, and, for
the same person, from one time to the next (Barsalou, 1987).
We make no attempt in this article to differentiate within this
family of nonclassical accounts. Rather, our purpose is to continue to specify through empirical means the properties of
emotion concepts.
In previous research, we have compared the classical with the
prototype view in the domain of emotion (Fehr, 1982,1988;
Fehr & Russell, 1984; Fehr, Russell, & Ward, 1982; Russell,
1991; Russell & Bullock, 1986), but we are not alone in this
interest. Indeed, writers as far back as William James (1890/
1950,1902/1929) have viewed emotion concepts in a way more
compatible with a prototype than
الأربعاء، 29 مايو 2013
الاشتراك في:
الرسائل (Atom)
ظلم
سرعة الانفعال تشير إلى استجابة الأفراد بشكل سريع وعاطفي لمواقف معينة، مما قد يؤدي إلى ردود فعل غير محسوبة. إليك بعض النقاط المتع...
-
للحفاظ على توازن الطاقة الشخصية، يمكن اتباع بعض الإجراءات والعادات الصحية. إليك بعض النصائح التي يمكن أن تساعدك في ذلك: 1. الغذاء الصحي: تنا...
-
فكرة جميلة ومقولة رائعة. هناك حكمة كبيرة في الصمت في بعض المواقف بدلاً من الرد أو الانخراط في جدال. إنتصار الصمت على الرد له عدة مميزات: 1. ...
-
البث الحي تسجيل أسلوب حياة 14 علامة لقياس الابتزاز العاطفي.. هل أنت ضحية التلاعب بمشاعرك؟ من دون عنف جسدي مباشر، يدفعك المبتز عاطفيا للخوف م...
