@#$Prearrange@#$ Reward of love

Things that happened and happening in my life by put the love at first priority.

life formation shifting. new level of feeling. love of life

experiencing love makes everything possible.

^^Video^^ 9/20/2008 Day Vlog

^^Video^^ 9/11/2008

^^Video^^ 8/31/2008

^^Video^^ kicking in the room

I sometimes need to relief my tension and energy. Physical exercise often helps.

^^Video^^ Grizzly Man,Timothy Treadmill

It's just amazing and fascinating every time when I see same type of people with me. This is about my another peer gifted man, Timothy Treadmill. First time when I see that movie on TV, my first impression about him was 'He is like a gay, isn't he?' 'Oh, another animal activist freak.' But more I watch, I started to feel empathy. It maybe because I sensed his intensity and drive.

One thing I actually envy about him is his girlfriend, his relationship with her. She fought with the bear for dieing Timothy until he was killed in spite of Timothy yelled at her run away. And after that she killed by the bear. She didn't run away leave behind her lover. I know I can do that for my woman. I'm sure and I've been always ready. But in my reality, there are not many women who able to do that. Woman who has developed love oriented personality. Put my lover's first than my life. Timothy and Amy had that personality. So their relationship had reached mature love that contain care and responsibility. I was very sad that he couldn't finish his mission. But at least when he died he was with his lover.

Relative Post: Alexander Supertramp (Chris), Intensity,

^^Video^^ Aug/27/2008

^^Video^^ Friend: T.J.

T.J.'s life style is very different than mine but interseting. Laid back and joyous Southern California life style. He is one of my people who has good heart and be real and truthful.

^^Video^^ San Francisco special 1

Recently, I dedicated most of my time posting and video making and I am glad about it. But I need to relax my brain and doing something easy and fun for an efficiency. So I made this.

^^Video^^ Friend:Gohkan Kaya, Long Beach

For the memory of my friend Kaya and gloomy life in Long Beach.

Personality type/orientation by Erich Fromm's Theory

Click here to see the page that explain his personality orientation theory

Click here to test your personality orientation

^^Photo^^ September/17/2008 Day Blog

I've got really bad soar throat. It makes me hard to sleep, talk, drink and eat. This is second time I get soar throat in San Francisco. Because my body is very sensitive about weather and extremely fickle weather in SF, I can get easily sick. Weather of San Francisco is worst of worst in California.
Anyway, last 7 day were very progressive about my writing because of Katie's asking I got motivation. I promised to myself to show my blog to her today. That made me make a big one step forward. Now I can rest and take care of myself until get over this sickness.

About my blog

I'm using this blog to write my book and make videos for sake of express myself and for the gether the data that I will need in future. I recently systemize my book project and this website is being good formation of it.

My book will be structured in big three categories: my Concept of love, about me and my life, and reference/quote. So these three parts will be articulate with each other and that's the procedure of writing a book "puzzling my thought, experience, expression"

Recent plan (September/15/2008)

Concepts and ideas about love:

-intention: intention of studying love to know the truth, to solve my problem, to be fulfilled, to help others
-definitions: true sense of all the words relate with love.
-hypothesis
-curiosity: from personal/social experience or thought
-conclusion: that match with what I've learn from the books and my realization after experienced

My life:

-real stroy of my personal experience(my dating/romance history)
-my significant moments(evolutionary moment) of life
-my childhood
-what I've learn and know about love from experience. experience that is practice/act of love.
-learning about myself through love.
-life that changed and constantly changing by love.
-fascination of understanding myself. self love.
-my dreams

References/Quote

-connect with my curiosity
-relate with my hyphothesis
-match with my conclusion
-match with my experience
-my trait, characteristic, temperament, behaviour. self knowledge

