What do you look in a relationship partner/lover/bf/gf?

@platorepublic,

You will never know what you really want until you experience the things that you don't want. I wouldn't take anyone elses advice on how you should be. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being shallow or being superficial if that is how you naturally want to be. People scoff at it mostly because they feel there should be more to it than superficial realistically everyone is superficial in some way or another.

No one tells you how you should chew your food, or what kind of food you should like. You like what you like and you eat how you want to eat. Why should a relationship be dictated by others or why should you look for acceptance in how others would view your selective choices.

Be superficial, if it works for you there is nothing wrong with it. If you want more than that, then you will naturally gravitate towards it. No need to pressure yourself to be the way you are not naturally.

@Krumple,

All I know is from my own experience with my relationship with my fianc?e (as well as the subsequent past girlfriends). I have known her since we were about 18 and it has been a little more than 8 years we have been together.

Honestly, "looks" are somewhat important. I think that people in general tend to respond better to a better looking significant other, or an otherwise more preferential attribute that person possesses. It doesn't necessarily have to be the whole package, but things like nice skin, a healthy body, a sharp mind, whatever you take to be the most important attribute in your partner.

Which I think brings me to a primary point which is that if you are looking to get into a relationship, it really is a partnership in all senses of the word. You have to be able to meet your significant other on most issues in such a way where you would consider them your best friend/girlfriend/spouse/etc. In my own case, my fianc?e and I have been best friends from the start. And not in the token "best-friend" sense, but on an actual plain where we share common goals, likes, hobbies, etc. I have a friend who treated girlfriends (and hilariously his current wife) as though they are a segregated part of his life, as though he had his real life with his buddies and the married life with his wife (and kids). The two rarely mix, and when they do, it is certainly not permanent. Some call that personal space, but I call it reluctance to commit fully to the partnership. I don't think I could live in a relationship like that. So true friendship is essential, but even better is to have a genuine best friend in your future spouse. And if you are a genuine dabbler in philosophical thoughts, then it may be the case that your best match will be a person of likewise character.

However, as far as placing more emphasis on a potential partner who "dabbles more in philosophical thought" than the ability for your significant other to be capable enough to coexist harmoniously with you in a relationship, I would honestly caution against this. If I am any judge of what thinking too much on a certain matter does to you, if my fianc?e thought the same way, we would certainly not be together. The relationship would be admittedly rough. I admit I am not the easiest person to get along with, especially in my method of thinking and profession. Which is odd because (in a revelation of personal experience), though both my fianc?e and I are in school to become lawyers, she is taking a much more different path than I am. I am more combative and aggressive and she is much more neutral. She is more mathematical, I am more abstract, I have an extensively large ego easily bruised (LOL) and she to the contrary. You need that diversity to keep things interesting and peaceful.

But this is my own take from my own experience. I tend to believe that applying philosophy to a relationship is disastrous if taken too literally. Case in point, I had a professor who my fianc?e told me on numerous occasions that he needed to have an "off" switch for his academic life opposed to his private life. It was that bad.

@platorepublic,

The above points are quite valid... but who knows what is "good", lol. And who knows for how long? "What works for you" - how would you ever know?

Haha, maybe it doesn't actually even matter? But why would I ask if it didn't matter?

You could only control yourself, and not others?

@platorepublic,

Don't over think it!

Point the bow of your ship towards "Getting to Know" potential partners with an open mind; from there your natural "needs" will come to be known by your own intuitive feel. Whether it be intellectually, physically, emotionally or through interaction, you may not consciously have any idea what is 'best' for you personally (few of us do, until our much-latter years). But it's there, just don't force it.

Through these forays into "learning" about someone, testing the waters of a relationship (so to speak) you'll come to discover what's most important to you personally. It's much this way with the study of Philosophy; wherein the best way to proceed is to first study as if at a buffet table, picking and choosing what looks good, leaving off that which strikes the pallet as bitter or dank - from there proceeding to only then understand it fully.

In any case, yes relationship hunting is serious business: But overthink it and you'll likely overshadow those subtle gut-feels that are perhaps the only manifestations of what's good for you.

Hope this helps

@Khethil,

Khethil;149706 wrote:

Don't over think it!

Point the bow of your ship towards "Getting to Know" potential partners with an open mind; from there your natural "needs" will come to be known by your own intuitive feel. Whether it be intellectually, physically, emotionally or through interaction, you may not consciously have any idea what is 'best' for you personally (few of us do, until our much-latter years). But it's there, just don't force it.

