Monday, June 22, 2015
Extremism and Dogma Wikipedia pages
Page semi-protected
Love
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the general concept of "love". For other uses, see Love (disambiguation).
Archetypal lovers Romeo and Juliet portrayed by Frank Dicksee
This article contains special characters. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols.
Love is a variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes that ranges from interpersonal affection ("I love my mother") to pleasure ("I loved that meal"). It can refer to an emotion of a strong attraction and personal attachment.[1] It can also be a virtue representing human kindness, compassion, and affection—"the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another".[2] It may also describe compassionate and affectionate actions towards other humans, one's self or animals.[3]
Non-Western traditions have also distinguished variants or symbioses of these states.[4] This diversity of uses and meanings combined with the complexity of the feelings involved makes love unusually difficult to consistently define, compared to other emotional states.
Love in its various forms acts as a major facilitator of interpersonal relationships and, owing to its central psychological importance, is one of the most common themes in the creative arts.[5]
Love may be understood as a function to keep human beings together against menaces and to facilitate the continuation of the species.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 Definitions
2 Impersonal love
3 Interpersonal love 3.1 Biological basis
3.2 Psychological basis
3.3 Evolutionary basis
3.4 Comparison of scientific models
4 Cultural views 4.1 Ancient Greek
4.2 Ancient Roman (Latin)
4.3 Chinese and other Sinic cultures
4.4 Persian
4.5 Japanese
4.6 Turkish (Shaman and Islamic)
5 Religious views 5.1 Abrahamic religions 5.1.1 Christianity
5.1.2 Judaism
5.1.3 Islam
5.1.4 Bahá'í Faith
5.2 Eastern religions 5.2.1 Buddhism
5.2.2 Hinduism
6 Political views 6.1 Free love
7 Philosophical views
8 See also
9 References
10 Sources
11 External links
Definitions
Part of a series on
Love
Red-outline heart icon
Basic aspects[show]
In history[show]
Types of emotion[show]
Related topics[show]
v ·
t ·
e
The word "love" can have a variety of related but distinct meanings in different contexts. Many other languages use multiple words to express some of the different concepts that in English are denoted as "love"; one example is the plurality of Greek words for "love" which includes agape and eros.[7] Cultural differences in conceptualizing love thus doubly impede the establishment of a universal definition.[8]
Although the nature or essence of love is a subject of frequent debate, different aspects of the word can be clarified by determining what isn't love (antonyms of "love"). Love as a general expression of positive sentiment (a stronger form of like) is commonly contrasted with hate (or neutral apathy); as a less sexual and more emotionally intimate form of romantic attachment, love is commonly contrasted with lust; and as an interpersonal relationship with romantic overtones, love is sometimes contrasted with friendship, although the word love is often applied to close friendships. (Further possible ambiguities come with usages "girlfriend", "boyfriend", "just good friends").
Fraternal love (Prehispanic sculpture from 250–900 AD, of Huastec origin). Museum of Anthropology in Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico
Abstractly discussed love usually refers to an experience one person feels for another. Love often involves caring for or identifying with a person or thing (cf. vulnerability and care theory of love), including oneself (cf. narcissism). In addition to cross-cultural differences in understanding love, ideas about love have also changed greatly over time. Some historians date modern conceptions of romantic love to courtly Europe during or after the Middle Ages, although the prior existence of romantic attachments is attested by ancient love poetry.[9]
The complex and abstract nature of love often reduces discourse of love to a thought-terminating cliché. Several common proverbs regard love, from Virgil's "Love conquers all" to The Beatles' "All You Need Is Love". St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle, defines love as "to will the good of another."[10] Bertrand Russell describes love as a condition of "absolute value," as opposed to relative value.[citation needed] Philosopher Gottfried Leibniz said that love is "to be delighted by the happiness of another."[11] Meher Baba stated that in love there is a "feeling of unity" and an "active appreciation of the intrinsic worth of the object of love."[12] Biologist Jeremy Griffith defines love as "unconditional selflessness".[13]
Impersonal love
A person can be said to love an object, principle, or goal to which they are deeply committed and greatly value. For example, compassionate outreach and volunteer workers' "love" of their cause may sometimes be born not of interpersonal love but impersonal love, altruism, and strong spiritual or political convictions.[14] People can also "love" material objects, animals, or activities if they invest themselves in bonding or otherwise identifying with those things. If sexual passion is also involved, then this feeling is called paraphilia.[15]
Interpersonal love
Interpersonal love refers to love between human beings. It is a much more potent sentiment than a simple liking for another. Unrequited love refers to those feelings of love that are not reciprocated. Interpersonal love is most closely associated with interpersonal relationships.[14] Such love might exist between family members, friends, and couples. There are also a number of psychological disorders related to love, such as erotomania.
Pair of Lovers. 1480–1485
Throughout history, philosophy and religion have done the most speculation on the phenomenon of love. In the 20th century, the science of psychology has written a great deal on the subject. In recent years, the sciences of psychology, anthropology, neuroscience, and biology have added to the understanding of the nature and function of love.
Biological basis
Main article: Biological basis of love
Biological models of sex tend to view love as a mammalian drive, much like hunger or thirst.[16] Helen Fisher, a leading expert in the topic of love, divides the experience of love into three partly overlapping stages: lust, attraction, and attachment. Lust is the feeling of sexual desire; romantic attraction determines what partners mates find attractive and pursue, conserving time and energy by choosing; and attachment involves sharing a home, parental duties, mutual defense, and in humans involves feelings of safety and security.[17] Three distinct neural circuitries, including neurotransmitters, and three behavioral patterns, are associated with these three romantic styles.[17]
Lust is the initial passionate sexual desire that promotes mating, and involves the increased release of chemicals such as testosterone and estrogen. These effects rarely last more than a few weeks or months. Attraction is the more individualized and romantic desire for a specific candidate for mating, which develops out of lust as commitment to an individual mate forms. Recent studies in neuroscience have indicated that as people fall in love, the brain consistently releases a certain set of chemicals, including the neurotransmitter hormones, dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin, the same compounds released by amphetamine, stimulating the brain's pleasure center and leading to side effects such as increased heart rate, loss of appetite and sleep, and an intense feeling of excitement. Research has indicated that this stage generally lasts from one and a half to three years.[18]
Since the lust and attraction stages are both considered temporary, a third stage is needed to account for long-term relationships. Attachment is the bonding that promotes relationships lasting for many years and even decades. Attachment is generally based on commitments such as marriage and children, or on mutual friendship based on things like shared interests. It has been linked to higher levels of the chemicals oxytocin and vasopressin to a greater degree than short-term relationships have.[18] Enzo Emanuele and coworkers reported the protein molecule known as the nerve growth factor (NGF) has high levels when people first fall in love, but these return to previous levels after one year.[19]
Psychological basis
Further information: Human bonding
Psychology depicts love as a cognitive and social phenomenon. Psychologist Robert Sternberg formulated a triangular theory of love and argued that love has three different components: intimacy, commitment, and passion. Intimacy is a form in which two people share confidences and various details of their personal lives, and is usually shown in friendships and romantic love affairs. Commitment, on the other hand, is the expectation that the relationship is permanent. The last and most common form of love is sexual attraction and passion. Passionate love is shown in infatuation as well as romantic love. All forms of love are viewed as varying combinations of these three components. Non-love does not include any of these components. Liking only includes intimacy. Infatuated love only includes passion. Empty love only includes commitment. Romantic love includes both intimacy and passion. Companionate love includes intimacy and commitment. Fatuous love includes passion and commitment. Lastly, consummate love includes all three.[20] American psychologist Zick Rubin sought to define love by psychometrics in the 1970s. His work states that three factors constitute love: attachment, caring, and intimacy.[21] [22]
Grandmother and grandchild, Sri Lanka
Following developments in electrical theories such as Coulomb's law, which showed that positive and negative charges attract, analogs in human life were developed, such as "opposites attract." Over the last century, research on the nature of human mating has generally found this not to be true when it comes to character and personality—people tend to like people similar to themselves. However, in a few unusual and specific domains, such as immune systems, it seems that humans prefer others who are unlike themselves (e.g., with an orthogonal immune system), since this will lead to a baby that has the best of both worlds.[23] In recent years, various human bonding theories have been developed, described in terms of attachments, ties, bonds, and affinities. Some Western authorities disaggregate into two main components, the altruistic and the narcissistic. This view is represented in the works of Scott Peck, whose work in the field of applied psychology explored the definitions of love and evil. Peck maintains that love is a combination of the "concern for the spiritual growth of another," and simple narcissism.[24] In combination, love is an activity, not simply a feeling.
Psychologist Erich Fromm maintained in his book The Art of Loving that love is not merely a feeling but is also actions, and that in fact, the "feeling" of love is superficial in comparison to one's commitment to love via a series of loving actions over time.[14] In this sense, Fromm held that love is ultimately not a feeling at all, but rather is a commitment to, and adherence to, loving actions towards another, oneself, or many others, over a sustained duration.[14] Fromm also described love as a conscious choice that in its early stages might originate as an involuntary feeling, but which then later no longer depends on those feelings, but rather depends only on conscious commitment.[14]
Evolutionary basis
Evolutionary psychology has attempted to provide various reasons for love as a survival tool. Humans are dependent on parental help for a large portion of their lifespans compared to other mammals. Love has therefore been seen as a mechanism to promote parental support of children for this extended time period. Another factor may be that sexually transmitted diseases can cause, among other effects, permanently reduced fertility, injury to the fetus, and increase complications during childbirth. This would favor monogamous relationships over polygamy.[25]
Comparison of scientific models
Biological models of love tend to see it as a mammalian drive, similar to hunger or thirst.[16] Psychology sees love as more of a social and cultural phenomenon. Certainly love is influenced by hormones (such as oxytocin), neurotrophins (such as NGF), and pheromones, and how people think and behave in love is influenced by their conceptions of love. The conventional view in biology is that there are two major drives in love: sexual attraction and attachment. Attachment between adults is presumed to work on the same principles that lead an infant to become attached to its mother. The traditional psychological view sees love as being a combination of companionate love and passionate love. Passionate love is intense longing, and is often accompanied by physiological arousal (shortness of breath, rapid heart rate); companionate love is affection and a feeling of intimacy not accompanied by physiological arousal.
Cultural views
Ancient Greek
See also: Greek words for love
Greek distinguishes several different senses in which the word "love" is used. Ancient Greeks identified four forms of love: kinship or familiarity (in Greek, storge), friendship (philia), sexual and/or romantic desire (eros), and self-emptying or divine love (agape).[26][27] Modern authors have distinguished further varieties of romantic love.[28] However, with Greek (as with many other languages), it has been historically difficult to separate the meanings of these words totally. At the same time, the Ancient Greek text of the Bible has examples of the verb agapo having the same meaning as phileo.
Agape (ἀγάπη agápē) means love in modern-day Greek. The term s'agapo means I love you in Greek. The word agapo is the verb I love. It generally refers to a "pure," ideal type of love, rather than the physical attraction suggested by eros. However, there are some examples of agape used to mean the same as eros. It has also been translated as "love of the soul."[29]
Eros (ἔρως érōs) (from the Greek deity Eros) is passionate love, with sensual desire and longing. The Greek word erota means in love. Plato refined his own definition. Although eros is initially felt for a person, with contemplation it becomes an appreciation of the beauty within that person, or even becomes appreciation of beauty itself. Eros helps the soul recall knowledge of beauty and contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth. Lovers and philosophers are all inspired to seek truth by eros. Some translations list it as "love of the body."[29]
Philia (φιλία philía), a dispassionate virtuous love, was a concept addressed and developed by Aristotle.[citation needed] It includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality, and familiarity. Philia is motivated by practical reasons; one or both of the parties benefit from the relationship. It can also mean "love of the mind."
Storge (στοργή storgē) is natural affection, like that felt by parents for offspring.
Xenia (ξενία xenía), hospitality, was an extremely important practice in Ancient Greece. It was an almost ritualized friendship formed between a host and his guest, who could previously have been strangers. The host fed and provided quarters for the guest, who was expected to repay only with gratitude. The importance of this can be seen throughout Greek mythology—in particular, Homer's Iliad and Odyssey.
Ancient Roman (Latin)
The Latin language has several different verbs corresponding to the English word "love." amō is the basic verb meaning I love, with the infinitive amare (“to love”) as it still is in Italian today. The Romans used it both in an affectionate sense as well as in a romantic or sexual sense. From this verb come amans—a lover, amator, "professional lover," often with the accessory notion of lechery—and amica, "girlfriend" in the English sense, often being applied euphemistically to a prostitute. The corresponding noun is amor (the significance of this term for the Romans is well illustrated in the fact, that the name of the City, Rome—in Latin: Roma—can be viewed as an anagram for amor, which was used as the secret name of the City in wide circles in ancient times),[30] which is also used in the plural form to indicate love affairs or sexual adventures. This same root also produces amicus—"friend"—and amicitia, "friendship" (often based to mutual advantage, and corresponding sometimes more closely to "indebtedness" or "influence"). Cicero wrote a treatise called On Friendship (de Amicitia), which discusses the notion at some length. Ovid wrote a guide to dating called Ars Amatoria (The Art of Love), which addresses, in depth, everything from extramarital affairs to overprotective parents.
Latin sometimes uses amāre where English would simply say to like. This notion, however, is much more generally expressed in Latin by placere or delectāre, which are used more colloquially, the latter used frequently in the love poetry of Catullus. Diligere often has the notion "to be affectionate for," "to esteem," and rarely if ever is used for romantic love. This word would be appropriate to describe the friendship of two men. The corresponding noun diligentia, however, has the meaning of "diligence" or "carefulness," and has little semantic overlap with the verb. Observare is a synonym for diligere; despite the cognate with English, this verb and its corresponding noun, observantia, often denote "esteem" or "affection." Caritas is used in Latin translations of the Christian Bible to mean "charitable love"; this meaning, however, is not found in Classical pagan Roman literature. As it arises from a conflation with a Greek word, there is no corresponding verb.
Chinese and other Sinic cultures
"Ai," the traditional Chinese character for love (愛) consists of a heart (心, middle) inside of "accept," "feel," or "perceive," (受) which shows a graceful emotion. It can also be interpreted as a hand offering one's heart to another hand.
Two philosophical underpinnings of love exist in the Chinese tradition, one from Confucianism which emphasized actions and duty while the other came from Mohism which championed a universal love. A core concept to Confucianism is Ren ("benevolent love", 仁), which focuses on duty, action and attitude in a relationship rather than love itself. In Confucianism, one displays benevolent love by performing actions such as filial piety from children, kindness from parent, loyalty to the king and so forth.
The concept of Ai (愛) was developed by the Chinese philosopher Mozi in the 4th century BC in reaction to Confucianism's benevolent love. Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese over-attachment to family and clan structures with the concept of "universal love" (jiān'ài, 兼愛). In this, he argued directly against Confucians who believed that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees. Mozi, by contrast, believed people in principle should care for all people equally. Mohism stressed that rather than adopting different attitudes towards different people, love should be unconditional and offered to everyone without regard to reciprocation, not just to friends, family and other Confucian relations. Later in Chinese Buddhism, the term Ai (愛) was adopted to refer to a passionate caring love and was considered a fundamental desire. In Buddhism, Ai was seen as capable of being either selfish or selfless, the latter being a key element towards enlightenment.
In contemporary Chinese, Ai (愛) is often used as the equivalent of the Western concept of love. Ai is used as both a verb (e.g. wo ai ni 我愛你, or "I love you") and a noun (such as aiqing 愛情, or "romantic love"). However, due to the influence of Confucian Ren, the phrase 'Wo ai ni' (I love you) carries with it a very specific sense of responsibility, commitment and loyalty. Instead of frequently saying "I love you" as in some Western societies, the Chinese are more likely to express feelings of affection in a more casual way. Consequently, "I like you" (Wo xihuan ni, 我喜欢你) is a more common way of expressing affection in Chinese; it is more playful and less serious.[31] This is also true in Japanese (suki da, 好きだ). The Chinese are also more likely to say "I love you" in English or other foreign languages than they would in their mother tongue.
Persian
Rumi, Hafiz and Sa'di are icons of the passion and love that the Persian culture and language present. The Persian word for love is eshgh,[citation needed] derived from the Arabic ishq, however is considered by most to be too stalwart a term for interpersonal love and is more commonly substituted for 'doost dashtan' ('liking').[citation needed] In the Persian culture, everything is encompassed by love and all is for love, starting from loving friends and family, husbands and wives, and eventually reaching the divine love that is the ultimate goal in life .[citation needed] Over seven centuries ago, Sa'di wrote:
The children of Adam are limbs of one body
Having been created of one essence.