Knowledge

The Art of Loving P.27, Erich Fromm

To respect a person is not possible without knowing him; care and responsibility would be blind if they were not guided by knowledge. Knowledge would be empty if it were not motivated by concern. There are many layers of knowledge; the knowledge which is an aspect of love is one which does not stay at the periphery, but penetrates to the core. It is possible only when I can transcend the concern for myself and see the other person in his own terms. I may know, for instance, that a person is angry, even if he does not show it overtly; but I may know him more deeply than that; then I know that he is anxious, and worried that he feels lonely, that he feels guilty. Then I know that his anger is only the manifestation of something deeper, and I see him as anxious and embarrassed, that is, as the suffering person, rather than as the angry one.
Knowledge has one more, and a more fundamental, relation to the problem of love. The basic need to fuse with another person so as to transcend the prison of one's separateness is closely related to another specifically human desire, that to know the "secret of man." While life in its merely biological aspects is a miracle and a secret, man in his human aspects is an unfathomable secret to himself-and to his fellow man. We know ourselves, and yet even with all the efforts we may make, we do not know ourselves. We know our fellow man, and yet we do not know him, because we are not a thing, and our fellow man is not a thing. The further we reach into the depth of our being, or someone else's being, the more the goal of knowledge eludes us. Yet we cannot help desiring to penetrate into the secret of man's soul, into the innermost nucleus which is "he." There is one way, a desperate one, to know the secret: it is that of complete power over another person; the power which makes him do what we want, feel what we want, think what we want; which transforms him into a thing, our thing, our possession. The ultimate degree of this attempt to know lies in the extremes of sadism, the desire and ability to make a human being suffer; to torture him, to force him, to force him to betray his secret in his suffering. In this craving for penetrating man's secret, his and hence our own, lies an essential motivation for the depth and intensity of cruelty and destructiveness. In a very succinct way this idea has been expressed by Isaac Babel. He quotes a fellow officer in the Russian civil war, who has just stamped his former master to death, as saying: "With shooting-I'll put it this way-with shooting you only get rid of a chap....With shooting you'll never get at the soul, to where it is in a fellow and how it shows itself. But I don't spare myself, and I've more than once trampled an enemy for over an hour. You see, I want to get to know what life really is, what life's like down our way."
In children we often see this path to knowledge quite overtly. The child takes something apart, breaks it up in order to know it; or it takes an animal apart; cruelly tears off the wings of a butterfly in order to know it. to force its secret. The cruelty itself is motivated by something deeper: the wish to know the secret of things and of life.
The other path to knowing "the secret" is love. Love is active penetration of the other person, in which my desire to know it stilled by union. In the act of fusion I know you, I know myself, I know everybody-and I "know" nothing. I know in the only way knowledge of that which is alive is possible for man-by experience of union-not by any knowledge our thought can give. Sadism is motivated by the wish to know the secret, yet I remain as ignorant as I was before. I have torn the other being apart limb from limb, yet all I have done is to destroy him. Love is the only way of knowledge, which in the act of union answers my quest. In the act of loving, of giving myself, in the act of penetrating the other person, I find myself, I discover myself, I discover us both, I discover man.
The longing to know ourselves and to know our fellow man has been expressed in the Delphic motto "Know thyself." It is the mainspring of all psychology. But inasmuch as the desire is to know all of man, his innermost secret, the desire can never be fulfilled in knowledge of the ordinary kind, in knowledge only by thought. Even if we knew a thousand times more of ourselves, we would never reach bottom. We would still remain an enigma to ourselves, as our fellow man would remain an enigma to us. The only way of full knowledge lies in the act of love: this act transcends thought, it transcends words. It is the daring plunge into the experience of union. However, knowledge in thought, that is psychological knowledge, is a necessary condition for full knowledge in the act of love. I have to know the other person and myself objectively, in order to be able to see his reality, or rather, to overcome the illusions, the irrationally distorted picture I have of him. Only if I know a human being objectively, can I know him in his ultimate essence, in the act of love. (The above statement has an important implication for the role of psychology in contemporary Western culture. While the great popularity of psychology certainly indicates an interest in the knowledge of man, it also betrays the fundamental lack of love in human relations today. Psychological knowledge thus becomes a substitute for full knowledge in the act of love, instead of being a step toward it.)
The problem of knowing man is parallel to the religious problem of knowing God. In conventional Western theology the attempt is made to know God by thought, to make statements about God. It is assumed that I can know God in my thought. In mysticism, which is the consequent outcome of monotheism (as I shall try to show later on), the attempt is given up to know God by thought, and it is replaced by the experience of union with God in which there is no more room-and no need-for knowledge about God.
The experience of union, with man, or religiously speaking, with God, is by no means irrational. On the contrary, it is as Albert Schweitzer has pointed out, the consequence of rationalism, its most daring and radical consequence. It is based on our knowledge of the fundamental, and not accidental, limitations of our knowledge. It is the knowledge that we shall never "grasp" the secret of man and of the universe, but that we can know, nevertheless, in the act of love. Psychology as a science has its limitations, and, as the logical consequence of theology is mysticism, so the ultimate consequence of psychology is love.
Care, responsibility, respect and knowledge are mutually interdependent. They are a syndrome of attitudes which are to be found in the mature person; that is, in the person who develops his own powers productively, who only wants to have that which he has worked for, who has given up narcissistic dreams of omniscience and omnipotence, who has acquired humility based on the inner strength which only genuine productive activity can give.