Through these forays into "learning" about someone, testing the waters of a relationship (so to speak) you'll come to discover what's most important to you personally. It's much this way with the study of Philosophy; wherein the best way to proceed is to first study as if at a buffet table, picking and choosing what looks good, leaving off that which strikes the pallet as bitter or dank - from there proceeding to only then understand it fully.

In any case, yes relationship hunting is serious business: But overthink it and you'll likely overshadow those subtle gut-feels that are perhaps the only manifestations of what's good for you.

Hope this helps

Yes. Thanks.

Now I just need to find this person Smile

And then I will come back here to ask for more advice or give advice, or just to post here for fun.

But this may take forever - now this might deserve another thread - uh, no thanks, even I don't want to hear about my failure in getting a date, haha.

Are there philosophy dating sites? Haha.

@platorepublic,

platorepublic;149606 wrote:

I have only reached my twenties, and well I hear people talking about having good looks etc are superficial. And well, I have always felt much more mature than my age, and feel that non-superficial things like personality, maturity, intelligence etc are getting superficial to me too.

I feel like those who "dabble in philosophical thoughts" and similar are much more important to me. And to me it's almost the most important in a person.

But then again, is it that important in a partner (e.g. just for raising a family, have sex, have fun, be intimate etc.)?

I have no idea as to how to approach this, because my experience, as my young age (lol) suggests, is very limited - so I do ask the perhaps older (and wiser) audience.

What is most important depends upon what, exactly, one wants the relationship to be. You need to figure that out before you get married to anyone, as you cannot know whether it is a good idea to marry someone if you do not know what it is that you really want.

There are certain things about which it is extremely important to agree, such as whether or not to have children, and if one decides to have children, how to raise them. You cannot come to some compromise between having children or not; you either become parents or you don't; there is no halfway point. Generally speaking, you need to agree on whatever is most important to each of you. But you also need to think carefully about what it is that really matters, and do not get caught up in things that you believe ought to matter to you due to social expectations or whatever.

With a partner, although sex matters, you must be able to get along in a nonsexual way, or you will have no end of problems. Even if you have sex 4 hours every day, you still are not having sex most of the time.

As for dabbling in philosophy, although I would prefer it if my wife had a greater interest in philosophy than she does, I personally do not think it is the most important thing, or even close. I have no regrets about my choice of wife. She is my best friend, and was so before we became romantically involved. She is an extremely nice person, who is the most reasonable person I have ever met, and she is very intelligent. She also has a great body. But what matters most, to me, is that she is nice and reasonable. It is easy to find someone who will treat you like crap, or who is crazy, and those are the things that I would suggest avoiding (assuming, of course, that you are nice and reasonable and like those qualities in others).

@Khethil,

Khethil;149706 wrote:

Don't over think it!

That is usually terrible advice, with the real meaning of such an expression typically being "stop thinking".

Khethil;149706 wrote:

Point the bow of your ship towards "Getting to Know" potential partners with an open mind; from there your natural "needs" will come to be known by your own intuitive feel. Whether it be intellectually, physically, emotionally or through interaction, you may not consciously have any idea what is 'best' for you personally (few of us do, until our much-latter years). But it's there, just don't force it.

Through these forays into "learning" about someone, testing the waters of a relationship (so to speak) you'll come to discover what's most important to you personally. It's much this way with the study of Philosophy; wherein the best way to proceed is to first study as if at a buffet table, picking and choosing what looks good, leaving off that which strikes the pallet as bitter or dank - from there proceeding to only then understand it fully.

That is a terrible way to study philosophy. Sometimes, the things that look superficially good are only that, and one may neglect something with greater depth and importance because it is not so pretty on the surface. I think it is better to take college classes in philosophy to become introduced to philosophy, so that one will become at least somewhat acquainted with the philosophers who are generally considered to be the greatest, and then one can decide whether or not one wants to study them further.

Khethil;149706 wrote:

In any case, yes relationship hunting is serious business: But overthink it and you'll likely overshadow those subtle gut-feels that are perhaps the only manifestations of what's good for you.

Hope this helps

Most people don't put nearly enough thought into the process at all, and end up in shitty relationships because, for example, the woman with the largest breasts distracts a foolish man from thinking about what really matters to him. He then ends up bitter, posting online his sob story about how women are crazy and can't be trusted. If only he looked for a sane woman who could be trusted, he might have found her, but he was too stupid and put too little thought into the matter to look for that.