When the calamity of time afflicts one limb
The other limbs cannot remain at rest.
If you have no sympathy for the troubles of others
You are not worthy to be called by the name of "man".
Japanese
Ohatsu and Tokubei, characters of Sonezaki Shinjū
The Japanese language uses three words to convey the English equivalent of "love". Because "love" covers a wide range of emotions and behavioral phenomena, there are nuances distinguishing the three terms.[32][33] The term ai (愛?), which is often associated with maternal love[32] or selfless love,[33] originally referred to beauty and was often used in religious context. Following the Meiji Restoration 1868, the term became associated with "love" in order to translate Western literature. Prior to Western influence, the term koi (恋?) generally represented romantic love, and was often the subject of the popular Man'yōshū Japanese poetry collection.[32] Koi describes a longing for a member of the opposite sex and is typical interpreted as selfish and wanting.[33] The term's origins come from the concept of lonely solitude as a result of separation from a loved one. Though modern usage of koi focuses on sexual love and infatuation, the Manyō used the term to cover a wider range of situations, including tenderness, benevolence, and material desire.[32] The third term, ren'ai (恋愛?), is a more modern construction that combines the kanji characters for both ai and koi, though its usage more closely resembles that of koi in the form of romantic love.[32][33]
Turkish (Shaman and Islamic)
In Turkish, the word "love" comes up with several meanings. A person can love a god, a person, parents, or family. But that person can "love" just one special person, which they call the word "aşk." Aşk (a word of Arabic origin) is a feeling for to love, or being "in love" (Aşık), as it still is in Turkish today. The Turks used this word just for their loves in a romantic or sexual sense. If a Turk says that he is in love (Aşık) with somebody, it is not a love that a person can feel for his or her parents; it is just for one person, and it indicates a huge infatuation. The word is also common for Turkic languages, such as Azerbaijani (eşq) and Kazakh (ғашық).
Religious views
Main article: Religious views on love
Abrahamic religions
Robert Indiana's 1977 Love sculpture spelling ahava.
Christianity
The Christian understanding is that love comes from God. The love of man and woman—eros in Greek—and the unselfish love of others (agape), are often contrasted as "ascending" and "descending" love, respectively, but are ultimately the same thing.[34]
There are several Greek words for "love" that are regularly referred to in Christian circles.
Agape: In the New Testament, agapē is charitable, selfless, altruistic, and unconditional. It is parental love, seen as creating goodness in the world; it is the way God is seen to love humanity, and it is seen as the kind of love that Christians aspire to have for one another.[29]
Phileo: Also used in the New Testament, phileo is a human response to something that is found to be delightful. Also known as "brotherly love."
Two other words for love in the Greek language, eros (sexual love) and storge (child-to-parent love), were never used in the New Testament.[29]
Christians believe that to Love God with all your heart, mind, and strength and Love your neighbor as yourself are the two most important things in life (the greatest commandment of the Jewish Torah, according to Jesus; cf. Gospel of Mark chapter 12, verses 28–34). Saint Augustine summarized this when he wrote "Love God, and do as thou wilt."
Sacred Love Versus Profane Love (1602–03) by Giovanni Baglione. Intended as an attack on his hated enemy the artist Caravaggio, it shows a boy (hinting at Caravaggio's homosexuality) on one side, a devil with Caravaggio's face on the other, and between an angel representing pure, meaning non-erotic, love.
The Apostle Paul glorified love as the most important virtue of all. Describing love in the famous poetic interpretation in 1 Corinthians, he wrote, "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, and always perseveres." (1 Cor. 13:4–7, NIV)
Relationships
Types[show]
Activities[show]
Endings[show]
Emotions and feelings[show]
Practices[show]
Abuse[show]
v ·
t ·
e
The Apostle John wrote, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." (John 3:16–17, NIV) John also wrote, "Dear friends, let us love one another for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." (1 John 4:7–8, NIV)
Saint Augustine says that one must be able to decipher the difference between love and lust. Lust, according to Saint Augustine, is an overindulgence, but to love and be loved is what he has sought for his entire life. He even says, “I was in love with love.” Finally, he does fall in love and is loved back, by God. Saint Augustine says the only one who can love you truly and fully is God, because love with a human only allows for flaws such as “jealousy, suspicion, fear, anger, and contention.” According to Saint Augustine, to love God is “to attain the peace which is yours.” (Saint Augustine's Confessions)
Augustine regards the duplex commandment of love in Matthew 22 as the heart of Christian faith and the interpretation of the Bible. After the review of Christian doctrine, Augustine treats the problem of love in terms of use and enjoyment until the end of Book I of De Doctrina Christiana (1.22.21-1.40.44;).[35]
Christian theologians see God as the source of love, which is mirrored in humans and their own loving relationships. Influential Christian theologian C.S. Lewis wrote a book called The Four Loves. Benedict XVI wrote his first encyclical on "God is love". He said that a human being, created in the image of God, who is love, is able to practice love; to give himself to God and others (agape) and by receiving and experiencing God's love in contemplation (eros). This life of love, according to him, is the life of the saints such as Teresa of Calcutta and the Blessed Virgin Mary and is the direction Christians take when they believe that God loves them.[34]
In Christianity the practical definition of love is best summarised by St. Thomas Aquinas, who defined love as "to will the good of another," or to desire for another to succeed.[10] This is the explanation of the Christian need to love others, including their enemies. As Thomas Aquinas explains, Christian love is motivated by the need to see others succeed in life, to be good people.
Judaism
See also: Jewish views on love
In Hebrew, Ahava is the most commonly used term for both interpersonal love and love between God and God's creations. Chesed, often translated as loving-kindness, is used to describe many forms of love between human beings.
The commandment to love other people is given in the Torah, which states, "Love your neighbor like yourself" (Leviticus 19:18). The Torah's commandment to love God "with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might" (Deuteronomy 6:5) is taken by the Mishnah (a central text of the Jewish oral law) to refer to good deeds, willingness to sacrifice one's life rather than commit certain serious transgressions, willingness to sacrifice all of one's possessions, and being grateful to the Lord despite adversity (tractate Berachoth 9:5). Rabbinic literature differs as to how this love can be developed, e.g., by contemplating divine deeds or witnessing the marvels of nature. As for love between marital partners, this is deemed an essential ingredient to life: "See life with the wife you love" (Ecclesiastes 9:9). The biblical book Song of Solomon is considered a romantically phrased metaphor of love between God and his people, but in its plain reading, reads like a love song. The 20th-century Rabbi Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler is frequently quoted as defining love from the Jewish point of view as "giving without expecting to take" (from his Michtav me-Eliyahu, Vol. 1).
Islam
Love encompasses the Islamic view of life as universal brotherhood that applies to all who hold faith. Amongst the 99 names of God (Allah), there is the name Al-Wadud, or "the Loving One," which is found in Surah [Quran 11:90] as well as Surah [Quran 85:14]. God is also referenced at the beginning of every chapter in the Qur'an as Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim, or the "Most Compassionate" and the "Most Merciful", indicating that nobody is more loving, compassionate and benevolent than God. The Qur'an refers to God as being "full of loving kindness."
The Qur'an exhorts Muslim believers to treat all people, those who have not persecuted them, with birr or "deep kindness" as stated in Surah [Quran 6:8-9]. Birr is also used by the Qur'an in describing the love and kindness that children must show to their parents.
Ishq, or divine love, is the emphasis of Sufism in the Islamic tradition. Practitioners of Sufism believe that love is a projection of the essence of God to the universe. God desires to recognize beauty, and as if one looks at a mirror to see oneself, God "looks" at himself within the dynamics of nature. Since everything is a reflection of God, the school of Sufism practices to see the beauty inside the apparently ugly. Sufism is often referred to as the religion of love.[citation needed] God in Sufism is referred to in three main terms, which are the Lover, Loved, and Beloved, with the last of these terms being often seen in Sufi poetry. A common viewpoint of Sufism is that through love, humankind can get back to its inherent purity and grace. The saints of Sufism are infamous for being "drunk" due to their love of God; hence, the constant reference to wine in Sufi poetry and music.
Bahá'í Faith
In his Paris Talks, `Abdu'l-Bahá described four types of love:[1]
1.The love that flows from God to human beings
2.The love that flows from human beings to God
3.the love of God towards the Self or Identity of God
4.the love of human beings for human beings
Eastern religions
Buddhism
In Buddhism, Kāma is sensuous, sexual love. It is an obstacle on the path to enlightenment, since it is selfish. Karuṇā is compassion and mercy, which reduces the suffering of others. It is complementary to wisdom and is necessary for enlightenment. Adveṣa and mettā are benevolent love. This love is unconditional and requires considerable self-acceptance. This is quite different from ordinary love, which is usually about attachment and sex and which rarely occurs without self-interest. Instead, in Buddhism it refers to detachment and unselfish interest in others' welfare.
The Bodhisattva ideal in Mahayana Buddhism involves the complete renunciation of oneself in order to take on the burden of a suffering world. The strongest motivation one has in order to take the path of the Bodhisattva is the idea of salvation within unselfish, altruistic love for all sentient beings.
Hinduism
Kama (left) with Rati on a temple wall of Chennakesava Temple, Belur
In Hinduism, kāma is pleasurable, sexual love, personified by the god Kamadeva. For many Hindu schools, it is the third end (Kama) in life. Kamadeva is often pictured holding a bow of sugar cane and an arrow of flowers; he may ride upon a great parrot. He is usually accompanied by his consort Rati and his companion Vasanta, lord of the spring season. Stone images of Kamadeva and Rati can be seen on the door of the Chennakeshava temple at Belur, in Karnataka, India. Maara is another name for kāma.
In contrast to kāma, prema – or prem – refers to elevated love. Karuna is compassion and mercy, which impels one to help reduce the suffering of others. Bhakti is a Sanskrit term, meaning "loving devotion to the supreme God." A person who practices bhakti is called a bhakta. Hindu writers, theologians, and philosophers have distinguished nine forms of bhakti, which can be found in the Bhagavata Purana and works by Tulsidas. The philosophical work Narada Bhakti Sutras, written by an unknown author (presumed to be Narada), distinguishes eleven forms of love.
In certain Vaishnava sects within Hinduism, attaining unadulterated, unconditional and incessant love for Godhead is considered the foremost goal of life. Gaudiya Vaishnavas who worship Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the cause of all causes consider Love for Godhead (Prema) to act in two ways: sambhoga and vipralambha (union and separation)—two opposites .[36]
In the condition of separation, there is an acute yearning for being with the beloved and in the condition of union there is supreme happiness and nectarean. Gaudiya Vaishnavas consider that Krishna-prema (Love for Godhead) is not fire but that it still burns away one's material desires. They consider that Kṛṣṇa-prema is not a weapon, but it still pierces the heart. It is not water, but it washes away everything—one's pride, religious rules, and one's shyness. Krishna-prema is considered to make one drown in the ocean of transcendental ecstasy and pleasure. The love of Radha, a cowherd girl, for Krishna is often cited as the supreme example of love for Godhead by Gaudiya Vaishnavas. Radha is considered to be the internal potency of Krishna, and is the supreme lover of Godhead. Her example of love is considered to be beyond the understanding of material realm as it surpasses any form of selfish love or lust that is visible in the material world. The reciprocal love between Radha (the supreme lover) and Krishna (God as the Supremely Loved) is the subject of many poetic compositions in India such as the Gita Govinda and Hari Bhakti Shuddhodhaya.
In the Bhakti tradition within Hinduism, it is believed that execution of devotional service to God leads to the development of Love for God (taiche bhakti-phale krsne prema upajaya), and as love for God increases in the heart, the more one becomes free from material contamination (krishna-prema asvada haile, bhava nasa paya). Being perfectly in love with God or Krishna makes one perfectly free from material contamination. and this is the ultimate way of salvation or liberation. In this tradition, salvation or liberation is considered inferior to love, and just an incidental by-product. Being absorbed in Love for God is considered to be the perfection of life.[37]
Political views
Free love
Main article: Free love
Lovers kissing on the street
The term free love has been used [38] to describe a social movement that rejects marriage, which is seen as a form of social bondage. The Free Love movement's initial goal was to separate the state from sexual matters such as marriage, birth control, and adultery. It claimed that such issues were the concern of the people involved, and no one else.[39]
Many people in the early 19th century believed that marriage was an important aspect of life to "fulfill earthly human happiness." Middle-class Americans wanted the home to be a place of stability in an uncertain world. This mentality created a vision of strongly defined gender roles, which provoked the advancement of the free love movement as a contrast.[40]
The term "sex radical" is also used interchangeably with the term "free lover", and was the preferred term by advocates because of the negative connotations of "free love".[citation needed] By whatever name, advocates had two strong beliefs: opposition to the idea of forceful sexual activity in a relationship and advocacy for a woman to use her body in any way that she pleases.[41] These are also beliefs of Feminism.
Philosophical views
Main article: Philosophy of love
Graffito in East Timor
The philosophy of love is a field of social philosophy and ethics that attempts to explain the nature of love.[42] The philosophical investigation of love includes the tasks of distinguishing between the various kinds of personal love, asking if and how love is or can be justified, asking what the value of love is, and what impact love has on the autonomy of both the lover and the beloved.
Many different theories attempt to explain the nature and function of love. Explaining love to a hypothetical person who had not himself or herself experienced love or being loved would be very difficult because to such a person love would appear to be quite strange if not outright irrational behavior. Among the prevailing types of theories that attempt to account for the existence of love are: psychological theories, the vast majority of which consider love to be very healthy behavior; evolutionary theories which hold that love is part of the process of natural selection; spiritual theories which may, for instance consider love to be a gift from a god; and theories that consider love to be an unexplainable mystery, very much like a mystical experience.
There were many attempts to find the equation of love. One such attempt was by Christian Rudder, a mathematician and co-founder of online dating website OKCupid,one of the largest online dating site. The mathematical approach was through the collection of large data from the dating site. Another interesting equation of love is found by in the philosophical blog 'In the Quest of Truth'.[43] Love is defined as a measure of selfless give and take, and the author attempted to draw a graph that shows the equation of love.
See also
Love at first sight
References
1.Jump up ^ Oxford Illustrated American Dictionary (1998) + Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary (2000)
2.Jump up ^ Merriam Webster Dictionary
3.Jump up ^ Fromm, Erich; The Art of Loving, Harper Perennial (1956), Original English Version, ISBN 978-0-06-095828-2
4.Jump up ^ Mascaró, Juan (2003). The Bhagavad Gita. Penguin Classics. Penguin. ISBN 0-14-044918-3. (J. Mascaró, translator)
5.Jump up ^ "Article On Love". Retrieved 13 September 2011.
6.Jump up ^ Helen Fisher. Why We Love: the nature and chemistry of romantic love. 2004.
7.Jump up ^ Anders Nygren, Agape and Eros.
8.Jump up ^ Kay, Paul; Kempton, Willett (March 1984). "What is the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis?". American Anthropologist. New Series 86 (1): 65–79. doi:10.1525/aa.1984.86.1.02a00050.
9.Jump up ^ "Ancient Love Poetry".
10.^ Jump up to: a b "St. Thomas Aquinas, STh I-II, 26, 4, corp. art". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 30 October 2010.
11.Jump up ^ Leibniz, Gottfried. "Confessio philosophi". Wikisource edition. Retrieved 25 March 2009.
12.Jump up ^ Baba, Meher (1995). Discourses. Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Press. p. 113. ISBN 978-1880619094.
13.Jump up ^ What is love?. In The Book of Real Answers to Everything! Griffith, J. 2011. ISBN 9781741290073.
14.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Fromm, Erich; The Art of Loving, Harper Perennial (5 September 2000), Original English Version, ISBN 978-0-06-095828-2
15.Jump up ^ DiscoveryHealth. "Paraphilia". Retrieved 16 December 2007.
16.^ Jump up to: a b Lewis, Thomas; Amini, F.; Lannon, R. (2000). A General Theory of Love. Random House. ISBN 0-375-70922-3.
17.^ Jump up to: a b http://homepage.mac.com/helenfisher/archives_of_sex_beh.pdf Defining the Brain Systems of Lust, Romantic Attraction, and Attachment by Fisher et. al
18.^ Jump up to: a b Winston, Robert (2004). Human. Smithsonian Institution. ISBN 0-03-093780-9.
