1. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    19 May '16 02:56
    "The Four Loves is a book by C. S. Lewis which explores the nature of love from a Christian and philosophical perspective through thought experiments. The book was based on a set of radio talks from 1958, criticised in the States at the time for their frankness about sex.

    Contents: 1. Need/gift love; 2. Pleasures; 3. The Four Loves 3.1 Storge: affection; 3.2 Phileo: friendship; 3.3 Eros: romance; 3.4 Agape: unconditional love.

    Need/gift love: Taking his start from St. John's words "God is Love", Lewis initially thought to contrast "Need-love" (such as the love of a child for its mother) and "Gift-love" (epitomized by God's love for humanity), to the disparagement of the former.[3] However he swiftly happened on the insight that the natures of even these basic categorizations of love are more complicated than they at first seemed: a child's need for parental comfort is a necessity, not a selfish indulgence, while conversely parental Gift-love in excessive form can be a perversion of its own.[4]

    Pleasures: Lewis continued his examination by exploring the nature of pleasure, distinguishing Need-pleasures (such as water for the thirsty) from Pleasures of Appreciation, such as the love of nature.[5] From the latter, he developed what he called “a third element in love...Appreciative love”,[6] to go along with Need-love and Gift-love.

    Throughout the rest of the book, Lewis would go on to counterpart that three-fold, qualitative distinction against the four broad types of loves indicated in his title.[7]

    The Four Loves: In his remaining four chapters, Lewis treats of love under four categories (the highest does not stand without the lowest), based in part on the four Greek words for love: affection, friendship, eros, and charity. Lewis states that just as Lucifer—a former archangel—perverted himself by pride and fell into depravity, so too can love—commonly held to be the arch-emotion—become corrupt by presuming itself to be what it is not. A fictional treatment of these loves is the main theme of Lewis's novel Till We Have Faces.

    Storge: affection: Affection is fondness through familiarity (a brotherly love), especially between family members or people who have otherwise found themselves together by chance. It is described as the most natural, emotive, and widely diffused of loves: natural in that it is present without coercion; emotive because it is the result of fondness due to familiarity; and most widely diffused because it pays the least attention to those characteristics deemed "valuable" or worthy of love and, as a result, is able to transcend most discriminating factors.

    Affection, for Lewis, included both Need-love and Gift-love; he considered it responsible for 9/10th of all solid and lasting human happiness.[8] Ironically, however, affection's strength is also what makes it vulnerable. Affection has the appearance of being "built-in" or "ready made", says Lewis, and as a result people come to expect it irrespective of their behavior and its natural consequences.[9] Both in its Need and its Gift form, affection then is liable to 'go bad', and to be corrupted by such forces as jealousy, ambivalence and smothering.[10]

    Phileo: friendship Phileo is the love between friends. Friendship is the strong bond existing between people who share common interest or activity.[11] Lewis immediately differentiates Friendship Love from the other Loves. He describes friendship as, "the least biological, organic, instinctive, gregarious and necessary...the least natural of loves"[12] - our species does not need friendship in order to reproduce - but to the classical and medieval worlds the more profound precisely because it is freely chosen.

    Lewis explains that true friendships, like the friendship between David and Jonathan in the Bible, are almost a lost art. He expresses a strong distaste for the way modern society ignores friendship. He notes that he cannot remember any poem that celebrated true friendship like that between David and Jonathan, Orestes and Pylades, Roland and Oliver, Amis and Amiles. Lewis goes on to say, "to the Ancients, Friendship seemed the happiest and most fully human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue. The modern world, in comparison, ignores it".

    Growing out of Companionship, friendship for Lewis was a deeply Appreciative love, though one which he felt few people in modern society could value at its worth, because so few actually experienced true friendship.[13]

    Nevertheless Lewis was not blind to the dangers of friendships, such as its potential for cliqueyness, anti-authoritarianism, and pride.[14]

    Eros: romance: Eros for Lewis was love in the sense of 'being in love' or 'loving' someone, as opposed to the raw sexuality of what he called Venus: the illustration Lewis uses was the distinction between 'wanting a woman' and wanting one particular woman - something that matched his (classical) view of man as a rational animal, a composite both of reasoning angel and instinctual alley-cat.[15] Eros turns the need-pleasure of Venus into the most appreciative of all pleasures;[16] but nevertheless Lewis warned against the modern tendency for Eros to become a god to people who fully submit themselves to it, a justification for selfishness, even a phallic religion.[17]

    After exploring sexual activity and its spiritual significance in both a pagan and a Christian sense, he notes how Eros (or being in love) is in itself an indifferent, neutral force: how "Eros in all his splendour...may urge to evil as well as good".[18] While accepting that Eros can be an extremely profound experience, he does not overlook the dark way it may lead even to the point of suicide pacts or murder, as well as to furious refusals to part, "mercilessly chaining together two mutual tormentors, each raw all over with the poison of hate-in-love".[19]

    Agape: unconditional love: Charity (agape) is the love that brings forth caring regardless of the circumstance. Lewis recognizes this as the greatest of loves, and sees it as a specifically Christian virtue. The chapter on the subject focuses on the need of subordinating the natural loves - as Lewis puts it, "The natural loves are not self-sufficient"[20] - to the love of God, who is full of charitable love, to prevent what he termed their 'demonic' self-aggrandizement.[21]" (C.S. Lewis/wiki) Thread 155320 (page 4)
  2. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    19 May '16 11:52
    The Joy of Sex is an illustrated sex manual by British author
    Alex Comfort, M.B., Ph.D., first published in 1972. An updated
    edition was released in September 2008.
    The Joy of Sex spent eleven weeks at the top of the New York Times
    bestseller list and more than 70 weeks in the top five (1972–1974)

    The original intention was to use the same approach as such cook books as
    The Joy of Cooking, hence section titles include "starters" and "main courses".
    The book features sexual practices such as oral sex and various sex positions
    as well as bringing "further out" practices such as sexual bondage and
    swinging to the attention of the general public.

