Laws of Attraction
Everyone has come up with at some time a formula or theory or equation that explains or describes attraction. So here's my attempt.
Firstly, my assumptions are as follows:
1 Human beings deeply desire to have their human being-ness affirmed. Different people need different modes of affirmation, but the function of that affirmation is always the same: to make us feel real and valuable, to make us feel like a person.
2 If you've had good parents and a good early life, you will probably have internalised affirmation and probably feel good about yourself. This means that some people will not actively seek affirmation of their humanity. Such people still need affirmation, though, and but they'll just be much less intentional about getting it.
3 We are most attracted to people who seem to be complete and autonomous. That is, we are attracted to people who seem to be human beings at their fullest. Such a person will appear to not need to have their human being-ness affirmed, that would be redundant.
4 People are fundamentally selfish and lazy and do not want to have to make the effort to affirm another person's human being- ness.
I think 4 sort of explains 3, but I also think there are pure reasons for desiring 3; that humanity is a good thing and we desire good things, and its a good thing to desire good things.
But anyway, I think we are less attracted to people who obviously want to have their human-being-ness affirmed, and more attracted to those who hide their need to have their human-being-ness affirmed. That is why we're more attracted to the people described in 2, from training at an early age, they get affirmation of their humanity easily and naturally.
Some of us are better or worse at detecting the activity of humanity-affirmation in others. This is why each person finds different people attractive. Some of us are better or worse at hiding that need.
The most attractive people are probably those with highly sophisticated means of getting others to affirm their own humanity without others realizing that they are affirming the sophisticates' need to have their humanity affirmed. And this type of person has so much affirmation of their own humanity, that they hardly feel the need to have it affirmed (but of course if it was taken from them, they'd notice).
Maybe some examples? Someone who has naturally entertaining and makes jokes without waiting for others to laugh at them might be considered more attractive, than a David Brent type.
What do my readers think? Can you think of counterexamples to floor this theory?
Firstly, my assumptions are as follows:
1 Human beings deeply desire to have their human being-ness affirmed. Different people need different modes of affirmation, but the function of that affirmation is always the same: to make us feel real and valuable, to make us feel like a person.
2 If you've had good parents and a good early life, you will probably have internalised affirmation and probably feel good about yourself. This means that some people will not actively seek affirmation of their humanity. Such people still need affirmation, though, and but they'll just be much less intentional about getting it.
3 We are most attracted to people who seem to be complete and autonomous. That is, we are attracted to people who seem to be human beings at their fullest. Such a person will appear to not need to have their human being-ness affirmed, that would be redundant.
4 People are fundamentally selfish and lazy and do not want to have to make the effort to affirm another person's human being- ness.
I think 4 sort of explains 3, but I also think there are pure reasons for desiring 3; that humanity is a good thing and we desire good things, and its a good thing to desire good things.
But anyway, I think we are less attracted to people who obviously want to have their human-being-ness affirmed, and more attracted to those who hide their need to have their human-being-ness affirmed. That is why we're more attracted to the people described in 2, from training at an early age, they get affirmation of their humanity easily and naturally.
Some of us are better or worse at detecting the activity of humanity-affirmation in others. This is why each person finds different people attractive. Some of us are better or worse at hiding that need.
The most attractive people are probably those with highly sophisticated means of getting others to affirm their own humanity without others realizing that they are affirming the sophisticates' need to have their humanity affirmed. And this type of person has so much affirmation of their own humanity, that they hardly feel the need to have it affirmed (but of course if it was taken from them, they'd notice).
Maybe some examples? Someone who has naturally entertaining and makes jokes without waiting for others to laugh at them might be considered more attractive, than a David Brent type.
What do my readers think? Can you think of counterexamples to floor this theory?
posted by The Borg at
3:42 PM
15 Comments:
For example, if a person has money, good looks, creativity, homour etc, these affirm that person's human-being-ness, in another person's eyes.
By
The Borg, At
4:51 PM
I probably haven't been all that clear, so ask lots of questions. That's the best way to explain.
By
The Borg, At
5:00 PM
The most attractive people are probably those with highly sophisticated means of getting others to affirm their own humanity without others realizing that they are affirming the sophisticates' need to have their humanity affirmed. And this type of person has so much affirmation of their own humanity, that they hardly feel the need to have it affirmed (but of course if it was taken from them, they'd notice)
So are you saying they're manipulative? Or that they don't even realise they're doing it? Interesting theory by the way. I agree with a lot of things in it. Still processing some of the rest.
By
Angus, At
5:31 PM
So is the bad boy nice girl phenomenon one that is merely explained by your hypothesis?
By
BSJ-rom, At
9:02 PM
I think I could work with this theory.
In reflection on bsj-rom's statement I think perhaps, the bad boy doesn't care if people think him human or not but still wants to be treated humanely so goes for the nice girl. Nice girls are confidant in their own human-ness and do not need people to be nice to them because they find their sense of human-ness in being nice to others. They actually have this reaffirmed by being nice to bad boys because it allows opportunity them to be nicer. It's a kind of martyrdom which comes at a great price but offers great reward: the recognition that they are nice. Both are deluded which is why relationships like these always end like a train wreck.
By
missmellifluous, At
9:10 PM
Maybe nice girls are not confident in their own human-ness, and they're attempting to have their human-ness affirmed by converting a bad boy (being the one girl that he 'sees differently' or whatever).
So in some ways, women drawn to bad boys could be said to be drawn to men who are NOT complete and autonomous (bad boys who need 'fixing'). They are then the element that 'completes' the bad boy, hence affirming their own worth as a human being.
Need to think a bit more about this, I just got back from French and my brain is still recovering :)
By
Emi, At
10:43 PM
In "nice girl/bad boy", I don't think nice girl is complete. Rather, she affirms herself by "obtaining the unobtainable", and (trying to) "change the unchangeable".
By
Craig Schwarze, At
10:18 AM
Is blogging a sophisticated way of getting other people to affirm humanness? What if you have comments turned off?
I think it is. That's why people write blogposts that chase comments. (Not to get all meta here, but Shiloh's done pretty well with this one;). You write what you think people will want to read, so they find you interesting.
By
Angus, At
1:06 PM
I think attraction is a response to our need to be needed. I guess that goes with the good girl/bad boy thing but I don't get what the bad boy gets out of it.
By
Anonymous, At
8:43 PM
dude. he gets grace.
someone who is supposed to normally 'not look twice' at him loves him to the very core.
he doesn't realize that she's loving out of wanting to be needed. she probably doesn't even.
until it's too late.
perhaps it's the age old redemption story for both of them.
By
Anonymous, At
8:44 AM
I thought it was a case of the bad boy knowing exactly what he wants, getting it, then buggering off. Isn't that the ultimate proof that he's a bad boy?
By
BSJ-rom, At
5:57 PM
Clear insight, Jerome.
By
The Borg, At
7:39 PM
- "Humanity" is pretty broad.
- Some people are attracted to vulnerability or need in others.
- Even good parents and happy childhoods can leave marks on one's romantic inclinations.
- Many charismatic people are so because they give those around them a sense of grandeur and myth, not just because they have those themselves.
- Sometimes, attraction is totally and utterly irrational.
By
Unknown, At
7:25 AM
Good points. On reflection, I think my model is too simplistic. I guess I was trying to get at why it is, in general, we are attracted to people who are "comfortable in their own skin".
By
The Borg, At
6:56 PM
Re your second point, JML:
I think people are attracted to vulnerability/need in others only in so far as that need/vulnerability isn't central to that person, or that they're only needy/vulnerable in certain arenas which can be justified in the eyes of others. Especially if that need/vulnerability can be filled easily by the other person.
By
The Borg, At
7:17 PM
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home