19.Jump up ^ Emanuele, E.; Polliti, P.; Bianchi, M.; Minoretti, P.; Bertona, M.; Geroldi, D (2005). "Raised plasma nerve growth factor levels associated with early-stage romantic love". Psychoneuroendocrinology. Sept. 05 (3): 288–94. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.09.002. PMID 16289361.
20.Jump up ^ Sternberg, R. J. (1986). "A triangular theory of love". Psychological Review 93 (2): 119–135. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.
21.Jump up ^ Rubin, Zick (1970). "Measurement of Romantic Love". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 16 (2): 265–27[clarification needed]. doi:10.1037/h0029841. PMID 5479131.
22.Jump up ^ Rubin, Zick (1973). Liking and Loving: an invitation to social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
23.Jump up ^ Berscheid, Ellen; Walster, Elaine H. (1969). Interpersonal Attraction. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. ISBN 0-201-00560-3. CCCN 69-17443.
24.Jump up ^ Peck, Scott (1978). The Road Less Traveled. Simon & Schuster. p. 169. ISBN 0-671-25067-1.
25.Jump up ^ The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, edited by David M. Buss, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2005. Chapter 14, Commitment, Love, and Mate Retention by Lorne Campbell and Bruce J. Ellis.
26.Jump up ^ C. S. Lewis, The Four Loves, 1960.
27.Jump up ^ Kristeller, Paul Oskar (1980). Renaissance Thought and the Arts: Collected Essays. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-02010-8.
28.Jump up ^ Stendhal, in his book On Love ("De l'amour"; Paris, 1822), distinguished carnal love, passionate love, a kind of uncommitted love that he called "taste-love", and love of vanity. Denis de Rougemont in his book Love in the Western World traced the story of passionate love (l'amour-passion) from its courtly to its romantic forms. Benjamin Péret, in the introduction to his Anthology of Sublime Love (Paris, 1956), further distinguished "sublime love", a state of realized idealisation perhaps equatable with the romantic form of passionate love.
29.^ Jump up to: a b c d Anders Theodor Samuel Nygren, Eros and Agape (first published in Swedish, 1930-1936).
30.Jump up ^ Thomas Köves-Zulauf, Reden und Schweigen, Munich, 1972.
31.Jump up ^ JFK Miller, "Why the Chinese Don't Say I Love You"
32.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Ryang, Sonia (2006). Love in Modern Japan: Its Estrangement from Self, Sex and Society. Routledge. pp. 13–14.
33.^ Jump up to: a b c d Abe, Namiko. "Japanese Words for "Love": The Difference between "Ai" and "Koi"". About.com. Retrieved November 5, 2014.
34.^ Jump up to: a b Pope Benedict XVI. "papal encyclical, Deus Caritas Est.".
35.Jump up ^ Woo, B. Hoon (2013). "Augustine's Hermeneutics and Homiletics in De doctrina christiana". Journal of Christian Philosophy 17: 97–117.
36.Jump up ^ Gour Govinda Swami. "Wonderful Characteristic of Krishna Prema, Gour Govinda Swami.".
37.Jump up ^ A C Bhaktivedanta Swami. "Being Perfectly in Love".
38.Jump up ^ The Handbook of the Oneida Community claims to have coined the term around 1850, and laments that its use was appropriated by socialists to attack marriage, an institution that they felt protected women and children from abandonment
39.Jump up ^ McElroy, Wendy. "The Free Love Movement and Radical Individualism." Libertarian Enterprise .19 (1996): 1.
40.Jump up ^ Spurlock, John C. Free Love Marriage and Middle-Class Radicalism in America. New York, NY: New York UP, 1988.
41.Jump up ^ Passet, Joanne E. Sex Radicals and the Quest for Women's Equality. Chicago,IL: U of Illinois P, 2003.
42.Jump up ^ Soren Kierkegaard. Works of Love.
43.Jump up ^ "In the Quest of Truth". The Equation of Love.
Sources
Chadwick, Henry (1998). Saint Augustine Confessions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-283372-3.
Fisher, Helen. Why We Love: the Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love. ISBN 0-8050-6913-5.
Giles, James (1994). "A theory of love and sexual desire". Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 24 (4): 339–357. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1994.tb00259.x.
Kierkegaard, Søren (2009). Works of Love. New York City: Harper Perennial Modern Classics. ISBN 978-0-06-171327-9.
Oord, Thomas Jay (2010). Defining Love: A Philosophical, Scientific, and Theological Engagement. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos. ISBN 978-1-58743257-6.
Singer, Irving (1966). The Nature of Love. (in three volumes) (v.1 reprinted and later volumes from The University of Chicago Press, 1984 ed.). Random House. ISBN 0-226-76094-4.
Sternberg, R.J. (1986). "A triangular theory of love". Psychological Review 93 (2): 119–135. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.119.
Sternberg, R.J. (1987). "Liking versus loving: A comparative evaluation of theories". Psychological Bulletin 102 (3): 331–345. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.102.3.331.
Tennov, Dorothy (1979). Love and Limerence: the Experience of Being in Love. New York: Stein and Day. ISBN 0-8128-6134-5.
Wood Samuel E., Ellen Wood and Denise Boyd (2005). The World of Psychology (5th ed.). Pearson Education. pp. 402–403. ISBN 0-205-35868-3.
External links
Look up I love you in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Media related to Love at Wikimedia Commons
Quotations related to Love at Wikiquote
The dictionary definition of love at Wiktionary
Learning materials related to Have a Happy Relationship at Wikiversity
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Emotions (list)
Plutchik-wheel.svg
Authority control
GND: 4035646-2 ·
NDL: 00560099
Categories: Love
Emotions
Ethical principles
Personal life
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
View source
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Afrikaans
Alemannisch
አማርኛ
Ænglisc
العربية
Aragonés
Asturianu
Avañe'ẽ
Azərbaycanca
বাংলা
Башҡортса
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
Boarisch
བོད་ཡིག
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Буряад
Català
Чӑвашла
Čeština
Corsu
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Estremeñu
Euskara
فارسی
Fiji Hindi
Français
Frysk
Gàidhlig
Galego
贛語
ગુજરાતી
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Igbo
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ/inuktitut
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Basa Jawa
ಕನ್ನಡ
ქართული
कॉशुर / کٲشُر
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Ligure
Limburgs
Lingála
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
Malti
मराठी
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Mirandés
Монгол
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nāhuatl
Nederlands
नेपाली
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Нохчийн
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
ଓଡ଼ିଆ
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
پنجابی
Piemontèis
Polski
Português
Ripoarisch
Română
Runa Simi
Русиньскый
Русский
Саха тыла
Sardu
Shqip
Sicilianu
සිංහල
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Soomaaliga
کوردیی ناوەندی
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
తెలుగు
ไทย
Тоҷикӣ
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
ئۇيغۇرچە / Uyghurche
Tiếng Việt
Walon
文言
Winaray
ייִדיש
粵語
Žemaitėška
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 18 June 2015, at 04:01.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love
Page semi-protected
Love
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the general concept of "love". For other uses, see Love (disambiguation).
Archetypal lovers Romeo and Juliet portrayed by Frank Dicksee
This article contains special characters. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols.
Love is a variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes that ranges from interpersonal affection ("I love my mother") to pleasure ("I loved that meal"). It can refer to an emotion of a strong attraction and personal attachment.[1] It can also be a virtue representing human kindness, compassion, and affection—"the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another".[2] It may also describe compassionate and affectionate actions towards other humans, one's self or animals.[3]
Non-Western traditions have also distinguished variants or symbioses of these states.[4] This diversity of uses and meanings combined with the complexity of the feelings involved makes love unusually difficult to consistently define, compared to other emotional states.
Love in its various forms acts as a major facilitator of interpersonal relationships and, owing to its central psychological importance, is one of the most common themes in the creative arts.[5]
Love may be understood as a function to keep human beings together against menaces and to facilitate the continuation of the species.[6]
Contents [hide]
1 Definitions
2 Impersonal love
3 Interpersonal love 3.1 Biological basis
3.2 Psychological basis
3.3 Evolutionary basis
3.4 Comparison of scientific models
4 Cultural views 4.1 Ancient Greek
4.2 Ancient Roman (Latin)
4.3 Chinese and other Sinic cultures
4.4 Persian
4.5 Japanese
4.6 Turkish (Shaman and Islamic)
5 Religious views 5.1 Abrahamic religions 5.1.1 Christianity
5.1.2 Judaism
5.1.3 Islam
5.1.4 Bahá'í Faith
5.2 Eastern religions 5.2.1 Buddhism
5.2.2 Hinduism
6 Political views 6.1 Free love
7 Philosophical views
8 See also
9 References
10 Sources
11 External links
Definitions
Part of a series on
Love
Red-outline heart icon
Basic aspects[show]
In history[show]
Types of emotion[show]
Related topics[show]
v ·
t ·
e
The word "love" can have a variety of related but distinct meanings in different contexts. Many other languages use multiple words to express some of the different concepts that in English are denoted as "love"; one example is the plurality of Greek words for "love" which includes agape and eros.[7] Cultural differences in conceptualizing love thus doubly impede the establishment of a universal definition.[8]
Although the nature or essence of love is a subject of frequent debate, different aspects of the word can be clarified by determining what isn't love (antonyms of "love"). Love as a general expression of positive sentiment (a stronger form of like) is commonly contrasted with hate (or neutral apathy); as a less sexual and more emotionally intimate form of romantic attachment, love is commonly contrasted with lust; and as an interpersonal relationship with romantic overtones, love is sometimes contrasted with friendship, although the word love is often applied to close friendships. (Further possible ambiguities come with usages "girlfriend", "boyfriend", "just good friends").
Fraternal love (Prehispanic sculpture from 250–900 AD, of Huastec origin). Museum of Anthropology in Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico
Abstractly discussed love usually refers to an experience one person feels for another. Love often involves caring for or identifying with a person or thing (cf. vulnerability and care theory of love), including oneself (cf. narcissism). In addition to cross-cultural differences in understanding love, ideas about love have also changed greatly over time. Some historians date modern conceptions of romantic love to courtly Europe during or after the Middle Ages, although the prior existence of romantic attachments is attested by ancient love poetry.[9]
The complex and abstract nature of love often reduces discourse of love to a thought-terminating cliché. Several common proverbs regard love, from Virgil's "Love conquers all" to The Beatles' "All You Need Is Love". St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle, defines love as "to will the good of another."[10] Bertrand Russell describes love as a condition of "absolute value," as opposed to relative value.[citation needed] Philosopher Gottfried Leibniz said that love is "to be delighted by the happiness of another."[11] Meher Baba stated that in love there is a "feeling of unity" and an "active appreciation of the intrinsic worth of the object of love."[12] Biologist Jeremy Griffith defines love as "unconditional selflessness".[13]
Impersonal love
A person can be said to love an object, principle, or goal to which they are deeply committed and greatly value. For example, compassionate outreach and volunteer workers' "love" of their cause may sometimes be born not of interpersonal love but impersonal love, altruism, and strong spiritual or political convictions.[14] People can also "love" material objects, animals, or activities if they invest themselves in bonding or otherwise identifying with those things. If sexual passion is also involved, then this feeling is called paraphilia.[15]
Interpersonal love
Interpersonal love refers to love between human beings. It is a much more potent sentiment than a simple liking for another. Unrequited love refers to those feelings of love that are not reciprocated. Interpersonal love is most closely associated with interpersonal relationships.[14] Such love might exist between family members, friends, and couples. There are also a number of psychological disorders related to love, such as erotomania.
Pair of Lovers. 1480–1485
Throughout history, philosophy and religion have done the most speculation on the phenomenon of love. In the 20th century, the science of psychology has written a great deal on the subject. In recent years, the sciences of psychology, anthropology, neuroscience, and biology have added to the understanding of the nature and function of love.
Biological basis
Main article: Biological basis of love
Biological models of sex tend to view love as a mammalian drive, much like hunger or thirst.[16] Helen Fisher, a leading expert in the topic of love, divides the experience of love into three partly overlapping stages: lust, attraction, and attachment. Lust is the feeling of sexual desire; romantic attraction determines what partners mates find attractive and pursue, conserving time and energy by choosing; and attachment involves sharing a home, parental duties, mutual defense, and in humans involves feelings of safety and security.[17] Three distinct neural circuitries, including neurotransmitters, and three behavioral patterns, are associated with these three romantic styles.[17]
Lust is the initial passionate sexual desire that promotes mating, and involves the increased release of chemicals such as testosterone and estrogen. These effects rarely last more than a few weeks or months. Attraction is the more individualized and romantic desire for a specific candidate for mating, which develops out of lust as commitment to an individual mate forms. Recent studies in neuroscience have indicated that as people fall in love, the brain consistently releases a certain set of chemicals, including the neurotransmitter hormones, dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin, the same compounds released by amphetamine, stimulating the brain's pleasure center and leading to side effects such as increased heart rate, loss of appetite and sleep, and an intense feeling of excitement. Research has indicated that this stage generally lasts from one and a half to three years.[18]
Since the lust and attraction stages are both considered temporary, a third stage is needed to account for long-term relationships. Attachment is the bonding that promotes relationships lasting for many years and even decades. Attachment is generally based on commitments such as marriage and children, or on mutual friendship based on things like shared interests. It has been linked to higher levels of the chemicals oxytocin and vasopressin to a greater degree than short-term relationships have.[18] Enzo Emanuele and coworkers reported the protein molecule known as the nerve growth factor (NGF) has high levels when people first fall in love, but these return to previous levels after one year.[19]
Psychological basis
Further information: Human bonding
Psychology depicts love as a cognitive and social phenomenon. Psychologist Robert Sternberg formulated a triangular theory of love and argued that love has three different components: intimacy, commitment, and passion. Intimacy is a form in which two people share confidences and various details of their personal lives, and is usually shown in friendships and romantic love affairs. Commitment, on the other hand, is the expectation that the relationship is permanent. The last and most common form of love is sexual attraction and passion. Passionate love is shown in infatuation as well as romantic love. All forms of love are viewed as varying combinations of these three components. Non-love does not include any of these components. Liking only includes intimacy. Infatuated love only includes passion. Empty love only includes commitment. Romantic love includes both intimacy and passion. Companionate love includes intimacy and commitment. Fatuous love includes passion and commitment. Lastly, consummate love includes all three.[20] American psychologist Zick Rubin sought to define love by psychometrics in the 1970s. His work states that three factors constitute love: attachment, caring, and intimacy.[21] [22]
Grandmother and grandchild, Sri Lanka
Following developments in electrical theories such as Coulomb's law, which showed that positive and negative charges attract, analogs in human life were developed, such as "opposites attract." Over the last century, research on the nature of human mating has generally found this not to be true when it comes to character and personality—people tend to like people similar to themselves. However, in a few unusual and specific domains, such as immune systems, it seems that humans prefer others who are unlike themselves (e.g., with an orthogonal immune system), since this will lead to a baby that has the best of both worlds.[23] In recent years, various human bonding theories have been developed, described in terms of attachments, ties, bonds, and affinities. Some Western authorities disaggregate into two main components, the altruistic and the narcissistic. This view is represented in the works of Scott Peck, whose work in the field of applied psychology explored the definitions of love and evil. Peck maintains that love is a combination of the "concern for the spiritual growth of another," and simple narcissism.[24] In combination, love is an activity, not simply a feeling.
Psychologist Erich Fromm maintained in his book The Art of Loving that love is not merely a feeling but is also actions, and that in fact, the "feeling" of love is superficial in comparison to one's commitment to love via a series of loving actions over time.[14] In this sense, Fromm held that love is ultimately not a feeling at all, but rather is a commitment to, and adherence to, loving actions towards another, oneself, or many others, over a sustained duration.[14] Fromm also described love as a conscious choice that in its early stages might originate as an involuntary feeling, but which then later no longer depends on those feelings, but rather depends only on conscious commitment.[14]
Evolutionary basis
Evolutionary psychology has attempted to provide various reasons for love as a survival tool. Humans are dependent on parental help for a large portion of their lifespans compared to other mammals. Love has therefore been seen as a mechanism to promote parental support of children for this extended time period. Another factor may be that sexually transmitted diseases can cause, among other effects, permanently reduced fertility, injury to the fetus, and increase complications during childbirth. This would favor monogamous relationships over polygamy.[25]
Comparison of scientific models
Biological models of love tend to see it as a mammalian drive, similar to hunger or thirst.[16] Psychology sees love as more of a social and cultural phenomenon. Certainly love is influenced by hormones (such as oxytocin), neurotrophins (such as NGF), and pheromones, and how people think and behave in love is influenced by their conceptions of love. The conventional view in biology is that there are two major drives in love: sexual attraction and attachment. Attachment between adults is presumed to work on the same principles that lead an infant to become attached to its mother. The traditional psychological view sees love as being a combination of companionate love and passionate love. Passionate love is intense longing, and is often accompanied by physiological arousal (shortness of breath, rapid heart rate); companionate love is affection and a feeling of intimacy not accompanied by physiological arousal.