Respect

The Art of Loving, P.26 Erich Fromm

Responsibility could easily deteriorate into domination and possessiveness, were it not for a third component of love, respect. Respect is not fear and awe; it denotes, in accordance with the root of the word (respicere= to look at ), the ability to see a person as he is, to be aware of his unique individuality. Respect means the concern that the other person should grow and unfold as he is. Respect, thus, implies the absence of exploitation. I want the loved person to grow and unfold for his own sake, and in his own ways, and not for the purpose of serving me. If I love the other person, I feel one with him or her, but with him as he is, not as I need him to be as an object for my use. It is clear that respect is possible only if I have achieved independence; if I can stand and walk without needing crutches, without having to dominate and exploit anyone else. Respect exists only on the basis of freedom: "L'Amour est L'Enfant de la liberte" as an old French song says; love is the child of freedom, never that of domination.

Responsibility

The Art of Loving p.26, Erich Fromm

Care and concern imply another aspect of love; that of responsibility. Today responsibility is often meant to denote duty, something imposed upon one from the outside. But responsibility, in its true sense, is an entirely voluntary act; it is my response to the needs, expressed or unexpressed, of another human being. To be "responsible" means to be able and ready to "respond." Jonah did not feel responsible to the inhabitants of Nineveh. He, like Cain, could ask: "Am I my brother's keeper?" the loving person responds. The life of his brother is not his brother's business alone, but his own. He feels responsible for his fellow men, as he feels responsible for himself. This responsibility, in the case of the mother and her infant, refers mainly to the care for physical needs. In the love between adults it refers mainly to the psychic needs of the other person.

Care

The Art of Loving P.24 , Erich Fromm

Beyond the element of giving, the active character of love becomes evident in the fact that it always implies certain basic elements, common to all forms of love. These are care, responsibility, respect and knowledge.
That love implies care is most evident in a mother's love for her child. No assurance of her love would strike us as sincere if we saw her lacking in care for the infant, if she neglected to feed it, to bathe it, to give it physical comfort; an we are impressed by her love if we see her caring for the child. It is not different even with the love for animals or flowers. If a woman told us that she loved flowers, and we saw that she forgot to water them, we would not believe in her"love" for flowers. Love is the active concern for the life and the growth of that which we love. Where this active concern is lacking, there is no love. This element of love has been beautifully described in the book of Jonah. God has told Jonah to go to Nineveh to warn its inhabitants that they will be punished unless they mend their evil ways. Jonah runs away from his mission because he is afraid that the people of Nineveh will repent and that God will forgive them. He is a man with a strong sense of order and law, but without love. However, in his attempt to escape, he finds himself in the belly of a whale, symbolizing the state of isolation and imprisonment which his lack of love and solidarity has brought upon him. God saves him, and Jonah goes to Nineveh. He preaches to the inhabitants as God had told him, and the very thing he was afraid of happens. The men of Nineveh repent their sins, mend their ways, and God forgives them and decides not to destroy the city. Jonah is intensely angry and disappointed; he wanted "justice" to be done, not mercy. At last he finds some comfort in the shade of a tree which God had made to grow for him to protect him from the sun. But when God makes the tree wilt, Jonah is depressed and angrily complains to God. God answers: "Thou hast had pity on the gourd for the which thou hast not labored neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night. And should I not spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand people that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?" God's answer to Jonah is to be understood symbolically. God explains to Jonah that the essence of love is to "labor" for something and "to make something grow," that love and labor are inseparable. One loves that for which one labors, and one labors for that which one loves.