Under-think relationships and you, too, can have a shitty relationship.

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:

That is usually terrible advice, with the real meaning of such an expression typically being "stop thinking".

That is a terrible way to study philosophy. Sometimes, the things that look superficially good are only that, and one may neglect something with greater depth and importance because it is not so pretty on the surface. I think it is better to take college classes in philosophy to become introduced to philosophy, so that one will become at least somewhat acquainted with the philosophers who are generally considered to be the greatest, and then one can decide whether or not one wants to study them further.

Most people don't put nearly enough thought into the process at all, and end up in shitty relationships because, for example, the woman with the largest breasts distracts a foolish man from thinking about what really matters to him. He then ends up bitter, posting online his sob story about how women are crazy and can't be trusted. If only he looked for a sane woman who could be trusted, he might have found her, but he was too stupid and put too little thought into the matter to look for that.

Under-think relationships and you, too, can have a shitty relationship.

"Over-think" and "under-think"?! Seriously?

It will be "over-think" and "under-think" if you end up in a shitty relationship. Like, duh.

Otherwise, just think.

@Pyrrho,

Hey Pyrrho, Nice to hear from you

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:

That is usually terrible advice, with the real meaning of such an expression typically being "stop thinking".

Nope. To not over-think something is sage advice and is different from not thinking at all. The way you've taken that suggests two-dimensional/on-off thinking (in that if you're cautioned not to over-think, that this is the same as not thinking, period). That's ok, a lot of folks are like that...

... but yea, over-complicating issues is something we all do from time to time. And in matters of long-term mate choosing and all the dynamics that go into it, it's that that much more important to avoid.

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:

That is a terrible way to study philosophy.

No, it's the best. When we peruse different philosophies (particularly ones new to us), discovering what we agree with (and why) as well as what we don't like (and why) is the most thorough and honest way to discover oneself as well as learn. I can't imagine a method that's more self-true

College classes are great, for sure, and can help on every level.

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:

Most people don't put nearly enough thought into the process at all, and end up in shitty relationships because, for example, the woman with the largest breasts distracts a foolish man from thinking about what really matters to him. He then ends up bitter, posting online his sob story about how women are crazy and can't be trusted. If only he looked for a sane woman who could be trusted, he might have found her, but he was too stupid and put too little thought into the matter to look for that.

You know all this? This is why people end up in such relationships? Excellent, you can serve as a beacon of knowledge to all of us who mistakenly believe that relationships fail for a variety of reasons. Thank you!

@platorepublic,

"over thinking" is a bit of a misnomer I think. Generally it just means "thinking poorly".

Khethil, I would put thinking well over intuition. Intuition will get you a long way, but the quality of your intuitions is greatly shaped by previous good thinking, and it's better for it to be a major factor in your well thought decision rather than the decider itself.

I think this is a kind of false dilemma that often comes up in reason vs faith, thinking vs feeling type arguments. Often the best thing to do is exactly what our feelings think is the best thing to do, but in order to decide if that is the case we need to think about it.

@Jebediah,

Jebediah;150231 wrote:

Khethil, I would put thinking well over intuition.

I don't think it's a good idea to put either over the other; quite honestly. It really depends on what we're talking about, whom, their issues, their goals, their emotional needs and so on. Let's not be lured into a false dichotomy.

In this case, I sensed that our OP was perhaps doing this (getting mired in choices not yet explored, not yet realized); thus this advice seems to be appropriate. Remember, advice is a 'open' proposition: If you offer me advice, you're doing so out of - presumably - well intentions. Whether or not it applies to me (and definitely whether or not I take it) is my responsibility.

I find it curious how often we here run into this problem of issues being steered into black and white. For those who might be interested, it goes like this:

If I say something has a 'good effect', that's not to say it's completely and totally 'good', only that the effect of which one speaks, they think is good

If Bill says "Today is a nice Day", it's not to say that there isn't somewhere horrible suffering being endured. It's just that from his perspective, and to that of which he speaks, he's calling 'good

If I say one shouldn't overthink what aspects to look for in a potential mate, this isn't to say that one shouldn't think at all. It's only that for that person, it might be good advice based on what they're saying about the situation

This sort of thing really makes communication difficult. And it's really too bad - the message is lost for those pitting unwarranted disputes where none existed.

Ah well, let's keep trying I suppose. Thanks

@platorepublic,

A good sense of humour, kindness and easy going.

@Caroline,

Caroline;150258 wrote:

A good sense of humour, kindness and easy going.