Cultural views
Ancient Greek
See also: Greek words for love
Greek distinguishes several different senses in which the word "love" is used. Ancient Greeks identified four forms of love: kinship or familiarity (in Greek, storge), friendship (philia), sexual and/or romantic desire (eros), and self-emptying or divine love (agape).[26][27] Modern authors have distinguished further varieties of romantic love.[28] However, with Greek (as with many other languages), it has been historically difficult to separate the meanings of these words totally. At the same time, the Ancient Greek text of the Bible has examples of the verb agapo having the same meaning as phileo.
Agape (ἀγάπη agápē) means love in modern-day Greek. The term s'agapo means I love you in Greek. The word agapo is the verb I love. It generally refers to a "pure," ideal type of love, rather than the physical attraction suggested by eros. However, there are some examples of agape used to mean the same as eros. It has also been translated as "love of the soul."[29]
Eros (ἔρως érōs) (from the Greek deity Eros) is passionate love, with sensual desire and longing. The Greek word erota means in love. Plato refined his own definition. Although eros is initially felt for a person, with contemplation it becomes an appreciation of the beauty within that person, or even becomes appreciation of beauty itself. Eros helps the soul recall knowledge of beauty and contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth. Lovers and philosophers are all inspired to seek truth by eros. Some translations list it as "love of the body."[29]
Philia (φιλία philía), a dispassionate virtuous love, was a concept addressed and developed by Aristotle.[citation needed] It includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality, and familiarity. Philia is motivated by practical reasons; one or both of the parties benefit from the relationship. It can also mean "love of the mind."
Storge (στοργή storgē) is natural affection, like that felt by parents for offspring.
Xenia (ξενία xenía), hospitality, was an extremely important practice in Ancient Greece. It was an almost ritualized friendship formed between a host and his guest, who could previously have been strangers. The host fed and provided quarters for the guest, who was expected to repay only with gratitude. The importance of this can be seen throughout Greek mythology—in particular, Homer's Iliad and Odyssey.
Ancient Roman (Latin)
The Latin language has several different verbs corresponding to the English word "love." amō is the basic verb meaning I love, with the infinitive amare (“to love”) as it still is in Italian today. The Romans used it both in an affectionate sense as well as in a romantic or sexual sense. From this verb come amans—a lover, amator, "professional lover," often with the accessory notion of lechery—and amica, "girlfriend" in the English sense, often being applied euphemistically to a prostitute. The corresponding noun is amor (the significance of this term for the Romans is well illustrated in the fact, that the name of the City, Rome—in Latin: Roma—can be viewed as an anagram for amor, which was used as the secret name of the City in wide circles in ancient times),[30] which is also used in the plural form to indicate love affairs or sexual adventures. This same root also produces amicus—"friend"—and amicitia, "friendship" (often based to mutual advantage, and corresponding sometimes more closely to "indebtedness" or "influence"). Cicero wrote a treatise called On Friendship (de Amicitia), which discusses the notion at some length. Ovid wrote a guide to dating called Ars Amatoria (The Art of Love), which addresses, in depth, everything from extramarital affairs to overprotective parents.
Latin sometimes uses amāre where English would simply say to like. This notion, however, is much more generally expressed in Latin by placere or delectāre, which are used more colloquially, the latter used frequently in the love poetry of Catullus. Diligere often has the notion "to be affectionate for," "to esteem," and rarely if ever is used for romantic love. This word would be appropriate to describe the friendship of two men. The corresponding noun diligentia, however, has the meaning of "diligence" or "carefulness," and has little semantic overlap with the verb. Observare is a synonym for diligere; despite the cognate with English, this verb and its corresponding noun, observantia, often denote "esteem" or "affection." Caritas is used in Latin translations of the Christian Bible to mean "charitable love"; this meaning, however, is not found in Classical pagan Roman literature. As it arises from a conflation with a Greek word, there is no corresponding verb.
Chinese and other Sinic cultures
"Ai," the traditional Chinese character for love (愛) consists of a heart (心, middle) inside of "accept," "feel," or "perceive," (受) which shows a graceful emotion. It can also be interpreted as a hand offering one's heart to another hand.
Two philosophical underpinnings of love exist in the Chinese tradition, one from Confucianism which emphasized actions and duty while the other came from Mohism which championed a universal love. A core concept to Confucianism is Ren ("benevolent love", 仁), which focuses on duty, action and attitude in a relationship rather than love itself. In Confucianism, one displays benevolent love by performing actions such as filial piety from children, kindness from parent, loyalty to the king and so forth.
The concept of Ai (愛) was developed by the Chinese philosopher Mozi in the 4th century BC in reaction to Confucianism's benevolent love. Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese over-attachment to family and clan structures with the concept of "universal love" (jiān'ài, 兼愛). In this, he argued directly against Confucians who believed that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees. Mozi, by contrast, believed people in principle should care for all people equally. Mohism stressed that rather than adopting different attitudes towards different people, love should be unconditional and offered to everyone without regard to reciprocation, not just to friends, family and other Confucian relations. Later in Chinese Buddhism, the term Ai (愛) was adopted to refer to a passionate caring love and was considered a fundamental desire. In Buddhism, Ai was seen as capable of being either selfish or selfless, the latter being a key element towards enlightenment.
In contemporary Chinese, Ai (愛) is often used as the equivalent of the Western concept of love. Ai is used as both a verb (e.g. wo ai ni 我愛你, or "I love you") and a noun (such as aiqing 愛情, or "romantic love"). However, due to the influence of Confucian Ren, the phrase 'Wo ai ni' (I love you) carries with it a very specific sense of responsibility, commitment and loyalty. Instead of frequently saying "I love you" as in some Western societies, the Chinese are more likely to express feelings of affection in a more casual way. Consequently, "I like you" (Wo xihuan ni, 我喜欢你) is a more common way of expressing affection in Chinese; it is more playful and less serious.[31] This is also true in Japanese (suki da, 好きだ). The Chinese are also more likely to say "I love you" in English or other foreign languages than they would in their mother tongue.
Persian
Rumi, Hafiz and Sa'di are icons of the passion and love that the Persian culture and language present. The Persian word for love is eshgh,[citation needed] derived from the Arabic ishq, however is considered by most to be too stalwart a term for interpersonal love and is more commonly substituted for 'doost dashtan' ('liking').[citation needed] In the Persian culture, everything is encompassed by love and all is for love, starting from loving friends and family, husbands and wives, and eventually reaching the divine love that is the ultimate goal in life .[citation needed] Over seven centuries ago, Sa'di wrote:
The children of Adam are limbs of one body
Having been created of one essence.
When the calamity of time afflicts one limb
The other limbs cannot remain at rest.
If you have no sympathy for the troubles of others
You are not worthy to be called by the name of "man".
Japanese
Ohatsu and Tokubei, characters of Sonezaki Shinjū
The Japanese language uses three words to convey the English equivalent of "love". Because "love" covers a wide range of emotions and behavioral phenomena, there are nuances distinguishing the three terms.[32][33] The term ai (愛?), which is often associated with maternal love[32] or selfless love,[33] originally referred to beauty and was often used in religious context. Following the Meiji Restoration 1868, the term became associated with "love" in order to translate Western literature. Prior to Western influence, the term koi (恋?) generally represented romantic love, and was often the subject of the popular Man'yōshū Japanese poetry collection.[32] Koi describes a longing for a member of the opposite sex and is typical interpreted as selfish and wanting.[33] The term's origins come from the concept of lonely solitude as a result of separation from a loved one. Though modern usage of koi focuses on sexual love and infatuation, the Manyō used the term to cover a wider range of situations, including tenderness, benevolence, and material desire.[32] The third term, ren'ai (恋愛?), is a more modern construction that combines the kanji characters for both ai and koi, though its usage more closely resembles that of koi in the form of romantic love.[32][33]
Turkish (Shaman and Islamic)
In Turkish, the word "love" comes up with several meanings. A person can love a god, a person, parents, or family. But that person can "love" just one special person, which they call the word "aşk." Aşk (a word of Arabic origin) is a feeling for to love, or being "in love" (Aşık), as it still is in Turkish today. The Turks used this word just for their loves in a romantic or sexual sense. If a Turk says that he is in love (Aşık) with somebody, it is not a love that a person can feel for his or her parents; it is just for one person, and it indicates a huge infatuation. The word is also common for Turkic languages, such as Azerbaijani (eşq) and Kazakh (ғашық).
Religious views
Main article: Religious views on love
Abrahamic religions
Robert Indiana's 1977 Love sculpture spelling ahava.
Christianity
The Christian understanding is that love comes from God. The love of man and woman—eros in Greek—and the unselfish love of others (agape), are often contrasted as "ascending" and "descending" love, respectively, but are ultimately the same thing.[34]
There are several Greek words for "love" that are regularly referred to in Christian circles.
Agape: In the New Testament, agapē is charitable, selfless, altruistic, and unconditional. It is parental love, seen as creating goodness in the world; it is the way God is seen to love humanity, and it is seen as the kind of love that Christians aspire to have for one another.[29]
Phileo: Also used in the New Testament, phileo is a human response to something that is found to be delightful. Also known as "brotherly love."
Two other words for love in the Greek language, eros (sexual love) and storge (child-to-parent love), were never used in the New Testament.[29]
Christians believe that to Love God with all your heart, mind, and strength and Love your neighbor as yourself are the two most important things in life (the greatest commandment of the Jewish Torah, according to Jesus; cf. Gospel of Mark chapter 12, verses 28–34). Saint Augustine summarized this when he wrote "Love God, and do as thou wilt."
Sacred Love Versus Profane Love (1602–03) by Giovanni Baglione. Intended as an attack on his hated enemy the artist Caravaggio, it shows a boy (hinting at Caravaggio's homosexuality) on one side, a devil with Caravaggio's face on the other, and between an angel representing pure, meaning non-erotic, love.
The Apostle Paul glorified love as the most important virtue of all. Describing love in the famous poetic interpretation in 1 Corinthians, he wrote, "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, and always perseveres." (1 Cor. 13:4–7, NIV)
Relationships
Types[show]
Activities[show]
Endings[show]
Emotions and feelings[show]
Practices[show]
Abuse[show]
v ·
t ·
e
The Apostle John wrote, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." (John 3:16–17, NIV) John also wrote, "Dear friends, let us love one another for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." (1 John 4:7–8, NIV)
Saint Augustine says that one must be able to decipher the difference between love and lust. Lust, according to Saint Augustine, is an overindulgence, but to love and be loved is what he has sought for his entire life. He even says, “I was in love with love.” Finally, he does fall in love and is loved back, by God. Saint Augustine says the only one who can love you truly and fully is God, because love with a human only allows for flaws such as “jealousy, suspicion, fear, anger, and contention.” According to Saint Augustine, to love God is “to attain the peace which is yours.” (Saint Augustine's Confessions)
Augustine regards the duplex commandment of love in Matthew 22 as the heart of Christian faith and the interpretation of the Bible. After the review of Christian doctrine, Augustine treats the problem of love in terms of use and enjoyment until the end of Book I of De Doctrina Christiana (1.22.21-1.40.44;).[35]
Christian theologians see God as the source of love, which is mirrored in humans and their own loving relationships. Influential Christian theologian C.S. Lewis wrote a book called The Four Loves. Benedict XVI wrote his first encyclical on "God is love". He said that a human being, created in the image of God, who is love, is able to practice love; to give himself to God and others (agape) and by receiving and experiencing God's love in contemplation (eros). This life of love, according to him, is the life of the saints such as Teresa of Calcutta and the Blessed Virgin Mary and is the direction Christians take when they believe that God loves them.[34]
In Christianity the practical definition of love is best summarised by St. Thomas Aquinas, who defined love as "to will the good of another," or to desire for another to succeed.[10] This is the explanation of the Christian need to love others, including their enemies. As Thomas Aquinas explains, Christian love is motivated by the need to see others succeed in life, to be good people.
Judaism
See also: Jewish views on love
In Hebrew, Ahava is the most commonly used term for both interpersonal love and love between God and God's creations. Chesed, often translated as loving-kindness, is used to describe many forms of love between human beings.
The commandment to love other people is given in the Torah, which states, "Love your neighbor like yourself" (Leviticus 19:18). The Torah's commandment to love God "with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might" (Deuteronomy 6:5) is taken by the Mishnah (a central text of the Jewish oral law) to refer to good deeds, willingness to sacrifice one's life rather than commit certain serious transgressions, willingness to sacrifice all of one's possessions, and being grateful to the Lord despite adversity (tractate Berachoth 9:5). Rabbinic literature differs as to how this love can be developed, e.g., by contemplating divine deeds or witnessing the marvels of nature. As for love between marital partners, this is deemed an essential ingredient to life: "See life with the wife you love" (Ecclesiastes 9:9). The biblical book Song of Solomon is considered a romantically phrased metaphor of love between God and his people, but in its plain reading, reads like a love song. The 20th-century Rabbi Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler is frequently quoted as defining love from the Jewish point of view as "giving without expecting to take" (from his Michtav me-Eliyahu, Vol. 1).
Islam
Love encompasses the Islamic view of life as universal brotherhood that applies to all who hold faith. Amongst the 99 names of God (Allah), there is the name Al-Wadud, or "the Loving One," which is found in Surah [Quran 11:90] as well as Surah [Quran 85:14]. God is also referenced at the beginning of every chapter in the Qur'an as Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim, or the "Most Compassionate" and the "Most Merciful", indicating that nobody is more loving, compassionate and benevolent than God. The Qur'an refers to God as being "full of loving kindness."
The Qur'an exhorts Muslim believers to treat all people, those who have not persecuted them, with birr or "deep kindness" as stated in Surah [Quran 6:8-9]. Birr is also used by the Qur'an in describing the love and kindness that children must show to their parents.
Ishq, or divine love, is the emphasis of Sufism in the Islamic tradition. Practitioners of Sufism believe that love is a projection of the essence of God to the universe. God desires to recognize beauty, and as if one looks at a mirror to see oneself, God "looks" at himself within the dynamics of nature. Since everything is a reflection of God, the school of Sufism practices to see the beauty inside the apparently ugly. Sufism is often referred to as the religion of love.[citation needed] God in Sufism is referred to in three main terms, which are the Lover, Loved, and Beloved, with the last of these terms being often seen in Sufi poetry. A common viewpoint of Sufism is that through love, humankind can get back to its inherent purity and grace. The saints of Sufism are infamous for being "drunk" due to their love of God; hence, the constant reference to wine in Sufi poetry and music.
Bahá'í Faith
In his Paris Talks, `Abdu'l-Bahá described four types of love:[1]
1.The love that flows from God to human beings
2.The love that flows from human beings to God
3.the love of God towards the Self or Identity of God
4.the love of human beings for human beings
Eastern religions
Buddhism
In Buddhism, Kāma is sensuous, sexual love. It is an obstacle on the path to enlightenment, since it is selfish. Karuṇā is compassion and mercy, which reduces the suffering of others. It is complementary to wisdom and is necessary for enlightenment. Adveṣa and mettā are benevolent love. This love is unconditional and requires considerable self-acceptance. This is quite different from ordinary love, which is usually about attachment and sex and which rarely occurs without self-interest. Instead, in Buddhism it refers to detachment and unselfish interest in others' welfare.
The Bodhisattva ideal in Mahayana Buddhism involves the complete renunciation of oneself in order to take on the burden of a suffering world. The strongest motivation one has in order to take the path of the Bodhisattva is the idea of salvation within unselfish, altruistic love for all sentient beings.
Hinduism
Kama (left) with Rati on a temple wall of Chennakesava Temple, Belur
In Hinduism, kāma is pleasurable, sexual love, personified by the god Kamadeva. For many Hindu schools, it is the third end (Kama) in life. Kamadeva is often pictured holding a bow of sugar cane and an arrow of flowers; he may ride upon a great parrot. He is usually accompanied by his consort Rati and his companion Vasanta, lord of the spring season. Stone images of Kamadeva and Rati can be seen on the door of the Chennakeshava temple at Belur, in Karnataka, India. Maara is another name for kāma.
