PDA

View Full Version : Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Love & Pheromones



Pancho1188
01-08-2004, 04:16 PM
Everyone\'s getting a Penn State psychology minor from reading all of my posts...only

you didn\'t pay $7K/semester to go to these classes...

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

From the Matching Hypothesis

Thread:

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
does it die

if i don\'t wear the pheromones? that\'s hard to say. i think pheromones can also cause a sort of bonding that

wouldn\'t just melt away when you stop using them. but i think this is highly dependant on the type of product one

is using. more sexual products like npa/te tend in my opinion to create relationships that will die if you don\'t

use the pheros anymore. on the other hand, wagg is much more bonding, and i think it creates a lasting bonding that

wouldn\'t die (at least not so fast) if you stop using it.
i use different products on purpose with different

women according to what sort of relationship i am looking for. if i just want something quick and sexual that

wouldn\'t last long, i would mostly use te. if i want something longer and deeper with feelings, i would use

something which is less heavy on none and has a considerable amount of nol, something like attraction maybe, and

then also wagg.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Why can\'t you use both, ie a lot of nol

and te, for sexual and bonding? Do you find that amounts are unimportant, but rather ratios between the sexual and

bonding pheromones make the difference?

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

well if i want the

sexual relationship, i might also use some nol to make things more relaxed. but if i want something lasting, i would

not use te/npa even not with a lot of nol. at least not at the begining when the relationships is in creation. when

i wear te/npa (even with other products) i feel that takes out the wild side in the woman and make almost all other

sides disappear. i feel that she herself wants me just for the sex. this is something on which one cannot build a

lasting relationship. a few months max. then you have to have other things in the relationship which i feel are lost

with te/npa. but this is just my experience, it could be different for others.
markus


<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

This is an interesting argument. Why? Because it touches on

Sternberg\'s Triangular Model:

(Note: sorry if this looks funny, but it\'s the only way I could get it to

keep the shape of a friggin\' triangle...

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif)

|___________________Intimacy
|______________________/\

\
|_____________________/-- \\
|_____________Passion_/____\\ Commitment

The model shows three

aspects to love: Intimacy, Passion, and Commitment.

Nonlove: Casual Interactions
Intimacy only = Liking;

Friendships
Passion only = Infatuation; \"Love at first sight\", sexual attraction
Commitment only = Empty

Love; \"Staying together for the kids\"
Intimacy + Passion = Romantic Love; Summer fling
Intimacy +

Commitment = Companionate Love; Passionless Marriage, Older couples, Lifetime companionship
Passion + Commitment

= Fatuous Love; \"Whirlwind Courtship\" (best recent example: Bennifer: Passion and engagement to be married, but

too much media-frenzy to get close)
Intimacy + Passion + Commitment = Consumate Love; Complete Love, Most

difficult to attain


Now, I think most people would argue that pheromones in this model would be a

passion jumpstart (much like myself /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif) in this example. This

allows for the sexual chemistry/attraction to skyrocket between people. Now, I believe the above argument would say

that sexual -mones such as TE would be more likely to crank up the passion and allow for some major sexual hits...

However, when they wear off, it is likely that the passion may dissipate, which would lead to nothing being there to

keep the flame burning. On the other hand, using WAGG may allow for an intimacy overhaul where the closeness

between the two people can be increased as well as any passion that may be there. Therefore, if the passion fades

slightly from the removal of -mones from the pictures, you will still have that intimacy that you developed before,

thus leading to a better chance at a solid relationship. I believe that is what the argument above was trying to

say using the terms of this model.

One may also argue that TE or similar products will increase the passion,

and with your charm, wit, and intelligence can allow you to develop the intimacy, etc. needed to build a serious

relationship. However, the previous argument would say that this is harder due to the fact that you don\'t have

any assistance of \"intimacy\" -mones.

Question: How do you feel one can use knowledge of the Triangular

Model to your advantage? Do you think you can attempt to \"jumpstart\" a relationship by combining -mones and

your clever wit to develop a better relationship with an attractive man/woman?

Does this help anyone use

their -mones more effectively, or am I just wasting my time?

I hope this brings some more help to people

regarding -mone use...


