Queerplatonic | Aromantics Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia
What does queer platonic mean to you? Mari: For me, queer platonic or quasiplatonic describes relationships and attraction that is, of course. quasi-independent variables (i.e., biological sex, sexual orientation, gender-role orientation .. relationship be defined as platonic, thereby removing any sexual. A queerplatonic relationship (or "QPR") is one which is more intense and intimate however, there are alternatives to queerplatonic such as is "quasiplatonic" or.
The offspring of true virtue would essentially lead to a mortal achieving immortality. Later inMarsilio Ficino put forward a theory of neo-platonic love in which he defines love as a personal ability of an individual which guides their soul towards cosmic processes and lofty spiritual goals and heavenly ideas De Amore, Les Belles Lettres, The first use of the modern sense of platonic love is taken as an invention of Ficino in one of his letters. Though Plato's discussions of love originally centered on relationships which were sexual between members of the same sex, scholar Todd Reeser studies how the meaning of platonic love in Plato's original sense underwent a transformation during the Renaissanceleading to the contemporary sense of nonsexual heterosexual love.
It is derived from the concept in Plato's Symposium of the love of the idea of good which lies at the root of all virtue and truth. For a brief period, Platonic love was a fashionable subject at the English royal court, especially in the circle around Queen Henrietta Mariathe wife of King Charles I. Platonic love was the theme of some of the courtly masques performed in the Caroline era —though the fashion soon waned under pressures of social and political change.
Seven types of love[ edit ] Throughout these eras platonic love slowly was categorized into different subsections, which were: Eros is a sexual or passionate love, or a modern perspective of romantic love. Philia is the type of love that is directed towards friendship or goodwill, often is met with mutual benefits that can also can be formed by companionship, dependability, and trust.
Storge is the type of love that is found between parents and children, and this is often a unilateral love. Agape is the universal love, that can consist of the love for strangers, nature, or god. Ludus is a playful and uncommitted love, this is focused for fun and sometimes as a conquest with no strings attached.
creative writing - How do I convey that a relationship is platonic? - Writing Stack Exchange
Pragma is the type of love that is founded on duty and reason, and one's longer term interests. Philautia is self-love and this can be healthy or unhealthy; which can be unhealthy if you are hubris if placed ahead of gods, and it can be healthy if its used to build self esteem and confidence.
These different forms of love can be mistaken as any of the listed different loves. A nice illustration of the answer is given by egscomics. If I have to make a bibliography for every word I use, or link every reference I make, my answers could take days to write out properly. Let alone catering to every non-native English speaker that I might encounter. It's a tricky situation, and one that we could go on about for days.
However, I do see your point. I'll explain in my answer.
Never Heard of Queerplatonic Relationships? Here's What You Need to Know - HelloFlo
If not, use regular English. That typically means that they are interested in: Given it's unlikely I'll accurately guess which of the subjects are more gravitated towards without knowing every question written on the siteI assumed they would at least be equally popular. Of those subjects, how many do not engage in fandoms? Educated guess, I simply guessed wrong. Maybe I did too, but I knew it was a cliche and didn't want it.
Generally speaking, a systematic philosopher is one who constructs various philosophical distinctions that, in turn, can be applied to a number of different contexts. That is, one varies from the mean by the principle of the more and the less. In this article, the biological works are: Some of these titles may have sections that have survived in part within the present corpus, but this is doubtful. The specialist is one who has a considerable body of experience in practical fieldwork while the generalist is one who knows many different areas of study.
At PA a Aristotle says, In all study and investigation, be it exalted or mundane, there appear to be two types of proficiency: Aristotle does not mean to denigrate or to exalt either. Both are necessary for natural investigations. These two skills are demonstrated by the following example: In other words, the methodology of the specialist would be to observe and catalogue each separate species by itself. The generalist, on the other hand, is drawn to making more global connections through an understanding of the common character of many species.
Both skills are needed. Here and elsewhere Aristotle demonstrates the limitations of a single mode of discovery. Neither direction specialist or generalist is the one and only way to truth.
Really, it is a little of both working in tandem. Sometimes one half takes the lead and sometimes the other. The adoption of several methods is a cornerstone of Aristotelian pluralism, a methodological principle that characterizes much of his work. When discussing biological science, Aristotle presents the reader two directions: In the mode of discovery, the specialist sets out all the phenomena in as much detail as possible while the generalist must use her inter-generic knowledge to sort out what may or may not be significant in the event taking place before her.
This is because in the mode of discovery, the investigator is in the genetic order. Some possible errors that could be made in this order for example might be mistaking certain animal behaviors for an end for which they were not intended. For example, it is very easy to mistake mating behavior for aggressive territorial behavior.
Since the generalist has seen many different types of animals, she may be in the best position on the basis of generic analogy to classify the sort of behavior in question. In the mode of discovery one begins with the phenomenon and then seeks to create a causal explanation PA a But how does one go about doing this?
Arriving at the universal entails a comprehensive understanding of some phenomenon. For example, if one wanted to know whether fish sleep, one would first observe fish in their environment. If one of the behaviors of the fish meets the common understanding of sleep such as being deadened to outside stimulus, showing little to no movement, and so forththen one may move to the generalization that fish sleep On Sleeping and Waking b 8, cf.
On Dreams b 9. But one cannot stop there. Once one has determined that fish sleep via the inductive mode of discoveryit is now up to the researcher to ferret out the causes and reasons why, in a systematic fashion.
This second step is the mode of presentation. In this mode the practitioner of biological science seeks to understand why the universal is as it is. Going back to the example of sleeping fish, the scientist would ask why fish need to sleep.
Never Heard of Queerplatonic Relationships? Here’s What You Need to Know
Is it by analogy to humans and other animals that seem to gather strength through sleep? What ways might sleep be dangerous say by opening the individual fish to being eaten? What do fish do to avoid this? These, and other questions require the practitioner to work back and forth with what has been set down in the mode of discovery for the purpose of providing an explanation.
The most important tools for this exercise are the two modes of causal explanation. The material has the potential for the range of final products. Within the material is, in a potential sense, that which is to be formed. Obviously, one piece of wood or metal has the potential to be many artifacts; yet the possibilities are not infinite. The material itself puts constraint upon what can be produced from it. One can execute designs in glass, for example, which could never be brought forth from brass.
Aristotle gives the example of a male fathering a child as showing an efficient cause. The efficient cause is the trigger that starts a process moving.
The formal cause constitutes the essence of something while the final cause is the purpose of something. For example, Aristotle believed the tongue to be for the purpose of either talking or not. If the tongue was for the purpose of talking final causethen it had to be shaped in a certain way, wide and supple so that it might form subtle differences in sound formal cause. In this way the purpose of the tongue for speaking dovetails with the structural way it might be brought about P.
It is generally the case that Aristotle in his biological science interrelates the final and formal causes. For example Aristotle says that the efficient cause may be inadequate to explain change. In the On Generation and Corruption a Aristotle states that all natural efficient causes are regulated by formal causes.
The formal cause via the doctrine of natural place—that arranges an ascending hierarchy among the elements, earth, water, air and fire dictates that fire is the highest level of the sub-lunar phenomena.
Thus, its essence defines its purpose, namely, to travel upward toward its own natural place. In this way the formal and final cause act together to guide the actions of fire efficient cause to point upward toward its natural place. Aristotle at least in the biological works invokes a strategy of redundant explanation. Taken at its simplest level, he gives four accounts of everything. However, in the actual practice, it comes about that he really only offers two accounts.
For the sake of simplicity, let us call this the ME materially-based causal explanation account.