In contrast to kāma, prema – or prem – refers to elevated love. Karuna is compassion and mercy, which impels one to help reduce the suffering of others. Bhakti is a Sanskrit term, meaning "loving devotion to the supreme God." A person who practices bhakti is called a bhakta. Hindu writers, theologians, and philosophers have distinguished nine forms of bhakti, which can be found in the Bhagavata Purana and works by Tulsidas. The philosophical work Narada Bhakti Sutras, written by an unknown author (presumed to be Narada), distinguishes eleven forms of love.
In certain Vaishnava sects within Hinduism, attaining unadulterated, unconditional and incessant love for Godhead is considered the foremost goal of life. Gaudiya Vaishnavas who worship Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the cause of all causes consider Love for Godhead (Prema) to act in two ways: sambhoga and vipralambha (union and separation)—two opposites .[36]
In the condition of separation, there is an acute yearning for being with the beloved and in the condition of union there is supreme happiness and nectarean. Gaudiya Vaishnavas consider that Krishna-prema (Love for Godhead) is not fire but that it still burns away one's material desires. They consider that Kṛṣṇa-prema is not a weapon, but it still pierces the heart. It is not water, but it washes away everything—one's pride, religious rules, and one's shyness. Krishna-prema is considered to make one drown in the ocean of transcendental ecstasy and pleasure. The love of Radha, a cowherd girl, for Krishna is often cited as the supreme example of love for Godhead by Gaudiya Vaishnavas. Radha is considered to be the internal potency of Krishna, and is the supreme lover of Godhead. Her example of love is considered to be beyond the understanding of material realm as it surpasses any form of selfish love or lust that is visible in the material world. The reciprocal love between Radha (the supreme lover) and Krishna (God as the Supremely Loved) is the subject of many poetic compositions in India such as the Gita Govinda and Hari Bhakti Shuddhodhaya.
In the Bhakti tradition within Hinduism, it is believed that execution of devotional service to God leads to the development of Love for God (taiche bhakti-phale krsne prema upajaya), and as love for God increases in the heart, the more one becomes free from material contamination (krishna-prema asvada haile, bhava nasa paya). Being perfectly in love with God or Krishna makes one perfectly free from material contamination. and this is the ultimate way of salvation or liberation. In this tradition, salvation or liberation is considered inferior to love, and just an incidental by-product. Being absorbed in Love for God is considered to be the perfection of life.[37]
Political views
Free love
Main article: Free love
Lovers kissing on the street
The term free love has been used [38] to describe a social movement that rejects marriage, which is seen as a form of social bondage. The Free Love movement's initial goal was to separate the state from sexual matters such as marriage, birth control, and adultery. It claimed that such issues were the concern of the people involved, and no one else.[39]
Many people in the early 19th century believed that marriage was an important aspect of life to "fulfill earthly human happiness." Middle-class Americans wanted the home to be a place of stability in an uncertain world. This mentality created a vision of strongly defined gender roles, which provoked the advancement of the free love movement as a contrast.[40]
The term "sex radical" is also used interchangeably with the term "free lover", and was the preferred term by advocates because of the negative connotations of "free love".[citation needed] By whatever name, advocates had two strong beliefs: opposition to the idea of forceful sexual activity in a relationship and advocacy for a woman to use her body in any way that she pleases.[41] These are also beliefs of Feminism.
Philosophical views
Main article: Philosophy of love
Graffito in East Timor
The philosophy of love is a field of social philosophy and ethics that attempts to explain the nature of love.[42] The philosophical investigation of love includes the tasks of distinguishing between the various kinds of personal love, asking if and how love is or can be justified, asking what the value of love is, and what impact love has on the autonomy of both the lover and the beloved.
Many different theories attempt to explain the nature and function of love. Explaining love to a hypothetical person who had not himself or herself experienced love or being loved would be very difficult because to such a person love would appear to be quite strange if not outright irrational behavior. Among the prevailing types of theories that attempt to account for the existence of love are: psychological theories, the vast majority of which consider love to be very healthy behavior; evolutionary theories which hold that love is part of the process of natural selection; spiritual theories which may, for instance consider love to be a gift from a god; and theories that consider love to be an unexplainable mystery, very much like a mystical experience.
There were many attempts to find the equation of love. One such attempt was by Christian Rudder, a mathematician and co-founder of online dating website OKCupid,one of the largest online dating site. The mathematical approach was through the collection of large data from the dating site. Another interesting equation of love is found by in the philosophical blog 'In the Quest of Truth'.[43] Love is defined as a measure of selfless give and take, and the author attempted to draw a graph that shows the equation of love.
See also
Love at first sight
References
1.Jump up ^ Oxford Illustrated American Dictionary (1998) + Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary (2000)
2.Jump up ^ Merriam Webster Dictionary
3.Jump up ^ Fromm, Erich; The Art of Loving, Harper Perennial (1956), Original English Version, ISBN 978-0-06-095828-2
4.Jump up ^ Mascaró, Juan (2003). The Bhagavad Gita. Penguin Classics. Penguin. ISBN 0-14-044918-3. (J. Mascaró, translator)
5.Jump up ^ "Article On Love". Retrieved 13 September 2011.
6.Jump up ^ Helen Fisher. Why We Love: the nature and chemistry of romantic love. 2004.
7.Jump up ^ Anders Nygren, Agape and Eros.
8.Jump up ^ Kay, Paul; Kempton, Willett (March 1984). "What is the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis?". American Anthropologist. New Series 86 (1): 65–79. doi:10.1525/aa.1984.86.1.02a00050.
9.Jump up ^ "Ancient Love Poetry".
10.^ Jump up to: a b "St. Thomas Aquinas, STh I-II, 26, 4, corp. art". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 30 October 2010.
11.Jump up ^ Leibniz, Gottfried. "Confessio philosophi". Wikisource edition. Retrieved 25 March 2009.
12.Jump up ^ Baba, Meher (1995). Discourses. Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Press. p. 113. ISBN 978-1880619094.
13.Jump up ^ What is love?. In The Book of Real Answers to Everything! Griffith, J. 2011. ISBN 9781741290073.
14.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Fromm, Erich; The Art of Loving, Harper Perennial (5 September 2000), Original English Version, ISBN 978-0-06-095828-2
15.Jump up ^ DiscoveryHealth. "Paraphilia". Retrieved 16 December 2007.
16.^ Jump up to: a b Lewis, Thomas; Amini, F.; Lannon, R. (2000). A General Theory of Love. Random House. ISBN 0-375-70922-3.
17.^ Jump up to: a b http://homepage.mac.com/helenfisher/archives_of_sex_beh.pdf Defining the Brain Systems of Lust, Romantic Attraction, and Attachment by Fisher et. al
18.^ Jump up to: a b Winston, Robert (2004). Human. Smithsonian Institution. ISBN 0-03-093780-9.
19.Jump up ^ Emanuele, E.; Polliti, P.; Bianchi, M.; Minoretti, P.; Bertona, M.; Geroldi, D (2005). "Raised plasma nerve growth factor levels associated with early-stage romantic love". Psychoneuroendocrinology. Sept. 05 (3): 288–94. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.09.002. PMID 16289361.
20.Jump up ^ Sternberg, R. J. (1986). "A triangular theory of love". Psychological Review 93 (2): 119–135. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.
21.Jump up ^ Rubin, Zick (1970). "Measurement of Romantic Love". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 16 (2): 265–27[clarification needed]. doi:10.1037/h0029841. PMID 5479131.
22.Jump up ^ Rubin, Zick (1973). Liking and Loving: an invitation to social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
23.Jump up ^ Berscheid, Ellen; Walster, Elaine H. (1969). Interpersonal Attraction. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. ISBN 0-201-00560-3. CCCN 69-17443.
24.Jump up ^ Peck, Scott (1978). The Road Less Traveled. Simon & Schuster. p. 169. ISBN 0-671-25067-1.
25.Jump up ^ The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, edited by David M. Buss, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2005. Chapter 14, Commitment, Love, and Mate Retention by Lorne Campbell and Bruce J. Ellis.
26.Jump up ^ C. S. Lewis, The Four Loves, 1960.
27.Jump up ^ Kristeller, Paul Oskar (1980). Renaissance Thought and the Arts: Collected Essays. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-02010-8.
28.Jump up ^ Stendhal, in his book On Love ("De l'amour"; Paris, 1822), distinguished carnal love, passionate love, a kind of uncommitted love that he called "taste-love", and love of vanity. Denis de Rougemont in his book Love in the Western World traced the story of passionate love (l'amour-passion) from its courtly to its romantic forms. Benjamin Péret, in the introduction to his Anthology of Sublime Love (Paris, 1956), further distinguished "sublime love", a state of realized idealisation perhaps equatable with the romantic form of passionate love.
29.^ Jump up to: a b c d Anders Theodor Samuel Nygren, Eros and Agape (first published in Swedish, 1930-1936).
30.Jump up ^ Thomas Köves-Zulauf, Reden und Schweigen, Munich, 1972.
31.Jump up ^ JFK Miller, "Why the Chinese Don't Say I Love You"
32.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Ryang, Sonia (2006). Love in Modern Japan: Its Estrangement from Self, Sex and Society. Routledge. pp. 13–14.
33.^ Jump up to: a b c d Abe, Namiko. "Japanese Words for "Love": The Difference between "Ai" and "Koi"". About.com. Retrieved November 5, 2014.
34.^ Jump up to: a b Pope Benedict XVI. "papal encyclical, Deus Caritas Est.".
35.Jump up ^ Woo, B. Hoon (2013). "Augustine's Hermeneutics and Homiletics in De doctrina christiana". Journal of Christian Philosophy 17: 97–117.
36.Jump up ^ Gour Govinda Swami. "Wonderful Characteristic of Krishna Prema, Gour Govinda Swami.".
37.Jump up ^ A C Bhaktivedanta Swami. "Being Perfectly in Love".
38.Jump up ^ The Handbook of the Oneida Community claims to have coined the term around 1850, and laments that its use was appropriated by socialists to attack marriage, an institution that they felt protected women and children from abandonment
39.Jump up ^ McElroy, Wendy. "The Free Love Movement and Radical Individualism." Libertarian Enterprise .19 (1996): 1.
40.Jump up ^ Spurlock, John C. Free Love Marriage and Middle-Class Radicalism in America. New York, NY: New York UP, 1988.
41.Jump up ^ Passet, Joanne E. Sex Radicals and the Quest for Women's Equality. Chicago,IL: U of Illinois P, 2003.
42.Jump up ^ Soren Kierkegaard. Works of Love.
43.Jump up ^ "In the Quest of Truth". The Equation of Love.
Sources
Chadwick, Henry (1998). Saint Augustine Confessions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-283372-3.
Fisher, Helen. Why We Love: the Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love. ISBN 0-8050-6913-5.
Giles, James (1994). "A theory of love and sexual desire". Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 24 (4): 339–357. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1994.tb00259.x.
Kierkegaard, Søren (2009). Works of Love. New York City: Harper Perennial Modern Classics. ISBN 978-0-06-171327-9.
Oord, Thomas Jay (2010). Defining Love: A Philosophical, Scientific, and Theological Engagement. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos. ISBN 978-1-58743257-6.
Singer, Irving (1966). The Nature of Love. (in three volumes) (v.1 reprinted and later volumes from The University of Chicago Press, 1984 ed.). Random House. ISBN 0-226-76094-4.
Sternberg, R.J. (1986). "A triangular theory of love". Psychological Review 93 (2): 119–135. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.119.
Sternberg, R.J. (1987). "Liking versus loving: A comparative evaluation of theories". Psychological Bulletin 102 (3): 331–345. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.102.3.331.
Tennov, Dorothy (1979). Love and Limerence: the Experience of Being in Love. New York: Stein and Day. ISBN 0-8128-6134-5.
Wood Samuel E., Ellen Wood and Denise Boyd (2005). The World of Psychology (5th ed.). Pearson Education. pp. 402–403. ISBN 0-205-35868-3.
External links
Look up I love you in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Media related to Love at Wikimedia Commons
Quotations related to Love at Wikiquote
The dictionary definition of love at Wiktionary
Learning materials related to Have a Happy Relationship at Wikiversity
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Emotions (list)
Plutchik-wheel.svg
Authority control
GND: 4035646-2 ·
NDL: 00560099
Categories: Love
Emotions
Ethical principles
Personal life
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
View source
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Afrikaans
Alemannisch
አማርኛ
Ænglisc
العربية
Aragonés
Asturianu
Avañe'ẽ
Azərbaycanca
বাংলা
Башҡортса
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
Boarisch
བོད་ཡིག
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Буряад
Català
Чӑвашла
Čeština
Corsu
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Estremeñu
Euskara
فارسی
Fiji Hindi
Français
Frysk
Gàidhlig
Galego
贛語
ગુજરાતી
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Igbo
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ/inuktitut
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Basa Jawa
ಕನ್ನಡ
ქართული
कॉशुर / کٲشُر
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Ligure
Limburgs
Lingála
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
Malti
मराठी
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Mirandés
Монгол
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nāhuatl
Nederlands
नेपाली
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Нохчийн
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
ଓଡ଼ିଆ
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
پنجابی
Piemontèis
Polski
Português
Ripoarisch
Română
Runa Simi
Русиньскый
Русский
Саха тыла
Sardu
Shqip
Sicilianu
සිංහල
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Soomaaliga
کوردیی ناوەندی
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
తెలుగు
ไทย
Тоҷикӣ
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
ئۇيغۇرچە / Uyghurche
Tiếng Việt
Walon
文言
Winaray
ייִדיש
粵語
Žemaitėška
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 18 June 2015, at 04:01.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love
Dogma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about principles that should not be disagreed on. For other uses, see Dogma (disambiguation).
Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. The term can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, religion, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]
The term derives from Greek δόγμα "that which seems to one, opinion or belief"[3] and that from δοκέω (dokeo), "to think, to suppose, to imagine".[4] Dogma came to signify laws or ordinances adjudged and imposed upon others by the First Century. The plural is either dogmas or dogmata, from Greek δόγματα. The term "dogmatics" is used as a synonym for systematic theology, as in Karl Barth's defining textbook of neo-orthodoxy, the 14-volume Church Dogmatics.
Contents [hide]
1 In religion 1.1 Christianity
1.2 Catholicism
1.3 Islam
2 Reversalism
3 Other usage
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
In religion[edit]
See also: Roman Catholic dogma, Jewish principles of faith and The six articles of Islamic faith
Dogmata are found in religions such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, where they are considered core principles that must be upheld by all believers of that religion. As a fundamental element of religion, the term "dogma" is assigned to those theological tenets which are considered to be unanimously agreed upon, such that their proposed disputation or revision effectively means that a person no longer accepts the given religion as his or her own, or has entered into a period of personal doubt. Dogma is distinguished from theological opinion regarding those things considered less well-known. Dogmata may be clarified and elaborated upon, but not contradicted in novel teachings (e.g., Galatians 1:6-9). Rejection of dogma may lead to expulsion from a religious group.
Christianity[edit]
In Christianity, religious beliefs are defined by the Church.[5] It is usually based upon scripture or communicated by church authority.[6] It is believed that these dogmas will lead human beings towards redemption and thus the “path which leads to God".[7]
Protestants to differing degrees affirm portions of these dogmata, and often rely on denomination-specific "Statements of Faith" which summarize their chosen dogmata (see, e.g., Eucharist).
Catholicism[edit]
For Catholicism and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Christianity, the dogmata are contained in the Nicene Creed and the canon laws of two, three, seven, or twenty ecumenical councils (depending on whether one is Nestorian, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, or Roman Catholic). These tenets are summarized by St. John of Damascus in his Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, which is the third book of his main work, titled The Fount of Knowledge. In this book he takes a dual approach in explaining each article of the faith: one, for Christians, where he uses quotes from the Bible and, occasionally, from works of other Fathers of the Church, and the second, directed both at non-Christians (but who, nevertheless, hold some sort of religious belief) and at atheists, for whom he employs Aristotelian logic and dialectics.
The decisions of fourteen later councils that Catholics hold as dogmatic and numerous decrees promulgated by Popes' exercising papal infallibility (for examples, see Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary) are considered as being a part of the Church's sacred body of doctrine.
Islam[edit]
In Islam, the dogmatic principles are contained in the aqidah.
Reversalism[edit]
Religious organizations have begun defending their religions, stating that since one can not prove a negative, then atheists who point out the scientific inadequacies within religions must, necessarily, be dogmatic.[8] The arguments often depend on the presuppositionalist's view that since they believe their idea of God created humans, then anything that humans do to counter their religion is dogmatic.[9]
Other usage[edit]
As a possible reaction to skepticism, dogmatism is a set of beliefs or doctrines that are established as undoubtedly in truth.[10] They are regarded as (religious) truths relating closely to the nature of faith.[11]
The term "dogmatic" can be used disparagingly to refer to any belief that is held stubbornly, including political[12] and scientific[13] beliefs.