You might get two out of three, if your lucky Caroline. Easy going usually equals boring.

@Khethil,

Khethil;150211 wrote:

Hey Pyrrho, Nice to hear from you

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:
That is usually terrible advice, with the real meaning of such an expression typically being "stop thinking".

Nope. To not over-think something is sage advice and is different from not thinking at all. The way you've taken that suggests two-dimensional/on-off thinking (in that if you're cautioned not to over-think, that this is the same as not thinking, period). That's ok, a lot of folks are like that...

... but yea, over-complicating issues is something we all do from time to time. And in matters of long-term mate choosing and all the dynamics that go into it, it's that that much more important to avoid.

You seem to not understand the words "usually" and "typically". You should read and think more carefully.

Khethil;150211 wrote:

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:
That is a terrible way to study philosophy.

No, it's the best. When we peruse different philosophies (particularly ones new to us), discovering what we agree with (and why) as well as what we don't like (and why) is the most thorough and honest way to discover oneself as well as learn. I can't imagine a method that's more self-true

College classes are great, for sure, and can help on every level.

No, it is a terrible way for the reasons I stated that you omitted in your quote of my post. Very often, people who act in accordance with your advice primarily read one person's works, and fail to get a balanced view of what philosophy is, and fail to see problems in what their favored person thought. They are much more likely to avoid such problems by taking a college class.

Khethil;150211 wrote:

Pyrrho;150072 wrote:
Most people don't put nearly enough thought into the process at all, and end up in shitty relationships because, for example, the woman with the largest breasts distracts a foolish man from thinking about what really matters to him. He then ends up bitter, posting online his sob story about how women are crazy and can't be trusted. If only he looked for a sane woman who could be trusted, he might have found her, but he was too stupid and put too little thought into the matter to look for that.

You know all this? This is why people end up in such relationships? Excellent, you can serve as a beacon of knowledge to all of us who mistakenly believe that relationships fail for a variety of reasons. Thank you!

You are very careless in your reading, as you are replying as if you did not understand what the word "most" meant. And it is true that most people do not think things through enough before they jump into a relationship, and so they typically fail as the person selected isn't really what is desired (which could involve any number of aspects of the person that are not what is desired).

As for being a beacon of knowledge, when people fail to read the advice carefully and therefore fail to understand it, it does them no good at all, as it evidently has done no good for you thus far.

---------- Post added 04-11-2010 at 12:05 AM ----------

Caroline;150258 wrote:

A good sense of humour, kindness and easy going.

Those are good things to look for, at least for those with the taste and judgement to value those good qualities. Those who prefer people with no or a bad sense of humour, who are cruel, or who are drama queens will want something else.

@Caroline,

Caroline;150258 wrote:

A good sense of humour, kindness and easy going.

That's a nice set of qualities. What's more, it's straight to the point!

Awesome

@Khethil,

This is a question that can only be answered by you. The answer is a "function" of who you are (which is a question unto itself).

I think as you discover "you", choosing a companion becomes an easier task - however the "pool" shrinks and the process difficulty equalizes itself (becoming more complex to match your maturity). Remember (from a potential perspective) that your companion pool is undergoing the same developments and personal discovery.

For me, the most important things were: "love" and "support" when I'm down and out, compromise of personal preference for one another, complementary attributes, values, and future goals. When you can be the person you "are" around your companion (and vice versa) you've struck gold.

@Khethil,

Khethil;150629 wrote:

That's a nice set of qualities. What's more, it's straight to the point!

Awesome

I'm not sure those are things I look for in a relationship. But these must be a basic requirement for all my friends.

@platorepublic,

platorepublic;150787 wrote:

I'm not sure those are things I look for in a relationship. But these must be a basic requirement for all my friends.

So are you saying that you do not require or desire friendship with a person with whom you have a "relationship"? How will you get along with the person during the times that you are not having sex? (Even if you are having sex four hours a day, most of the time, you are not going to be having sex, so how would you get along with this person most of the time?)

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;150793 wrote:

So are you saying that you do not require or desire friendship with a person with whom you have a "relationship"? How will you get along with the person during the times that you are not having sex? (Even if you are having sex four hours a day, most of the time, you are not going to be having sex, so how would you get along with this person most of the time?)

Oh you misunderstand. Those qualities are a basic requirement. Without those, it would be rare for me to talk with this person without these qualities anyway.

Philosophy Forum

What do you look in a relationship partner/lover/bf/gf?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know