@#$Prearrange@#$ Independence as an ability to love

about meaning of independence and how it relate with ability to love and why it's important to love. productivity, self-knowledge. difference with self-sufficiency.

What is essential in the existence of man is the fact that he has emerged from the animal kingdom, from instinctive adaptation, that he has transcended nature-although he never leaves it; he is a part of it-and yet once torn away from nature, he cannot return to it; once thrown out of paradise- a state of original oneness with nature-cherubim with flaming swords block his way, if he should try to return. Man can only go forward by developing his reason, by finding a new harmony, a human one, instead of the prehuman harmony which is irretrievably lost. (The Art of Loving P.7)

*In Progress* Energy and Time of Love

힘의 세기, 파워의 정도로 모든것을 보는것은 우주를 이해함에 있어서 극히 작은 단편만 보는 것이다.사랑에 있어서도 마찬가지 내가 이해할 수 있는것이 단지 에너지의 크기,정도라면 그것역시 사랑의 function 을 이해하는데 큰 한계가 있을것이다. 단적인 예로 인간이 얼마나 작은존재인지에 놀라면서도 작은 생명체가 우주선을 다른 행성에 보낼 수 있다는것에 놀란다면 그것은 크기,규모를 중심적으로 보는 태도기 때문이다. 어제 iron man 에서 보았듯 무기의 파워는 엄청나다 그 에너지는 실로 강한것이다. 하지만 시간의 개념을 포함해서 보았을 땐. 상대적으로 짧은 순간에 일어난 일.현상이다. 사랑에 있어서도 내가 예전에 꺠달은 바, 예수나 테레사 수녀, 링컨, 슈바이쳐, 에리히 프롬 같은 사람이 해낸 것을 단지 그 크기로만 본다면 사랑의 에너지가 핵폭탄과 같은 무기의 에너지에 비하면 강하거나 크다고 할 수 없다. 하지만 그 사랑이 미치는 영향을 시간적 개념을 포함해서 보면 엄청난 시간동안 그 에너지가 계속 영향을 미치고 있는것을 볼 수 있다.
attraction and act of love: Whatever the reason, important thing is what I do. No matter what I feel how that feeling toward the person I love is strong, only thing that make "love" function is the act not feeling and thought. What do I do to the one whom I love is based on my expression, every single act is human expression, using the energy that within me to outer world, to other human being.
Even though it's just because she is beautiful what she feel is based on what I do. Ofcourse most likely there are the factor of my charm, things that I attracted her as well. Next difficult problem will encounter is deceptivity, our lack of objectivity and lack of consciousness. No matter what I think about my act of love, be loved one can have completely different idea, concept about love and any forms of relationships. 그 다음의 난제는 심지어 나의 행이 아무리 성숙한 태도라하더라도 사랑받는 사람이 그것을 이해/소화하지 못한다면 사랑의 교류는 역시 이루어지기 힘들다. 물론 성숙한 태도가 미성숙한 태도보다는 사랑의 교류가 더 잘 이루어지게 하지만 인간은 우리 자신을 완전히 이해하기 조차 어려운 복잡한 존재이면서 most of our conscious level is not reach to understand ourselve yet. 어쨋거나 내가 뭘 말하려고 했더라? Objectivity! No matter what I do, what I want, what I need, there is other human being's desire, need, and fear. It can be similar or very different than mine. If two person's desire, need, and fear are compatible, match then energy flow, attraction, magnetism can reinforce, stimulate the act. Think about oppsite case. What if two person's desire, need and fear are conflicted, not matched or compatible? Of course it's harder than former case. But does it mean I have to give up my act of love? 내가 경험한 바로 짝사랑을 하는 경우 내가 사랑하는 사람이 나를 사랑하지 않는경우, 고통과 suffering start. 물론 그 경우에 그것은 나의 고통과 suffering 이기 때문에 내 스스로가 책임져야하고 극복해내야 하는것이다. 그 경우 어떻게 대처하느냐는 나의 인격 수준에 달려있는 것이다. 전자의 경우로 시작 된 커플이 후자의 경우로 된 경우 때문에 나는 질문을 하는것이다. 그리고 내가 지금 개인적으로 격고 있는 문제이기 때문이다. There is no clear cut even though I thought "Ok she doesn't want erotic love, so I'm gonna do brotherly love now." But what really happen within me is conflict between my will by thought and emotion and feeling. I still feel like her, as a erotic love even though there is difference between feeling that I felt before, maybe that is state of feeling changed. So I thought what I need to do is just shift my love from erotic love to brotherly love. And actually mind is catching up that will/idea slowly. So those feelings are middle of somewhere and it's complicate as always. I can develop this concept/idea because I am experiencing now. And to solve my dilemma/problem/suffer/conflict, I have to think beyond the problem itself. Because only then I can act differently with developed idea. But so far last 5months what happen was suffer by dilemma, then think, then enlightened, find out what I need to do, then another dilemma appeared. There were several repetition of this procedure. ofcourse because of that I can write and what I want is also has changed. but one thing never change is "I want to experience love that I can think of." It's almost feel like I love her for sake of love itself. but it doesn't make sense because love cannot exist without object of love. because love is act, and act is again, energy between human beings. Just as energy between matters.Why I ask this? I am not just throwing the question. It's because this is very common issue in our world this time. How many couple experience this? Ok example, when couple start their love their desire and need and fear are matched but after time goes on, one person feel different and he/she thinks he/she doesn't love anymore. Their idea and feeling changed! Not compatible anymore! What are you going to do then? One person want to stop/kill his/her love but partner still fall in love and still wants to go on.
I don't know what actually she is how she is before I have knowledge about her. There is only my assumtion and expectation based on my judgement. So if I love her based on my distorted image of her, disappointment and shock, feeling betrayed that will be occur in the future are natural consequences. Needless to say, it's not good for myself for my woman neither. That's why objectivity is very important matter of the art of loving.I realized the suffering is happen when there is expectation. Especially when that expextation is not meet, when I'm not satisfied, dissatisfaction generate pain.

Giving

The Art of Loving, P.21, Erich Fromm


Love is an activity, not a passive affect; it is a "standing in," not a "falling for." In the most general way, the active character of love can be described by stating that love is primarily giving, not receiving.
What is giving? Simple as the answer to this question seems to be, it is acutally full of ambiguities and complexities. The most widespread misunderstanding is that which assumes that giving is "giving up" something, being deprived of, sacrificing. The person whose character has not developed of, sacrificing. The person whose character has not developed beyond the stage of the receptive, exploitative, or hoarding orientation, expreriences the act of giving in this way. The marketing character is willing to give, but only in exchange for receiving; giving without receiving for him is being cheated. People whose main orientation is a non-productive one feel giving as an impoverishment. Most individuals of this type therefore refuse to give. Some make a virtue out of giving in the sense of a sacrifice. For them, the norm that it is better to give than to receive means that it is better to suffer depivation than to experience joy.
For the productive character, giving has an entirely different meaning. Giving is the highest expression of potency. In the very act of giving, I experience my strength, my wealth, my power. This experience of heightened vitality and potency fills me with joy. I experience myself as overflowing, spending, alive, hence as joyous. Giving is more joyous than receiving, not because it is a deprivation, but because in the act of giving lies the expression of my aliveness.
It is not difficult to recognize the validity of this principle by applying it to various specific phenomena. The most elementary example lies in the sphere of sex. The culmination of the male sexual function lies in the act of giving; the man gives himself, his sexual organ, to the woman. At the moment of orgasm he gives his semem to her. He cannot help giving it if he is potent. If he cannot give, he is impotent. For the woman the process is not different, although somewhat more complex. She gives herself too; she opens the gates to her feminine center; in the act of receiving, she gives. If she is incapable of this act of giving, if she can only receive, she is frigid. With her the act of giving occurs again, not in her function as a lover, but in that as a mother. She gives of herself to the growing child within her, she gives her milk to the infant, she gives her bodily warmth. Not to give would be painful.
In the sphere of material things giving means being rich. Not he who has much is rich, but he who gives much. The hoarder who is anxiously worried about losing something is, psychologically speaking, the poor, impoverished man, regardless of how much he has. Whoever is capable of giving of himself is rich. He experiences himself as one who can confer of himself to others. Only one who is deprived of all that goes beyond the barest neccessities for subsistence would be incapable of enjouying the act of giving material things. But daily experience shows that what a person considers the minimal neccessities depends as much on his character as it depends on his acutal possessions. It is well known that the poor are more willing to give than the rich. Nevertheless, poverty beyond a certain point may make it impossible to give, and is so degrading, not only because of the suffering it causes directly, but butbecause of the fact that it deprives the poor of the joy of giving.
The most important sphere of giving, however, is not that of material things, but lies in the specifically human realm. What does one person give to another? He gives of himself, of the most precious he has, he gives of his life. This does not neccessarily mean that he sacrifices his life for the other-but that he gives him of that which is alive in him he gives him of his joy, of his interest, of his understanding, of his knowledge, of his humor, of his sadness-of all expressions and manifestations of that which is alive in him. In thus giving of his life, he enriches the other person, he enhances the other's sense of aliveness by enhancing his own sense of aliveness. He does not give in order to receive; giving is in itself exquisite joy. But in giving he cannot help brining something to life in the other person, and this which is brought to life reflects back to him; in truly giving, he cannot help receiving that which is given back to him. Giving implies to make the other person a giver also and they both share in the joy of what they have brought to life. In the act of giving something is born, and both persons involved are grateful for the life that is born for both of them. Specifically with regard to love this means: love is a power which produces love; impotence is the inability to produce love. This thought has been beautifully expressed by Marx: "Assume," he says, "man as man, and his relation to the world as a human one, and you can exchange love only for love, confidence for confidence, etc. If you wish to enjoy art, you must he an artistically trained person; if you wish to have influence on other people, you must be a person who has a really stimulating and furthering influence on other people. Every one of your relationships to man and to nature must be a definite expression of your real, individual life corresponding to the object of your will. If you love without calling forth love, that is, if your love as such does not produce love, if by means of an expression of life as a loving person you do not make of yourself a loved person, then your love is impotent, a misfortune." But not only in love does giving mean receiving. The teacher is taught by his students, the actor is stimulated by his audience, the psychoanalyst is cured by his patient-provided they do not treat each other as objects, but are related to each other genuinely and productively.
It is hardly neccessary to stress the fact that the ability to love as an act of giving depends on the character development of the person. It presupposes the attainment of a predominantly productive orientation; in this orientation the person has overcome dependency, narcissistic omnipotence, the wish to exploit others, or to hoard, and has acquired faith in his own human powers, courage to rely on his powers in the attainment of his goals. To the degree that these qualities are lacking, he is afraid of giving himself-hence of loving.