A notable use of the term can be found in the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology. In his autobiography, What Mad Pursuit, Francis Crick wrote about his choice of the word dogma and some of the problems it caused him:
I called this idea the central dogma, for two reasons, I suspect. I had already used the obvious word hypothesis in the sequence hypothesis, and in addition I wanted to suggest that this new assumption was more central and more powerful. ... As it turned out, the use of the word dogma caused almost more trouble than it was worth.... Many years later Jacques Monod pointed out to me that I did not appear to understand the correct use of the word dogma, which is a belief that cannot be doubted... I used the word the way I myself thought about it, not as most of the world does, and simply applied it to a grand hypothesis that, however plausible, had little direct experimental support.
Similarly, Horace Freeland Judson records in The Eighth Day of Creation:[14]
"My mind was, that a dogma was an idea for which there was no reasonable evidence. You see?!" And Crick gave a roar of delight. "I just didn't know what dogma meant. And I could just as well have called it the 'Central Hypothesis,' or — you know. Which is what I meant to say. Dogma was just a catch phrase."
See also[edit]
Axiom
Pragmatism
Church Dogmatics by Karl Barth
Freethought, a philosophical viewpoint which holds that opinions should be formed on the basis of science and should not be influenced by any other authority, tradition, or dogma.
2 + 2 = 5
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ [1], "dogma." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 24 Oct. 2011. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dogma>.
2.Jump up ^ [2], "Dogma" The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Ed. John Bowker. Oxford University Press, 2000. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t101.e2044>.
3.Jump up ^ Dogma, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, at Perseus
4.Jump up ^ Dokeo, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, at Perseus
5.Jump up ^ [3], "dogma" The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Simon Blackburn. Oxford University Press, 2008. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t98.e978>.
6.Jump up ^ [4], Prof. David Berman "dogma" The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press 2005. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t116.e662>.
7.Jump up ^ [5], Journet, Charles. What Is Dogma? San Francisco: Ignatius, 2011. Google Book Search. Web. 21 Oct. 2011.
8.Jump up ^ Murphy, Peter. "Atheism vs. Science". World Union of Deists. Retrieved 6 May 2015.
9.Jump up ^ Purdom, Georgia. "Science - Worldview Neutral?". Answers In Genesis. Ken Ham. Retrieved 6 May 2015.
10.Jump up ^ [6], "dogma" The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Simon Blackburn. Oxford University Press, 2008. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t98.e978>.
11.Jump up ^ [7], Journet, Charles. What Is Dogma? San Francisco: Ignatius, 2011. Google Book Search. Web. 21 Oct. 2011.
12.Jump up ^ Gabler, Neal. [8], "The Los Angeles Times", October 2, 2009
13.Jump up ^ Thompson, Michael. [9], The Analyst, 2004, 129, 865
14.Jump up ^ Horace Freeland Judson (1996). "Chapter 6: My mind was, that a dogma was an idea for which there was no reasonable evidence. You see?!". The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology (25th anniversary edition). Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 0-87969-477-7.
External links[edit]
Look up dogma in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Dogma
Wikisource has the text of the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia article Dogma.
Dogma - Strong's N.T. Greek Lexicon
Il Domani -terribile o radioso? - del Dogma, a book by Enrico Maria Radaelli with a Preface by Roger Scruton and comments by Brunero Gherardini, Alessandro Gnocchi-Mario Palmaro, and Mario Oliveri (Roma 2012)
Why I agree with the book The Future of Dogma by Enrico Maria Radaelli, by Brunero Gherardini.
Categories: Christian terminology
Dogmatism
Epistemology of religion
Justification
Religious belief and doctrine
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Afrikaans
العربية
বাংলা
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Frysk
Galego
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Latina
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Magyar
مصرى
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
پښتو
Piemontèis
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
සිංහල
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
Winaray
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 6 June 2015, at 16:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma
Dogma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about principles that should not be disagreed on. For other uses, see Dogma (disambiguation).
Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. The term can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, religion, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]
The term derives from Greek δόγμα "that which seems to one, opinion or belief"[3] and that from δοκέω (dokeo), "to think, to suppose, to imagine".[4] Dogma came to signify laws or ordinances adjudged and imposed upon others by the First Century. The plural is either dogmas or dogmata, from Greek δόγματα. The term "dogmatics" is used as a synonym for systematic theology, as in Karl Barth's defining textbook of neo-orthodoxy, the 14-volume Church Dogmatics.
Contents [hide]
1 In religion 1.1 Christianity
1.2 Catholicism
1.3 Islam
2 Reversalism
3 Other usage
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
In religion[edit]
See also: Roman Catholic dogma, Jewish principles of faith and The six articles of Islamic faith
Dogmata are found in religions such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, where they are considered core principles that must be upheld by all believers of that religion. As a fundamental element of religion, the term "dogma" is assigned to those theological tenets which are considered to be unanimously agreed upon, such that their proposed disputation or revision effectively means that a person no longer accepts the given religion as his or her own, or has entered into a period of personal doubt. Dogma is distinguished from theological opinion regarding those things considered less well-known. Dogmata may be clarified and elaborated upon, but not contradicted in novel teachings (e.g., Galatians 1:6-9). Rejection of dogma may lead to expulsion from a religious group.
Christianity[edit]
In Christianity, religious beliefs are defined by the Church.[5] It is usually based upon scripture or communicated by church authority.[6] It is believed that these dogmas will lead human beings towards redemption and thus the “path which leads to God".[7]
Protestants to differing degrees affirm portions of these dogmata, and often rely on denomination-specific "Statements of Faith" which summarize their chosen dogmata (see, e.g., Eucharist).
Catholicism[edit]
For Catholicism and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Christianity, the dogmata are contained in the Nicene Creed and the canon laws of two, three, seven, or twenty ecumenical councils (depending on whether one is Nestorian, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, or Roman Catholic). These tenets are summarized by St. John of Damascus in his Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, which is the third book of his main work, titled The Fount of Knowledge. In this book he takes a dual approach in explaining each article of the faith: one, for Christians, where he uses quotes from the Bible and, occasionally, from works of other Fathers of the Church, and the second, directed both at non-Christians (but who, nevertheless, hold some sort of religious belief) and at atheists, for whom he employs Aristotelian logic and dialectics.
The decisions of fourteen later councils that Catholics hold as dogmatic and numerous decrees promulgated by Popes' exercising papal infallibility (for examples, see Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary) are considered as being a part of the Church's sacred body of doctrine.
Islam[edit]
In Islam, the dogmatic principles are contained in the aqidah.
Reversalism[edit]
Religious organizations have begun defending their religions, stating that since one can not prove a negative, then atheists who point out the scientific inadequacies within religions must, necessarily, be dogmatic.[8] The arguments often depend on the presuppositionalist's view that since they believe their idea of God created humans, then anything that humans do to counter their religion is dogmatic.[9]
Other usage[edit]
As a possible reaction to skepticism, dogmatism is a set of beliefs or doctrines that are established as undoubtedly in truth.[10] They are regarded as (religious) truths relating closely to the nature of faith.[11]
The term "dogmatic" can be used disparagingly to refer to any belief that is held stubbornly, including political[12] and scientific[13] beliefs.
A notable use of the term can be found in the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology. In his autobiography, What Mad Pursuit, Francis Crick wrote about his choice of the word dogma and some of the problems it caused him:
I called this idea the central dogma, for two reasons, I suspect. I had already used the obvious word hypothesis in the sequence hypothesis, and in addition I wanted to suggest that this new assumption was more central and more powerful. ... As it turned out, the use of the word dogma caused almost more trouble than it was worth.... Many years later Jacques Monod pointed out to me that I did not appear to understand the correct use of the word dogma, which is a belief that cannot be doubted... I used the word the way I myself thought about it, not as most of the world does, and simply applied it to a grand hypothesis that, however plausible, had little direct experimental support.
Similarly, Horace Freeland Judson records in The Eighth Day of Creation:[14]
"My mind was, that a dogma was an idea for which there was no reasonable evidence. You see?!" And Crick gave a roar of delight. "I just didn't know what dogma meant. And I could just as well have called it the 'Central Hypothesis,' or — you know. Which is what I meant to say. Dogma was just a catch phrase."
See also[edit]
Axiom
Pragmatism
Church Dogmatics by Karl Barth
Freethought, a philosophical viewpoint which holds that opinions should be formed on the basis of science and should not be influenced by any other authority, tradition, or dogma.
2 + 2 = 5
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ [1], "dogma." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 24 Oct. 2011. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dogma>.
2.Jump up ^ [2], "Dogma" The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Ed. John Bowker. Oxford University Press, 2000. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t101.e2044>.
3.Jump up ^ Dogma, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, at Perseus
4.Jump up ^ Dokeo, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, at Perseus
5.Jump up ^ [3], "dogma" The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Simon Blackburn. Oxford University Press, 2008. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t98.e978>.
6.Jump up ^ [4], Prof. David Berman "dogma" The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press 2005. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t116.e662>.
7.Jump up ^ [5], Journet, Charles. What Is Dogma? San Francisco: Ignatius, 2011. Google Book Search. Web. 21 Oct. 2011.
8.Jump up ^ Murphy, Peter. "Atheism vs. Science". World Union of Deists. Retrieved 6 May 2015.
9.Jump up ^ Purdom, Georgia. "Science - Worldview Neutral?". Answers In Genesis. Ken Ham. Retrieved 6 May 2015.
10.Jump up ^ [6], "dogma" The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Simon Blackburn. Oxford University Press, 2008. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. York University. 25 October 2011 <http://www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t98.e978>.
11.Jump up ^ [7], Journet, Charles. What Is Dogma? San Francisco: Ignatius, 2011. Google Book Search. Web. 21 Oct. 2011.
12.Jump up ^ Gabler, Neal. [8], "The Los Angeles Times", October 2, 2009
13.Jump up ^ Thompson, Michael. [9], The Analyst, 2004, 129, 865
14.Jump up ^ Horace Freeland Judson (1996). "Chapter 6: My mind was, that a dogma was an idea for which there was no reasonable evidence. You see?!". The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology (25th anniversary edition). Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 0-87969-477-7.
External links[edit]
Look up dogma in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Dogma
Wikisource has the text of the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia article Dogma.
Dogma - Strong's N.T. Greek Lexicon
Il Domani -terribile o radioso? - del Dogma, a book by Enrico Maria Radaelli with a Preface by Roger Scruton and comments by Brunero Gherardini, Alessandro Gnocchi-Mario Palmaro, and Mario Oliveri (Roma 2012)
Why I agree with the book The Future of Dogma by Enrico Maria Radaelli, by Brunero Gherardini.
Categories: Christian terminology
Dogmatism
Epistemology of religion
Justification
Religious belief and doctrine
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Afrikaans
العربية
বাংলা
Български
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Frysk
Galego
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Latina
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Magyar
مصرى
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
پښتو
Piemontèis
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
සිංහල
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
Winaray
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 6 June 2015, at 16:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma
Indoctrination
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article needs attention from an expert in Sociology. (January 2015)
Globe icon.
The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (January 2015)
This article needs additional citations for verification. (January 2015)
Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine).[1] Indoctrination is a critical component in the transfer of cultures, customs, and traditions from one generation to the next.
Some distinguish indoctrination from education, claiming that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.[2] As such the term may be used pejoratively or as a buzz word, often in the context of political opinions, theology, religious dogma or anti-religious convictions. The term is closely linked to socialization; however, in common discourse, indoctrination is sometimes associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning.
Contents [hide]
1 Religious/Antireligious
2 Military
3 Information security
4 Criticism
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
Religious/Antireligious[edit]
Religious indoctrination, the original sense of indoctrination, refers to a process of imparting doctrine in an authoritative way, as in catechism. Most religious groups among the revealed religions instruct new members in the principles of the religion; this is now not usually referred to as indoctrination by the religions themselves, in part because of the negative connotations the word has acquired. Mystery religions require a period of indoctrination before granting access to esoteric knowledge. (cf. Information security)
As a pejorative term, indoctrination implies forcibly or coercively causing people to act and think on the basis of a certain ideology.[3] Some secular critics believe that all religions indoctrinate their adherents, as children, and the accusation is made in the case of religious extremism.[4] Sects such as Scientology use personality tests and peer pressures to indoctrinate new members.[5] Some religions have commitment ceremonies for children 13 years and younger, such as Bar Mitzvah, Confirmation, and Shichi-Go-San. In Buddhism, temple boys are encouraged to follow the faith while young.[citation needed] Critics of religion, such as Richard Dawkins, maintain that the children of religious parents are often unfairly indoctrinated.[6]
However, due to the policy of state atheism in the People's Socialist Republic of Albania and the USSR in the 20th century, many citizens in those countries were subject to a government-sponsored program of atheistic indoctrination, specifically Marxist–Leninist atheism.[7][8] Sabrina P. Ramet, a professor of political science, documented that "from kindergarten onward children are indoctrinated with an aggressive form of atheism" and "to denounce parents who follow religious practices at home."[9] Similarly, in the former Soviet Union, the period of "science education Soviet schools is used as a vehicle for atheistic indoctrination", with teachers having instructions to prepare their course "so as to conduct anti-religious educations at all times" since officials felt that little Marxist-Leninist atheistic indoctrination was done by "even the most atheistic parents."[10] To this end, "to promote anti-religious propaganda, some Soviet universities (Kiev, for example) have opened permanent departments on the history and theory of atheism", which served to "prepare and distribute antireligious pamphlets and present public lectures".[10] In 1964, the Soviet Union made the class Osnovy nauchnogo ateizma (Fundamentals of Scientific Atheism) mandatory for all university students.[11]
Military[edit]
Main article: Recruit training
The initial psychological preparation of soldiers during training is referred to (non-pejoratively) as indoctrination.[citation needed]
Information security[edit]
In the field of information security, indoctrination is the initial briefing and instructions given before a person is granted access to secret information.[12]
Criticism[edit]
Noam Chomsky remarks, "For those who stubbornly seek freedom around the world, there can be no more urgent task than to come to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination. These are easy to perceive in the totalitarian societies, much less so in the propaganda system to which we are subjected and in which all too often we serve as unwilling or unwitting instruments."[13]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Psychology portal
Behavior modification
Brainwashing
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Funk and Wagnalls: "To instruct in doctrines; esp., to teach partisan or sectarian dogmas"; I.A. Snook, ed. 1972. Concepts of Indoctrination (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).
2.Jump up ^ Wilson, J., 1964. "Education and indoctrination", in T.H.B. Hollins, ed. Aims in Education: the philosophic approach(Manchester University Press).
3.Jump up ^ See OED, indoctrination.
4.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam (2011). The moral landscape. Simon and Schuster.
5.Jump up ^ See Scientology beliefs and practices.
6.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Bantam Books, 2006. Print. Pp. 25, 28, 206, 367.
7.Jump up ^ Jacques, Edwin E. (1995). The Albanians: An Ethnic History from Prehistoric Times to the Present. McFarland. p. 447. ISBN 0899509320. "This Marxist-Leninist class revolution, therefore, demanded an atheistic indoctrination of the working masses and the elimination of all religious convictions."
8.Jump up ^ Franzmann, Manuel (2006). Religiosität in der säkularisierten Welt. Springer-Verlag. p. 89. "However, another conspicuous result of our comparison is that some Eastern European countries, in spite of decades of atheist indoctrination, have a considerable percentage of believers in God - Albania for instance, whose Communist rulers once claimed it was the world's first totally atheist country, or Russia, where the percentage of believers surged in the late eighties and rose dramatically once again in the course of the nineties."
9.Jump up ^ Ramet, Sabrina P. (1990). Catholicism and Politics in Communist Societies. Duke University Press. pp. 232–233. ISBN 0822310473. "From kindergarten onward children are indoctrinated with an aggressive form of atheism and trained to hate and distrust foreigners and to denounce parents who follow religious practices at home."
10.^ Jump up to: a b Witt, Nicholas De (1961). Education and Professional Employment in the U.S.S.R. National Academies. p. 121.
11.Jump up ^ Thrower, James (1983). Marxist-Leninist "scientific Atheism" and the Study of Religion and Atheism in the USSR. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 143–144. ISBN 9027930600. "In 1959, a new course, entitled Osnovy nauchnogo ateizma (Fundamentals of Scientific Atheism) was introduced into the curriculum of all higher educational institutions, including the universities."
12.Jump up ^ The National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual defines indoctrination as "the initial security instructions/briefing given a person prior to granting access to classified information."