    The original version was illustrated with a mixture of classical Indian and
    Japanese erotica and specially commissioned illustrations by Chris Foss
    (black-and-white line drawings) and Charles Raymond (colour paintings).
    These two artists based their work on photographs taken by Chris Foss,
    of Charles Raymond and his wife. The illustrations have become somewhat
    dated, mainly because of changes in hairstyles. Both the illustrations and
    text are titillating as well as illustrative, in contrast to the bland, clinical
    style of earlier books about sex. More recent editions feature new
    artwork, and added text emphasizing safer sex.

    Newer versions have reversed previously-supportive positions on topics such as
    swinging, due to extensive textual changes made at the height of the 1980s AIDS panic.

    A pocket book version entitled, The Joy of Sex, the Pocket Edition was also published.
    The book won the Bookseller/Diagram Prize for Oddest Title of the Year in 1997.

    The Joy of Sex did not address homosexual sex beyond a definitional level.
    Though there was a careful (for the day) treatment of bondage, other BDSM
    activities received definitional coverage at best. The book played a part in
    what is often called the sexual revolution.
    Publisher Mitchell Beazley released an updated edition of the book in
    September 2008. The new edition was rewritten and reinvented by
    relationship psychologist Susan Quilliam and approved by Nicholas
    Comfort, the original author's son.

    More material has been added to the book, and the remaining text has been
    rewritten from both a factual and psychological viewpoint to take into account
    social shifts since 1972. The new edition presents a more balanced female/male
    perspective and also contains 120 completely re-shot photographs and re-drawn illustrations.

    The quirky style—and the message of the book, that sex is fun—remain the same. Mitchell Beazley
    has marketed the New Joy with the subtitle "a thinking person's guide to sex".
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    19 May '16 12:20
    I have read The Four Loves (a long time ago) and found it insightful. The problem with C.S. Lewis however is that whenever he talked about religion he would throw reason out the window. I enjoyed the Narnia books as a child, but found some aspects of them perplexing. I only found out later that those were the very places where he was attempting to explain his religion (and failing miserably).
    I have seen many other quotes by C.S. Lewis on religious topics and they invariably can be seen through immediately. Its almost as if he was in fact doing it deliberately. Oddly enough theists often quote him without seeing the obvious flaws.
  4. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    28 May '16 05:56
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I have read The Four Loves (a long time ago) and found it insightful. The problem with C.S. Lewis however is that whenever he talked about religion he would throw reason out the window. I enjoyed the Narnia books as a child, but found some aspects of them perplexing. I only found out later that those were the very places where he was attempting to explai ...[text shortened]... ct doing it deliberately. Oddly enough theists often quote him without seeing the obvious flaws.
    You may be interested in reading his small paperback titled "Mere Christianity".
  5. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    28 May '16 05:561 edit
    "Mere Christianity"

    http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-toc.php#.V0kzq7Ao5ok
  6. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    28 May '16 06:50
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I have seen many other quotes by C.S. Lewis on religious topics and they invariably can be seen through immediately. Its almost as if he was in fact doing it deliberately. Oddly enough theists often quote him without seeing the obvious flaws.
    I am also baffled by Christians quoting weak statements or attempted 'wise words' by C.S. Lewis. Even when I was a Christian, I found a lot of what he had to say to be at the trite end of the spectrum.
  7. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    28 May '16 08:16
    Originally posted by FMF
    I am also baffled by Christians quoting weak statements or attempted 'wise words' by C.S. Lewis. Even when I was a Christian, I found a lot of what he had to say to be at the trite end of the spectrum.
    When did you stop being "a Christian"?
  8. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    28 May '16 08:35
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    When did you stop being "a Christian"?
    When I realized, in my own mind, that the Bible was unconvincing evidence in support the claims that Christians make about Jesus and about the supposed revelation of God. It was about a decade ago. It has been a positive change.
  9. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    29 May '16 09:34
    Originally posted by FMF
    When I realized, in my own mind, that the Bible was unconvincing evidence in support the claims that Christians make about Jesus and about the supposed revelation of God. It was about a decade ago. It has been a positive change.
    What if you were wrong?
  10. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    29 May '16 09:44
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    What if you were wrong?
    Your question is basically beside the point seeing as I can't just somehow pretend to believe the stuff that Christians such as you believe about yourselves.
  11. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35519
    29 May '16 11:121 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    When I realized, in my own mind, that the Bible was unconvincing evidence in support the claims that Christians make about Jesus and about the supposed revelation of God. It was about a decade ago. It has been a positive change.
    Again with the "realization".

    The word you're looking for is "decided".
  12. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    29 May '16 12:151 edit
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    Again with the "realization".

    The word you're looking for is "decided".
    Well it was a realization and not a decision. The word "decided" does not properly communicate what happened, while the word "realized" does.
  13. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35519
    29 May '16 13:59
    Originally posted by FMF
    Well it was a realization and not a decision. The word "decided" does not properly communicate what happened, while the word "realized" does.
    You've got that entirely backward. English not your first language?
  14. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    29 May '16 14:46
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    You've got that entirely backward. English not your first language?
    It may be your first language but you don't know how to use it. You are also dishonest about it. I explained why it is the best word in certain circumstances in the other thread and you ignored my explanation and went right on to complain about it again.
  15. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    29 May '16 18:04
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    You've got that entirely backward. English not your first language?
    The nuances of our language enable me to testify about my experience accurately. Your efforts to restrict language through the proscription of certain words ~ for your own personal ideological reasons ~ will come to nothing.
Back to Top