@Important@ for my people whom I gave permission

The reason I gave you permission to write/edit on my blog is to keep in touch with you and communicate with you because you are VIP for me. You are either same type of trait/temperament with me or person who is able to make synergy with me, I believe. I think connect by blog is good way to help and support each other. Through picture, text or video any formation will be wonderful. All your comment and post are welcome. Please freely post anything on my blog with a lable "Communication with awesome people". Nevertheless, I want to keep other name labled posts leave only for me. I couldn't set up like that, though.

Sep/15/2008 people list : Parth, Verena, Francisco, Sarah

@#$Prearrange@#$ My concept about Sex

I think it is obvious that Erich Fromm didn't emphasize sex itself in realm of love as much as contemporary Psychologist authors who write book about love or relationship. Inspite of he wrote a book about sexuality he didn't overestimate sex itself in realm of love. I think I can understand why. I think he actually had deeper and wider knowledge about sex and sexuality than other Psychologists and psychoanalists. Therefore he could write about sex as itself and I sense he had same idea that I have. The humanistic point that sex is for making love, if it is necessary to make a purpose of that. Now, my knowledge of sex is obviously lacking and I want to know much more but my intuition telling me that is what it is. If I see the world just with only perception of my eye ball, I would just see every thing about it without judgement and filter. But my tendency and characteristic-humanistic mind and love centered-make me think this way 'I see more bigger point of view if I can think that beyond the barrier of language' Inspite of all the difference of each of human behaviour, we call it just as one word "sex" I mean include all the nasty stuffs; fucking, humping, rape, conquer, using, taking, exploitating, enjoy, work, job-porn and prostitution we just call it sex. Then there is no difference with making love, physical expression of emotion, physical harmonizing, spiritual harmonize, phsyical movement of soul, sharing the body, moment, experience, joyous with the person I love. 'I don't need to experience all kind of sex that exist in this world.'


굳이 성교 존재의 목적을 만든다면, 그것은 사랑을 위한 것이다.