13.Jump up ^ Chomsky, Noam. "Propaganda, American Style". Retrieved 2007-06-29.
External links[edit]
Look up indoctrination in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Students for Academic Freedom
Habermas and the Problem of Indoctrination Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Education
Library resources about
Indoctrination
Resources in your library
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Media manipulation
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Propaganda techniques
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Psychological manipulation
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Conformity
Categories: Mind control methods
Propaganda techniques
Social psychology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Български
Bosanski
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Français
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
עברית
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
Edit links
This page was last modified on 27 April 2015, at 18:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination
Indoctrination
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article needs attention from an expert in Sociology. (January 2015)
Globe icon.
The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (January 2015)
This article needs additional citations for verification. (January 2015)
Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine).[1] Indoctrination is a critical component in the transfer of cultures, customs, and traditions from one generation to the next.
Some distinguish indoctrination from education, claiming that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.[2] As such the term may be used pejoratively or as a buzz word, often in the context of political opinions, theology, religious dogma or anti-religious convictions. The term is closely linked to socialization; however, in common discourse, indoctrination is sometimes associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning.
Contents [hide]
1 Religious/Antireligious
2 Military
3 Information security
4 Criticism
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
Religious/Antireligious[edit]
Religious indoctrination, the original sense of indoctrination, refers to a process of imparting doctrine in an authoritative way, as in catechism. Most religious groups among the revealed religions instruct new members in the principles of the religion; this is now not usually referred to as indoctrination by the religions themselves, in part because of the negative connotations the word has acquired. Mystery religions require a period of indoctrination before granting access to esoteric knowledge. (cf. Information security)
As a pejorative term, indoctrination implies forcibly or coercively causing people to act and think on the basis of a certain ideology.[3] Some secular critics believe that all religions indoctrinate their adherents, as children, and the accusation is made in the case of religious extremism.[4] Sects such as Scientology use personality tests and peer pressures to indoctrinate new members.[5] Some religions have commitment ceremonies for children 13 years and younger, such as Bar Mitzvah, Confirmation, and Shichi-Go-San. In Buddhism, temple boys are encouraged to follow the faith while young.[citation needed] Critics of religion, such as Richard Dawkins, maintain that the children of religious parents are often unfairly indoctrinated.[6]
However, due to the policy of state atheism in the People's Socialist Republic of Albania and the USSR in the 20th century, many citizens in those countries were subject to a government-sponsored program of atheistic indoctrination, specifically Marxist–Leninist atheism.[7][8] Sabrina P. Ramet, a professor of political science, documented that "from kindergarten onward children are indoctrinated with an aggressive form of atheism" and "to denounce parents who follow religious practices at home."[9] Similarly, in the former Soviet Union, the period of "science education Soviet schools is used as a vehicle for atheistic indoctrination", with teachers having instructions to prepare their course "so as to conduct anti-religious educations at all times" since officials felt that little Marxist-Leninist atheistic indoctrination was done by "even the most atheistic parents."[10] To this end, "to promote anti-religious propaganda, some Soviet universities (Kiev, for example) have opened permanent departments on the history and theory of atheism", which served to "prepare and distribute antireligious pamphlets and present public lectures".[10] In 1964, the Soviet Union made the class Osnovy nauchnogo ateizma (Fundamentals of Scientific Atheism) mandatory for all university students.[11]
Military[edit]
Main article: Recruit training
The initial psychological preparation of soldiers during training is referred to (non-pejoratively) as indoctrination.[citation needed]
Information security[edit]
In the field of information security, indoctrination is the initial briefing and instructions given before a person is granted access to secret information.[12]
Criticism[edit]
Noam Chomsky remarks, "For those who stubbornly seek freedom around the world, there can be no more urgent task than to come to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination. These are easy to perceive in the totalitarian societies, much less so in the propaganda system to which we are subjected and in which all too often we serve as unwilling or unwitting instruments."[13]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Psychology portal
Behavior modification
Brainwashing
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Funk and Wagnalls: "To instruct in doctrines; esp., to teach partisan or sectarian dogmas"; I.A. Snook, ed. 1972. Concepts of Indoctrination (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).
2.Jump up ^ Wilson, J., 1964. "Education and indoctrination", in T.H.B. Hollins, ed. Aims in Education: the philosophic approach(Manchester University Press).
3.Jump up ^ See OED, indoctrination.
4.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam (2011). The moral landscape. Simon and Schuster.
5.Jump up ^ See Scientology beliefs and practices.
6.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Bantam Books, 2006. Print. Pp. 25, 28, 206, 367.
7.Jump up ^ Jacques, Edwin E. (1995). The Albanians: An Ethnic History from Prehistoric Times to the Present. McFarland. p. 447. ISBN 0899509320. "This Marxist-Leninist class revolution, therefore, demanded an atheistic indoctrination of the working masses and the elimination of all religious convictions."
8.Jump up ^ Franzmann, Manuel (2006). Religiosität in der säkularisierten Welt. Springer-Verlag. p. 89. "However, another conspicuous result of our comparison is that some Eastern European countries, in spite of decades of atheist indoctrination, have a considerable percentage of believers in God - Albania for instance, whose Communist rulers once claimed it was the world's first totally atheist country, or Russia, where the percentage of believers surged in the late eighties and rose dramatically once again in the course of the nineties."
9.Jump up ^ Ramet, Sabrina P. (1990). Catholicism and Politics in Communist Societies. Duke University Press. pp. 232–233. ISBN 0822310473. "From kindergarten onward children are indoctrinated with an aggressive form of atheism and trained to hate and distrust foreigners and to denounce parents who follow religious practices at home."
10.^ Jump up to: a b Witt, Nicholas De (1961). Education and Professional Employment in the U.S.S.R. National Academies. p. 121.
11.Jump up ^ Thrower, James (1983). Marxist-Leninist "scientific Atheism" and the Study of Religion and Atheism in the USSR. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 143–144. ISBN 9027930600. "In 1959, a new course, entitled Osnovy nauchnogo ateizma (Fundamentals of Scientific Atheism) was introduced into the curriculum of all higher educational institutions, including the universities."
12.Jump up ^ The National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual defines indoctrination as "the initial security instructions/briefing given a person prior to granting access to classified information."
13.Jump up ^ Chomsky, Noam. "Propaganda, American Style". Retrieved 2007-06-29.
External links[edit]
Look up indoctrination in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Students for Academic Freedom
Habermas and the Problem of Indoctrination Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Education
Library resources about
Indoctrination
Resources in your library
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Media manipulation
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Propaganda techniques
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Psychological manipulation
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Conformity
Categories: Mind control methods
Propaganda techniques
Social psychology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Български
Bosanski
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Français
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
עברית
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
Edit links
This page was last modified on 27 April 2015, at 18:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination
Extremism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Political fringe" redirects here. For other political fringe groups, see Political fringe movements.
"Extremists" redirects here. For the DC Comics supervillain team, see Extremists (comics).
"Extremist" redirects here. For the 1992 instrumental rock album, see The Extremist. For the comic book series, see The Extremist (comics).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2008)
Part of the Politics series
Party politics
Political spectrum
Far-left/Radical left ·
Left-wing
Centre-left
Centre/Radical centre
Centre-right
Right-wing ·
Far-right/Radical right
Party platform
Extremist ·
Radical
Reformist ·
Moderate
Syncretic
Conservative ·
Reactionary
Fundamentalist
Party system
Non-partisan ·
Single-party
Dominant-party ·
Two-party ·
Multi-party
Coalition
Hung parliament ·
Confidence and supply ·
Minority government ·
Rainbow coalition ·
Grand coalition ·
Full coalition
National Unity government
Majority government
Lists
Political parties by country
Political parties by UN geoscheme
Political ideologies
Politics portal
v ·
t ·
e
Extremism means, literally: driving (something) to the limit, to the extreme.
Nowadays, the term is mostly being used in a political or religious sense, for an ideology that is considered (by the speaker) to be far outside the (acceptable) mainstream attitudes of society.[citation needed] But extremism can, for example, also be meant in an economic sense.
The term "extremism" is usually meant pejorative: to express (strong) disapproval, but it may also be meant in a more academic, purely descriptive, non-condemning sense.
Extremists are usually contrasted with centrists or moderates. For example, in contemporary discussions in Western countries of Islam or of Islamic political movements, the distinction between extremist (= 'bad') and moderate (= 'good') Muslims is typically stressed.
Political agendas perceived as extremist often include those from the far left or far right, as well as radicalism, reactionism, fundamentalism, and fanaticism.
Contents [hide]
1 Problems with defining extremism
2 Radicalism or extremism?
3 Theories of extremism 3.1 Psychological
4 Uses of the term in "mainstream" politics
5 Other terms
6 See also
7 References 7.1 Cited publications
7.2 Further reading
8 External links
Problems with defining extremism[edit]
In different realms at different times were many different definitions of "extremism". Dr. Peter T. Coleman and Dr. Andrea Bartoli give short observation of definitions:[1]
“ Extremism is a complex phenomenon, although its complexity is often hard to see. Most simply, it can be defined as activities (beliefs, attitudes, feelings, actions, strategies) of a character far removed from the ordinary. In conflict settings it manifests as a severe form of conflict engagement. However, the labeling of activities, people, and groups as "extremist", and the defining of what is "ordinary" in any setting is always a subjective and political matter. Thus, we suggest that any discussion of extremism be mindful of the following: Typically, the same extremist act will be viewed by some as just and moral (such as pro-social "freedom fighting"), and by others as unjust and immoral (antisocial "terrorism") depending on the observer's values, politics, moral scope, and the nature of their relationship with the actor.
In addition, one's sense of the moral or immoral nature of a given act of extremism (such as Nelson Mandela's use of guerilla war tactics against the South African Government) may change as conditions (leadership, world opinion, crises, historical accounts, etc.) change. Thus, the current and historical context of extremist acts shapes our view of them.
Power differences also matter when defining extremism. When in conflict, the activities of members of low power groups tend to be viewed as more extreme than similar activities committed by members of groups advocating the status quo. In addition, extreme acts are more likely to be employed by marginalized people and groups who view more normative forms of conflict engagement as blocked for them or biased. However, dominant groups also commonly employ extreme activities (such as governmental sanctioning of violent paramilitary groups or the attack in Waco by the FBI in the U.S.).
Extremist acts often employ violent means, although extremist groups will differ in their preference for violent vs. non-violent tactics, in the level of violence they employ, and in the preferred targets of their violence (from infrastructure to military personnel to civilians to children). Again, low power groups are more likely to employ direct, episodic forms of violence (such as suicide bombings), whereas dominant groups tend to be associated with more structural or institutionalized forms (like the covert use of torture or the informal sanctioning of police brutality).
Although extremist individuals and groups (such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad) are often viewed as cohesive and consistently evil, it is important to recognize that they may be conflicted or ambivalent psychologically as individuals, or contain difference and conflict within their groups. For instance, individual members of Hamas may differ considerably in their willingness to negotiate their differences with the Palestinian Authority and, ultimately, with certain factions in Israel.
Ultimately, the core problem that extremism presents in situations of protracted conflict is less the severity of the activities (although violence, trauma, and escalation are obvious concerns) but more so the closed, fixed, and intolerant nature of extremist attitudes, and their subsequent imperviousness to change.
”
Radicalism or extremism?[edit]
The terms extremism or extremist are almost always exonymic—i.e., applied by others to a group rather than by a group labeling itself. Rather than labeling themselves extremist, those labeled as such might describe themselves as, for example, political radicals. There is no political party that calls itself "right-wing extremist" or "left-wing extremist", and there is no sect of any religion that calls itself "extremist" or which calls its doctrine "extremism".
The term extremist is used to describe groups and individuals who have become radicalized, in some way, even though the term radical originally meant to go to the root of a (social) problem. The term radical is one not normally regarded as pejorative (except perhaps in the United States of America) and, unlike extremist, is sometimes used by groups in their description of themselves.
The term extremist is often used with reference to those who use or advocate violence against the will of society at large, but it is also used by some to describe those who advocate or use violence to enforce the will of the social body, such as a government or majority constituency. Those described as extremist would in general not accept that what they practice or advocate constitutes violence and would instead speak in terms of acts of "resistance"or militant action or the use of force. The word violence cannot be regarded as value-neutral. Ideology and methodology often become inextricably linked under the single term extremism.
The notion that there is a philosophy which can be described as extremism is considered by some to be suspect. Within sociology, several academics who track (and are critical of) extreme right-wing groups have objected to the term extremist, which was popularized by centrist sociologists in the 1960s and 1970s. As Jerome Himmelstein states the case: "At best this characterization tells us nothing substantive about the people it labels; at worst it paints a false picture." (Himmelstein, p. 7). The act of labeling a person, group or action as extremist is sometimes claimed to be a technique to further a political goal—especially by governments seeking to defend the status quo, or political centrists. In any event, the term extremist—like the word violence—cannot be regarded as value-neutral.
Theories of extremism[edit]
Laird Wilcox identifies 21 alleged traits of a "political extremist", ranging from behaviour like "a tendency to character assassination", over hateful behaviour like "name calling and labelling", to general character traits like "a tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil", "a tendency to substitute intimidation for argument" or "groupthink".[2]
Al-Qaeda fighters in Yemen, 2014
Eric Hoffer and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. were two political writers during the mid-20th century who gave what purported to be accounts of "political extremism". Hoffer wrote books such as The True Believer and The Passionate State of Mind about the psychology and sociology of those who join "fanatical" mass movements. Schlesinger wrote books such as The Vital Center, championing a supposed "center" of politics within which "mainstream" political discourse takes place, and underscoring the alleged need for societies to draw definite lines regarding what falls outside of this acceptability.
Seymour Martin Lipset argued that besides the extremism of the left and right there is also an extremism of the center, and that it actually formed the base of fascism.[3]
Joining extremist groups has been seen to arise from beliefs about the acceptability of aggression towards the group's target. For example, in Pakistan, beliefs about the acceptability of aggression against Jews were shown to predict who would join an extremist anti-Semitic group.[4] Cultural differences in acceptability about aggression towards certain groups may explain extremism towards certain targets, and as these beliefs can be easily changed through intervention, this may offer a way in which extremism can be discouraged.[4]
"Extremism" is not a stand-alone characteristic. The attitude or behavior of an "extremist" may be represented as part of a spectrum which ranges from mild interest through "obsession" to "fanaticism" and "extremism". The alleged similarity between the "extreme left" and "extreme right", or perhaps between different religious "zealots", may mean only that all these are "unacceptable" from the standpoint of a supposed mainstream or majority.
Economist Ronald Wintrobe[5] argues that many extremist movements, even though having completely different ideologies share a common set of characteristics. As an example, he lists the following common characteristics between "Jewish fundamentalists" and "the extremists of Hamas":[6]
Both are against any compromise with the other side.
Both are entirely sure of their position.
Both advocate and sometimes use violence to achieve their ends.
Both are nationalistic.
Both are intolerant of dissent within their group.
Both demonize the other side
Psychological[edit]
Among the explanations for extremism is one that views it as a plague.[1] Arno Gruen said, "The lack of identity associated with extremists is the result of self-destructive self-hatred that leads to feelings of revenge toward life itself, and a compulsion to kill one's own humanness." Thus extremism is seen as not a tactic, nor an ideology, but as a pathological illness which feeds on the destruction of life.[1] Dr. Kathleen Taylor believes Muslim fundamentalism is a mental illness and that is "curable."[7]
Another view is that extremism is an emotional outlet for severe feelings stemming from "persistent experiences of oppression, insecurity, humiliation, resentment, loss, and rage" which are presumed to "lead individuals and groups to adopt conflict engagement strategies which "fit" or feel consistent with these experiences".[1]
Extremism is however seen by other researchers as a "rational strategy in a game over power".[1] See for instance the works of Eli Berman.
Uses of the term in "mainstream" politics[edit]
Barry Goldwater said, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" at the 1964 Republican Convention in a sentence attributed to his speechwriter Karl Hess.
Robert F. Kennedy said, "What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not that they are extreme but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents."
Since the 1990s, in United States politics the term Sister Souljah moment has been used to describe a politician's public repudiation of an allegedly extremist person or group, statement, or position which might otherwise be associated with his own party.
In Russia laws prohibiting "extremist" content are used to suppress the freedom of speech through very broad and flexible interpretation.[8] Publications classified as "extremist" and thus prosecuded included protests against the court rulings in Bolotnaya Square case ("calling for illegal action"), criticism of overspending of local governor ("insult of the authorities") and publishing a poem in support of Ukraine ("inciting hatred")[9][10]
Main article: Freedom of press in Russia
Other terms[edit]
The term "subversive" was often used interchangeably, in the United States at least, with "extremist" during the Cold War period, although the two words are not synonymous.