/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gifPancho

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Kari
01-09-2004, 06:43 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Everyone\'s getting a

Penn State psychology minor from reading all of my posts...only you didn\'t pay $7K/semester to go to these

classes... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

From the Matching Hypothesis

Thread:

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
does it die

if i don\'t wear the pheromones? that\'s hard to say. i think pheromones can also cause a sort of bonding that

wouldn\'t just melt away when you stop using them. but i think this is highly dependant on the type of product one

is using. more sexual products like npa/te tend in my opinion to create relationships that will die if you don\'t

use the pheros anymore. on the other hand, wagg is much more bonding, and i think it creates a lasting bonding that

wouldn\'t die (at least not so fast) if you stop using it.
i use different products on purpose with different

women according to what sort of relationship i am looking for. if i just want something quick and sexual that

wouldn\'t last long, i would mostly use te. if i want something longer and deeper with feelings, i would use

something which is less heavy on none and has a considerable amount of nol, something like attraction maybe, and

then also wagg.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Why can\'t you use both, ie a lot of nol and

te, for sexual and bonding? Do you find that amounts are unimportant, but rather ratios between the sexual and

bonding pheromones make the difference?

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

well if i want the sexual

relationship, i might also use some nol to make things more relaxed. but if i want something lasting, i would not

use te/npa even not with a lot of nol. at least not at the begining when the relationships is in creation. when i

wear te/npa (even with other products) i feel that takes out the wild side in the woman and make almost all other

sides disappear. i feel that she herself wants me just for the sex. this is something on which one cannot build a

lasting relationship. a few months max. then you have to have other things in the relationship which i feel are lost

with te/npa. but this is just my experience, it could be different for others.
markus


<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

This is an interesting argument. Why? Because it touches on

Sternberg\'s Triangular Model:

(Note: sorry if this looks funny, but it\'s the only way I could get it to

keep the shape of a friggin\' triangle...

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif)

|___________________Intimacy
|______________________/\\
|_

____________________/-- \\
|_____________Passion_/____\\ Commitment

The model shows three aspects to love:

Intimacy, Passion, and Commitment.

Nonlove: Casual Interactions
Intimacy only = Liking; Friendships
Passion

only = Infatuation; \"Love at first sight\", sexual attraction
Commitment only = Empty Love; \"Staying together

for the kids\"
Intimacy + Passion = Romantic Love; Summer fling
Intimacy + Commitment = Companionate Love;

Passionless Marriage, Older couples, Lifetime companionship
Passion + Commitment = Fatuous Love; \"Whirlwind

Courtship\" (best recent example: Bennifer: Passion and engagement to be married, but too much media-frenzy to get

close)
Intimacy + Passion + Commitment = Consumate Love; Complete Love, Most difficult to attain


Now, I think

most people would argue that pheromones in this model would be a passion jumpstart (much like myself

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif) in this example. This allows for the sexual chemistry/attraction

to skyrocket between people. Now, I believe the above argument would say that sexual -mones such as TE would be

more likely to crank up the passion and allow for some major sexual hits... However, when they wear off, it is

likely that the passion may dissipate, which would lead to nothing being there to keep the flame burning. On the

other hand, using WAGG may allow for an intimacy overhaul where the closeness between the two people can be

increased as well as any passion that may be there. Therefore, if the passion fades slightly from the removal of

-mones from the pictures, you will still have that intimacy that you developed before, thus leading to a better

chance at a solid relationship. I believe that is what the argument above was trying to say using the terms of this

model.

One may also argue that TE or similar products will increase the passion, and with your charm, wit, and

intelligence can allow you to develop the intimacy, etc. needed to build a serious relationship. However, the

previous argument would say that this is harder due to the fact that you don\'t have any assistance of

\"intimacy\" -mones.

Question: How do you feel one can use knowledge of the Triangular Model to your advantage?

Do you think you can attempt to \"jumpstart\" a relationship by combining -mones and your clever wit to develop a

better relationship with an attractive man/woman?

Does this help anyone use their -mones more effectively, or am

I just wasting my time?

I hope this brings some more help to people regarding -mone use...




/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gifPancho /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif



<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Cool post, sweetie! I have two degrees in theis [censored], and

didn\'t know about Sternberg.

And, I thought you were nothing more than a pretty face! &lt;g&gt;

Pancho1188
01-09-2004, 08:39 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />

And, I thought you were

nothing more than a pretty face! &lt;g&gt;

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

\"When someone tells

me I\'m smarter than I look...I can\'t decide whether it\'s an insult or a compliment...\" ---

Ziggy

Well, I wasn\'t able to graduate in 3 1/2 years from a presitigious university

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif with a 4.0 in my psychology minor for no reason...

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Seriously, though, I have to say that that is the

first time ANYONE has ever said that to me... I\'m usually considered the really intelligent dork...I mean, I AM

a dork...everyone gets that part right... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif...but usually a smart

one with so-so looks instead of a \'pretty\' one with so-so intelligence...

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Holmes
01-09-2004, 09:05 AM
Didn\'t Donald Trump buy Maslow\'s Pyramid?


Holmes

Pancho1188
01-09-2004, 09:20 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Didn\'t Donald Trump buy

Maslow\'s Pyramid?


Holmes

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Yes, and he applied for the

proper patents, trademarks, and copyrights. All psychologists must now refer to the hierarchy as so:

Trump\'s

Hierarchy of Needs

*****Marrying Hot Chick Who Tries To Take Your Money*****
|||||||______Making Even More

Money__________
||||||____Dumping Old Hot Chicks for New Ones______
|||||_____________Making More

Money______________
||||_______________Getting Hot Chicks_________________
_____________________Making

Money___________________________

Holmes
01-09-2004, 09:26 AM
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif Hey, that sounds like my

Hierarchy Of Needs (with food thrown in there somewhere, maybe).

Seriously, though, I heard he turned the Pyramid

into a casino.


Holmes

Sagacious1420
01-09-2004, 11:46 AM
Interesting post.

Now if the removal of pheros can be equated w/ diminished passion,

then why wouldn\'t it also be equated w/ diminished intimacy? According to this model, Intimacy + Passsion =

Romantic Love. However, Intimacy w/out passion leaves one in the \"friends zone\", correct. Wouldn\'t that

kinda defeat the purpose? A \"relationship\" w/out Intimacy or Passion = Casual Interactions (Nonlove).

Therefore, applying pheros to this model would mean that no pheros leaves you w/ merely Casual Interactions. Who

wants that? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Certainly a compelling model, neatly packaged. I

guess for me the problem is that such models are neatly packaged, but life is messy. I\'m not so sure that phero

use (or lack thereof) and the issue of relationships is all that cut and dried.

You see, this is what

happens when you ppl make me start thinking. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

OCP
01-09-2004, 05:21 PM
That is really funny /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

OCP
01-09-2004, 05:22 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Didn\'t Donald Trump buy Maslow\'s Pyramid?


Holmes

<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Yes, and he applied for the proper patents, trademarks, and copyrights.

All psychologists must now refer to the hierarchy as so:

Trump\'s Hierarchy of Needs

*****Marrying Hot Chick

Who Tries To Take Your Money*****
|||||||______Making Even More Money__________
||||||____Dumping Old Hot Chicks

for New Ones______
|||||_____________Making More Money______________
||||_______________Getting Hot

Chicks_________________
_____________________Making Money___________________________

<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">


This is really funny /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

DrSmellThis
01-09-2004, 05:27 PM
Kari, you probably haven\'t heard of Sternberg because he\'s usually only taught in

human relations (touchy feely, community college) type psych courses -- not the traditional academic kind.

Pancho1188
01-09-2004, 06:16 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Kari, you probably

haven\'t heard of Sternberg because he\'s usually only taught in human relations (touchy feely, community

college) type psych courses -- not the traditional academic kind.

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

Are you calling my college a community college!?!?!?!?

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

Seriously, though, I learned about it in two classes:

Personality Psychology and Psychology of Adjustment. I didn\'t hear a thing about it in Child Psychology,

Psychological Research, and Cognitive Psychology.

DrSmellThis
01-10-2004, 08:46 AM
Just stating statistical realities. No offense intended.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif But Adjustment is a human relations type course. Most

personality theory courses wouldn\'t cover Sternberg, as he\'s a \'minor player\'.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Pancho1188
06-14-2004, 12:43 PM
*Bump*

This is when I

actually had interesting ideas to contribute... :)

koolking1
06-14-2004, 12:56 PM
DST will you stop this and

get back to the bottles!!!! You have no time for this - bottles, bottles, only bottles!!!!

DrSmellThis
06-14-2004, 01:23 PM
This was a long time ago,

koolie! :D

That was a great thread, Pancho. Good job and bump! ;) :)