soulmate

Post Reply New Topic

I don't believe in them, but I felt/feel it for someone nevertheless. Is that a sign of codependency? How does this work? How do I know when I am ready to fall in love with someone else? Will it feel just as strong, will I feel like a soulmate to them too? If I don't feel as strongly, how I would I be able to say that I've fallen in love with them? Do you think someone can feel like they have multiple soulmates? What about simply multiple loves? Is love just a choice after initial connection? Is full-blown romantic love and not allowing the other person to explore other romantic relationships really just society's way of giving into jealousy, which is -jealousy I mean- just a way of enforcing ownership of someone which we contradictorally say is bad as a society?

1. Start with the definition of "soulmate". What is it?
2. Keep in mind that this board is populated with autistic people. People with AS (and perhaps other autistics) have a documented specific tendency of exactly how they develop romantic feelings (I am sooo predictable!). So if you're not autistic (your sig said you aren't), then the feedback you get from autistics here may not be good to you.

Definitions are free to vary...I think, perhaps, that's partly the kind of the point of my post?

I think you are misappropriating your own experience to those of others with your second point. In fact, you are doing what NT's do ALL the time, which is identify with a group and then say the group is like you :-p

the naked truth is that that is, most often, what relation is
(or nuance, co-dependancy is close with fusional xx, which autistics might be more prone to due to making the other an obsession)
hence the "falling" in love




http://www.tarotcardmeanings.net/images ... -devil.jpg
furthermore symbolised by a ring...wtf
@viavia i went to hell with the devil, he'd claim that he was, i thought bs
he had put a lsd in my drink, i saw Hephaestus,
later, somewhere, i got a ring (i never liked rings)
the earth turned into fire and i trew the ring in a pitt deep in the earth
et voila the shrinking started
(well that took a year, i could write a book but that wouldnt make sense a lot)
i don't know why i lived at a place where weird emanations happened, it was interesting!
btw, watch out for happy endings!!

haven't checked any words, time's running out

I think that when we each respond to this thread we need to say what exactly we think a soul mate is otherwise we'll end up with misunderstandings. I don't believe in one other person being our other half, but I would use the word soulmate to refer to someone. When I use that term I mean that I have a deeper or more comfortable connection/bond with them than I do with other people. We just "get" each other. We are happy together and it just feels right.

I think that can happen with or without eros love being involved. I have met more than one soulmate in my life. At least two were people I was definitely romantically attracted to, but that waned over the years, mostly because we don't keep in close contact, he is with someone else now and we are just friends, but we will always just get each other. The other one I didn't get to spend enough time with, but there will always be the ability to re-connect whenever we see each other. It just works.

I have female friends who are soulmates too. Or "bosom friends" if you want to quote Anne Shirley.

Can you love more than one person? Definitely. But I don't know if most people can maintain a close relationship with more than one. I don't think it's about jealousy, I think it' more practical. Close relationships take time and energy. Some people don't even have enough time or energy to cope with one close intimate relationship let alone plural relationships.

How do you know if someone is a soulmate?

Well, there have been men that I've been interested in dating because they are genuinely good people; caring, polite, witty, responsible, just good to be around, but they haven't been soulmates. There was no deeper understanding. We never got into any more philosophical conversation. It was all surface, outward.

Ah, now I realise that soulmates to me are people I have a deeper, spiritual (not religious) connection with. People with depth. I think it depends on what is important to you.

You have to know your own soul before you can connect with another (again not using soul in a religious sense - I mean just who we are internally, the parts of our existence that we may not share with just anyone because those things are personal).

The myth of the "Soulmate" is based on a single core belief: That there is only one other person in all of the world who is a perfect match for you.

And, as we all know, belief proves nothing.

Other beliefs that have been attached to the core belief include, but aren't limited to:

- "Soulmates" the two halves of a single soul that was sundered at birth.

- "Soulmates" will find each other, no matter what.

- You will know your "soulmate" by the intense feeling of attraction when you meet him or her.

- Your relationship with your "soulmate" takes precedence over any other pre-existing relationships, including marriage.

- The two "soul mates" can become as one only through mutual death.

I believe one can come close to having a soulmate.

If you love spending 24 hours with a person, and you miss that person greatly when you are not around that person, and you really, really like that person and respect that person, then I think you've found something which is pretty darn close to most people's definition of a soulmate.

I hate walking around stores. If I like walking around stores with a particular woman, then I would say she's not far from being my soulmate.

This is actually somewhat of a matter of what I would call synchronicity.

For an extremely simplified description, people have their own bio-electro-magnetic-fields, similarly to how the Earth is said to have its own electro-magnetic-field. Certain conditions may result in resonating fields such that strong feelings can be invoked when two resonant-individuals are either near each other or even merely thinking about one another (even to the point of even feeling the resonant-partner's feelings).

Sometimes the resonance can become strong enough so as to seemingly manifest a phenomenon between a couple that is often called Telepathy; I think of it as something like "unlocking a 'special' ability" similarly to how video-game characters might somehow gain access to secret-abilities for fulfilling certain quest-requirements. I believe that everybody has the innate-instincts for sensing how to trigger the "flag" for said quest even if not consciously understood. I believe that such phenomenon can be intentionally cultivated between people who synchronously decide (whether consciously or sub-consciously) that they are meant to be together.

"Spooky interaction at a distance" phenomena was also demonstrated via Quantum-Entanglement experiments...

Your personal field Issa weak that it extends less than 1mm away from the surface of your skin, and it takes specialized equipment to measure it. Your mobile phone produces a stronger field that your entire body. There is no empirical evidence for any kind of "resonance" between these two fields, so there is no reason to believe that the fields of any two people will "resonate" in any way.

Besides, belief proves nothing.

I think you might be struggling with grasping the definition of the word "documented".


I like your definition.

Personally I thought it meant something else entirely, I thought it meant someone who shares your interests and thinks alike. (And I suspected that my definition might be wrong.) Meaning for example a perfect clone of myself would be my soul mate... And for me, I saw it as a problem, because I would never want to date myself. A person I desire is definitely not anything like me.

"Documented" fiction is one thing, while documented empirical evidence from reputable scientific sources is another. There is no documented empirical evidence to support the concept of a "soulmate". Everything else is fiction.

Pure. Effing. Fiction.

Only this, and nothing more.

No, I was not referring to soulmate. You clearly misunderstood what I was talking about.

There is a documented and published pattern in the way people with AS (and possibly other autism) fall in love. They like a person, but if that person shows them an unusual amout of attention (possibly in a completely unromatic way and context) the AS person "clicks" and latches onto that person.

I was making a very clear point that in this regard any feedback given by autistics to non-autistic person might not be valid. That's it.

I read what you posted, and it reminded me of certain other arguments put forth by the "Soulmate" believers, so I posted a pre-emptive rebuttal to those arguments. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

How do you know that other additional fields may not exist ? I mean, from that allegory, thoughts and emotions are non-existent either, yet I can feel and experience both phenomena. I still do not know of the existence of any scientific-equipment that can detect thoughts or emotions. Well, perhaps other than one, something known as thought-controlled prosthetics or thought-controlled computing...

P.S. : Exactly how would you go about designing an experiment that can measure with scientific-instruments an individual's or a couple's thoughts and/or emotions anyway ? What type of equipment could we use ?

Love, soul mates etc. are all manifestations of instinctive species survival including optimization mechanisms of evolution; they exist only as much as food can taste or an orgasm can feel good. That doesn't make them any less real but sure explains how normal people can go through relationships iteratively claiming love/soul mates etc. Normal people can even double think that is as much as they understand these things are falsehoods they act them out for instance claiming their one true love every time.

These things comprise Life. So go along with them after all they come with hormonal good feelings as much as any other kind of real experience. I just think that high functioning people might well be a little more aware of their fragility. In practice though they can also make stronger less fickle commitments. Such apparently conflicting polar perspectives are born out of the mechanisms of the brain being chemical such that all reactions tend towards balance. Our feelings are chemical reactions which when pushed one direction will create an increasing tendency for a reverse reaction and therefore a polar psychological response.

Well ...

1) Empiricism: If a posited thing can not be directly measured, then the posited thing can not be proven to exist.

2) Parsimmony: If the alleged effects of the posited thing can be more readily explained by already-known things, then the posited thing is not necessary to exist.

3) Replication: If the alleged effects of the posited thing can not be reproduced under carefully-controlled conditions that eliminate error, fraud, or outright trickery, then the posited thing can not be said to exist.

4) Reason: If the posited thing can not be presumed by mathematical extrapolation or mathematical interpolation of already-known things, then the thing can not be said to exist.

No matter what you believe to exist, if it does not satisfy even one of these conditions, then it can not be said to exist. Of course, violation even one of these conditions usually means that the rest are being violated as well.

People will still believe whatever they want to believe, however, even though their most fervent belief still proves nothing.