See also[edit]
Consequentialism
Domestic Extremism Lexicon
False consensus effect
Political extremism in Japan
Political extremism in Switzerland
Sikh extremism
Islamic extremism
Jewish extremism Israeli settler violence#Settler extremism
Zionist extremism
Cumulative extremism
Terrorism
Vigilantism
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Dr. Peter T. Coleman and Dr. Andrea Bartoli: Addressing Extremism, pp. 3–4
2.Jump up ^ "Laird Wilcox on Extremist Traits". Lairdwilcox.com. Retrieved 2013-09-08.
3.Jump up ^ G. M. Tamás: On Post-Fascism, Boston Review, summer 2000
4.^ Jump up to: a b Amjad, N., & Wood, A. M. (2009). Identifying and changing the normative beliefs about aggression which lead young Muslim adults to join extremist anti-Semitic groups in Pakistan. Aggressive Behavior, 35, 514-519
5.Jump up ^ "Economics at Western". Economics.uwo.ca. Retrieved 2013-09-08.
6.Jump up ^ Wintrobe (2006), p. 5
7.Jump up ^ Bruxelles, Simon de (2013-05-30). "Science ‘may one day cure Islamic radicals'". The Times (London) (London). Retrieved 2013-05-31.
8.Jump up ^ Paul Goble (2015-03-29). "FSB Increasingly Involved in Misuse of 'Anti-Extremism' Laws, SOVA Says". The Interpreter Magazine. Retrieved 2015-04-01.
9.Jump up ^ "Examples of forbidden content". Zapretno.info. 2014. Retrieved 2014-10-29.
10.Jump up ^ Neef, Christian; Schepp, Matthias (2014-04-22). "The Propaganda War: Opposition Sings Kremlin Tune on Ukraine". Spiegel Online. Retrieved 2015-06-10.
Cited publications[edit]
George, John and Laird Wilcox. Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America Prometheus Books, 1992. (ISBN 0-87975-680-2)
Himmelstein, Jerome L. All But Sleeping with the Enemy: Studying the Radical Right Up Close ASA, San Francisco: 1988
Hoffer, Eric. The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. Various editions, first published 1951.
Schlesinger, Arthur. The Vital Center: The Politics of Freedom. Various editions, first published 1949.
Wilcox, Laird. "What Is Political Extremism", retrieved from The Voluntaryist newsletter #27, 1987
Ronald Wintrobe (2006). Rational extremism: the political economy of radicalism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-85964-6.
Further reading[edit]
Nawaz, Maajid. Radical: My Journey out of Islamist Extremism (Lyons Press, 2013)
Bibi van Ginkel, Engaging Civil Society in Countering Violent Extremism (ICCT – The Hague, 2012)
External links[edit]
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Extremism
Look up extremism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
America's Homegrown Extremists – slideshow by Life magazine
Political Islam: Religious or Extremist? from the Dean Peter Krogh Foreign Affairs Digital Archives
The M and S Collection at the Library of Congress contains materials on Extremist Movements.
Categories: Political spectrum
Political theories
Political ideologies
Extremism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Euskara
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Кыргызча
മലയാളം
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
اردو
Edit links
This page was last modified on 10 June 2015, at 09:28.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremism
Extremism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Political fringe" redirects here. For other political fringe groups, see Political fringe movements.
"Extremists" redirects here. For the DC Comics supervillain team, see Extremists (comics).
"Extremist" redirects here. For the 1992 instrumental rock album, see The Extremist. For the comic book series, see The Extremist (comics).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2008)
Part of the Politics series
Party politics
Political spectrum
Far-left/Radical left ·
Left-wing
Centre-left
Centre/Radical centre
Centre-right
Right-wing ·
Far-right/Radical right
Party platform
Extremist ·
Radical
Reformist ·
Moderate
Syncretic
Conservative ·
Reactionary
Fundamentalist
Party system
Non-partisan ·
Single-party
Dominant-party ·
Two-party ·
Multi-party
Coalition
Hung parliament ·
Confidence and supply ·
Minority government ·
Rainbow coalition ·
Grand coalition ·
Full coalition
National Unity government
Majority government
Lists
Political parties by country
Political parties by UN geoscheme
Political ideologies
Politics portal
v ·
t ·
e
Extremism means, literally: driving (something) to the limit, to the extreme.
Nowadays, the term is mostly being used in a political or religious sense, for an ideology that is considered (by the speaker) to be far outside the (acceptable) mainstream attitudes of society.[citation needed] But extremism can, for example, also be meant in an economic sense.
The term "extremism" is usually meant pejorative: to express (strong) disapproval, but it may also be meant in a more academic, purely descriptive, non-condemning sense.
Extremists are usually contrasted with centrists or moderates. For example, in contemporary discussions in Western countries of Islam or of Islamic political movements, the distinction between extremist (= 'bad') and moderate (= 'good') Muslims is typically stressed.
Political agendas perceived as extremist often include those from the far left or far right, as well as radicalism, reactionism, fundamentalism, and fanaticism.
Contents [hide]
1 Problems with defining extremism
2 Radicalism or extremism?
3 Theories of extremism 3.1 Psychological
4 Uses of the term in "mainstream" politics
5 Other terms
6 See also
7 References 7.1 Cited publications
7.2 Further reading
8 External links
Problems with defining extremism[edit]
In different realms at different times were many different definitions of "extremism". Dr. Peter T. Coleman and Dr. Andrea Bartoli give short observation of definitions:[1]
“ Extremism is a complex phenomenon, although its complexity is often hard to see. Most simply, it can be defined as activities (beliefs, attitudes, feelings, actions, strategies) of a character far removed from the ordinary. In conflict settings it manifests as a severe form of conflict engagement. However, the labeling of activities, people, and groups as "extremist", and the defining of what is "ordinary" in any setting is always a subjective and political matter. Thus, we suggest that any discussion of extremism be mindful of the following: Typically, the same extremist act will be viewed by some as just and moral (such as pro-social "freedom fighting"), and by others as unjust and immoral (antisocial "terrorism") depending on the observer's values, politics, moral scope, and the nature of their relationship with the actor.
In addition, one's sense of the moral or immoral nature of a given act of extremism (such as Nelson Mandela's use of guerilla war tactics against the South African Government) may change as conditions (leadership, world opinion, crises, historical accounts, etc.) change. Thus, the current and historical context of extremist acts shapes our view of them.
Power differences also matter when defining extremism. When in conflict, the activities of members of low power groups tend to be viewed as more extreme than similar activities committed by members of groups advocating the status quo. In addition, extreme acts are more likely to be employed by marginalized people and groups who view more normative forms of conflict engagement as blocked for them or biased. However, dominant groups also commonly employ extreme activities (such as governmental sanctioning of violent paramilitary groups or the attack in Waco by the FBI in the U.S.).
Extremist acts often employ violent means, although extremist groups will differ in their preference for violent vs. non-violent tactics, in the level of violence they employ, and in the preferred targets of their violence (from infrastructure to military personnel to civilians to children). Again, low power groups are more likely to employ direct, episodic forms of violence (such as suicide bombings), whereas dominant groups tend to be associated with more structural or institutionalized forms (like the covert use of torture or the informal sanctioning of police brutality).
Although extremist individuals and groups (such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad) are often viewed as cohesive and consistently evil, it is important to recognize that they may be conflicted or ambivalent psychologically as individuals, or contain difference and conflict within their groups. For instance, individual members of Hamas may differ considerably in their willingness to negotiate their differences with the Palestinian Authority and, ultimately, with certain factions in Israel.
Ultimately, the core problem that extremism presents in situations of protracted conflict is less the severity of the activities (although violence, trauma, and escalation are obvious concerns) but more so the closed, fixed, and intolerant nature of extremist attitudes, and their subsequent imperviousness to change.
”
Radicalism or extremism?[edit]
The terms extremism or extremist are almost always exonymic—i.e., applied by others to a group rather than by a group labeling itself. Rather than labeling themselves extremist, those labeled as such might describe themselves as, for example, political radicals. There is no political party that calls itself "right-wing extremist" or "left-wing extremist", and there is no sect of any religion that calls itself "extremist" or which calls its doctrine "extremism".
The term extremist is used to describe groups and individuals who have become radicalized, in some way, even though the term radical originally meant to go to the root of a (social) problem. The term radical is one not normally regarded as pejorative (except perhaps in the United States of America) and, unlike extremist, is sometimes used by groups in their description of themselves.
The term extremist is often used with reference to those who use or advocate violence against the will of society at large, but it is also used by some to describe those who advocate or use violence to enforce the will of the social body, such as a government or majority constituency. Those described as extremist would in general not accept that what they practice or advocate constitutes violence and would instead speak in terms of acts of "resistance"or militant action or the use of force. The word violence cannot be regarded as value-neutral. Ideology and methodology often become inextricably linked under the single term extremism.
The notion that there is a philosophy which can be described as extremism is considered by some to be suspect. Within sociology, several academics who track (and are critical of) extreme right-wing groups have objected to the term extremist, which was popularized by centrist sociologists in the 1960s and 1970s. As Jerome Himmelstein states the case: "At best this characterization tells us nothing substantive about the people it labels; at worst it paints a false picture." (Himmelstein, p. 7). The act of labeling a person, group or action as extremist is sometimes claimed to be a technique to further a political goal—especially by governments seeking to defend the status quo, or political centrists. In any event, the term extremist—like the word violence—cannot be regarded as value-neutral.
Theories of extremism[edit]
Laird Wilcox identifies 21 alleged traits of a "political extremist", ranging from behaviour like "a tendency to character assassination", over hateful behaviour like "name calling and labelling", to general character traits like "a tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil", "a tendency to substitute intimidation for argument" or "groupthink".[2]
Al-Qaeda fighters in Yemen, 2014
Eric Hoffer and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. were two political writers during the mid-20th century who gave what purported to be accounts of "political extremism". Hoffer wrote books such as The True Believer and The Passionate State of Mind about the psychology and sociology of those who join "fanatical" mass movements. Schlesinger wrote books such as The Vital Center, championing a supposed "center" of politics within which "mainstream" political discourse takes place, and underscoring the alleged need for societies to draw definite lines regarding what falls outside of this acceptability.
Seymour Martin Lipset argued that besides the extremism of the left and right there is also an extremism of the center, and that it actually formed the base of fascism.[3]
Joining extremist groups has been seen to arise from beliefs about the acceptability of aggression towards the group's target. For example, in Pakistan, beliefs about the acceptability of aggression against Jews were shown to predict who would join an extremist anti-Semitic group.[4] Cultural differences in acceptability about aggression towards certain groups may explain extremism towards certain targets, and as these beliefs can be easily changed through intervention, this may offer a way in which extremism can be discouraged.[4]
"Extremism" is not a stand-alone characteristic. The attitude or behavior of an "extremist" may be represented as part of a spectrum which ranges from mild interest through "obsession" to "fanaticism" and "extremism". The alleged similarity between the "extreme left" and "extreme right", or perhaps between different religious "zealots", may mean only that all these are "unacceptable" from the standpoint of a supposed mainstream or majority.
Economist Ronald Wintrobe[5] argues that many extremist movements, even though having completely different ideologies share a common set of characteristics. As an example, he lists the following common characteristics between "Jewish fundamentalists" and "the extremists of Hamas":[6]
Both are against any compromise with the other side.
Both are entirely sure of their position.
Both advocate and sometimes use violence to achieve their ends.
Both are nationalistic.
Both are intolerant of dissent within their group.
Both demonize the other side
Psychological[edit]
Among the explanations for extremism is one that views it as a plague.[1] Arno Gruen said, "The lack of identity associated with extremists is the result of self-destructive self-hatred that leads to feelings of revenge toward life itself, and a compulsion to kill one's own humanness." Thus extremism is seen as not a tactic, nor an ideology, but as a pathological illness which feeds on the destruction of life.[1] Dr. Kathleen Taylor believes Muslim fundamentalism is a mental illness and that is "curable."[7]
Another view is that extremism is an emotional outlet for severe feelings stemming from "persistent experiences of oppression, insecurity, humiliation, resentment, loss, and rage" which are presumed to "lead individuals and groups to adopt conflict engagement strategies which "fit" or feel consistent with these experiences".[1]
Extremism is however seen by other researchers as a "rational strategy in a game over power".[1] See for instance the works of Eli Berman.
Uses of the term in "mainstream" politics[edit]
Barry Goldwater said, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" at the 1964 Republican Convention in a sentence attributed to his speechwriter Karl Hess.
Robert F. Kennedy said, "What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not that they are extreme but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents."
Since the 1990s, in United States politics the term Sister Souljah moment has been used to describe a politician's public repudiation of an allegedly extremist person or group, statement, or position which might otherwise be associated with his own party.
In Russia laws prohibiting "extremist" content are used to suppress the freedom of speech through very broad and flexible interpretation.[8] Publications classified as "extremist" and thus prosecuded included protests against the court rulings in Bolotnaya Square case ("calling for illegal action"), criticism of overspending of local governor ("insult of the authorities") and publishing a poem in support of Ukraine ("inciting hatred")[9][10]
Main article: Freedom of press in Russia
Other terms[edit]
The term "subversive" was often used interchangeably, in the United States at least, with "extremist" during the Cold War period, although the two words are not synonymous.
See also[edit]
Consequentialism
Domestic Extremism Lexicon
False consensus effect
Political extremism in Japan
Political extremism in Switzerland
Sikh extremism
Islamic extremism
Jewish extremism Israeli settler violence#Settler extremism
Zionist extremism
Cumulative extremism
Terrorism
Vigilantism
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Dr. Peter T. Coleman and Dr. Andrea Bartoli: Addressing Extremism, pp. 3–4
2.Jump up ^ "Laird Wilcox on Extremist Traits". Lairdwilcox.com. Retrieved 2013-09-08.
3.Jump up ^ G. M. Tamás: On Post-Fascism, Boston Review, summer 2000
4.^ Jump up to: a b Amjad, N., & Wood, A. M. (2009). Identifying and changing the normative beliefs about aggression which lead young Muslim adults to join extremist anti-Semitic groups in Pakistan. Aggressive Behavior, 35, 514-519
5.Jump up ^ "Economics at Western". Economics.uwo.ca. Retrieved 2013-09-08.
6.Jump up ^ Wintrobe (2006), p. 5
7.Jump up ^ Bruxelles, Simon de (2013-05-30). "Science ‘may one day cure Islamic radicals'". The Times (London) (London). Retrieved 2013-05-31.
8.Jump up ^ Paul Goble (2015-03-29). "FSB Increasingly Involved in Misuse of 'Anti-Extremism' Laws, SOVA Says". The Interpreter Magazine. Retrieved 2015-04-01.
9.Jump up ^ "Examples of forbidden content". Zapretno.info. 2014. Retrieved 2014-10-29.
10.Jump up ^ Neef, Christian; Schepp, Matthias (2014-04-22). "The Propaganda War: Opposition Sings Kremlin Tune on Ukraine". Spiegel Online. Retrieved 2015-06-10.
Cited publications[edit]
George, John and Laird Wilcox. Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America Prometheus Books, 1992. (ISBN 0-87975-680-2)
Himmelstein, Jerome L. All But Sleeping with the Enemy: Studying the Radical Right Up Close ASA, San Francisco: 1988
Hoffer, Eric. The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. Various editions, first published 1951.
Schlesinger, Arthur. The Vital Center: The Politics of Freedom. Various editions, first published 1949.
Wilcox, Laird. "What Is Political Extremism", retrieved from The Voluntaryist newsletter #27, 1987
Ronald Wintrobe (2006). Rational extremism: the political economy of radicalism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-85964-6.
Further reading[edit]
Nawaz, Maajid. Radical: My Journey out of Islamist Extremism (Lyons Press, 2013)
Bibi van Ginkel, Engaging Civil Society in Countering Violent Extremism (ICCT – The Hague, 2012)
External links[edit]
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Extremism
Look up extremism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
America's Homegrown Extremists – slideshow by Life magazine
Political Islam: Religious or Extremist? from the Dean Peter Krogh Foreign Affairs Digital Archives
The M and S Collection at the Library of Congress contains materials on Extremist Movements.
Categories: Political spectrum
Political theories
Political ideologies
Extremism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Euskara
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Кыргызча
മലയാളം
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
اردو
Edit links
This page was last modified on 10 June 2015, at 09:28.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment