Romantic
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Thoughts on Soulmates

A soulmate is someone who is similar to you recreationally, but different productively.

This is because your appreciation will lead to the same goals, but when working towards them, you’ll make up for what the other lacks.

The love of chemistry is the former, and the attraction of compatibility is the latter.

You find your soul in the relation of friends, but you find your mate in the contrast of partners. When the two come together, that’s when you have a soulmate.
DragonFruit · 61-69, M
My definition of a soul mate is quite different. To me, a soul mate doesn't need to be a partner in your life, but can be a friend who has a special connection.
I don't believe that you have to have a single soul mate, but that you can have 2, 3 or even several soul mates.
Reject · 26-30, M
@DragonFruit I was just trying to help you understand. If you can’t that’s okay. Perhaps I just didn’t explain things well. The problem with stating things simply is it leaves a lot of room to misinterpret, but if you state things in a more complex way, it’s too much to read.
DragonFruit · 61-69, M
@Reject I'm a retired attorney.....I can understand simple or complex. You contradicted your original post. I have no desire to continue this.
Reject · 26-30, M
@DragonFruit Alright. Have a good one!
WhateverWorks · 36-40
Eh.. sounds like an over complication of meaningful connections that puts people on iconic pedestals. The pedestals become idolized, which disrupts seeing someone for who they really are and interferes with other meaningful connections. What you get is a hot mess of conflicting messages inside the mind and heart that grasps for rationalizations why the Reality and ideal aren’t aligning when it would’ve been far simpler to not put people on a pillar to begin with.
WhateverWorks · 36-40
I mainly meant the idea of soulmates in general,
But even within your post there’s this person who when they seemingly meet a challenging standard ( to mirror you recreationally, but be your opposite also with productivity in a Yin Yang sort of way) is given the pedestal of soulmate. Then the idea gets divided up again into more obtainable, lesser bites and only to be rejoined as a ‘next level’ companionship where they are expected to be the soul and the mate, which implies that if at any time they cease to mirror the recreational or be the productivity yin then they cease to be of special soulmate status.

@Reject
Reject · 26-30, M
@WhateverWorks Being the same recreationally means you both can enjoy the same activities outsides of work. This does not mean you must be the same in every single way. I never said that. The same for productivity. I’m not saying they need to be the opposite in every single way, but in whatever ways that help you both reach goals. What’s strange is how extreme you’re making things. Of course if you think black and white nothing is going to make sense.
Reject · 26-30, M
@WhateverWorks You have inspired me. I will make a few minor changes in the wording so that people can have a clearer idea of what I mean. I didn’t think that needed to be specified, but you’ve shown me it has, so thanks for that.
WhateverWorks · 36-40
I understood what you meant by recreationally in productivity. The trouble is when people start using terms like soulmate there’s a lot of power and specificity behind that expression. It’s the word itself that usually embodies extremes. I do agree that elaboration is important. For example, if you don’t mean ‘mirrors’ in the true sense of the word, and instead mean that you both have a lot in common and your strengths/weaknesses tend to dance well together along with the attraction component then that just means you’ve met someone you’re very compatible with.

If I heard someone congenially say they’re with someone who they’re very compatible with vs. someone claiming they have found their soulmate, One statement is surely more loaded with expectations and ideals.



@Reject
Reject · 26-30, M
@WhateverWorks But that line of thinking makes magic impossible. The point I want to make is that nothing is impossible. You just don’t know how to make it possible yet. So maybe this is just a difference in our personal philosophy, but I’ve always learned the most when figuring out how something works, rather than dismissing it as something that doesn’t.
WhateverWorks · 36-40
Well, I suppose that’s where I’m at with it. I don’t believe there’s any magical reason behind finding someone you’re very compatible with. Going back to what I already wrote in the beginning, I instead believe that magical thinking becomes that problematic, pedestal issue. From my perspective, this whole thing has just been an example of the rationalizing thing people do when reality doesn’t align with an ideal. we start out with this loaded concept of ‘soulmate’, which you and I both agree is an unrealistic expectation.. however, instead we have this whole thread about how we’re still going to call something a soulmate even though we don’t believe that entails what the word means, simply because we want to still be able to call the perceived relationship/person a soulmate, because we want to believe there is a magical component to it where it’s not enough to simply call them very compatible because very compatible isn’t magical enough, isn’t pillar enough.. and round and round it goes @Reject
Reject · 26-30, M
@WhateverWorks I believe a lot of people follow the reality they know when approaching the word soulmate which is wrong because that word is defined by your ideal which is something you see. What you know and what you can see are different things.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Reject · 26-30, M
@MalteseFalconPunch Exactly. Perhaps I should have put more emphasis on the fact that perceived flaws don’t have to be that. I’ll have to think of an eloquent way to say this in my post.
Reject · 26-30, M
@MalteseFalconPunch Admittedly I’m having some trouble finding a way to shoehorn that concept into the post. Mostly because if someone wants to define it as perfect. They’re right. If they want to define it as imperfect. They’re still right. It’s an ideal which is based on what you see so you’ll always be correct in however you see it. I’m just describing the elements of a good human connection. If people want to discredit that with their own ideals, that’s their prerogative.
SW-User
that sounds like something out of cosmo, the concept of a soulmate keeps ppl unhappy forever as they build on this unrealistic expectation of meeting someone who is "made for them" which is so stupid
Reject · 26-30, M
@SW-User I agree. Unrealistic expectations are never a good thing.
LemonWorld · F
I belive in the greek mythology about soulmates
SW-User
It's a bunch of b.s imho
Reject · 26-30, M
@SW-User Many would agree I imagine.
It's a fictitious concept I don't believe in, a bit like Santa really
Reject · 26-30, M
@BeefySenpie That’s what it is for most people.
Wiseacre · F
Idc to have it analyzed or explained!
Reject · 26-30, M
@Wiseacre Then this post wasn't for you.
Wiseacre · F
Yeah @Reject
Pinkstarburst · 51-55, F
Soulmates don’t have to be an intimate partner.
Reject · 26-30, M
@Pinkstarburst This is true!
iamonfire696 · 41-45, F
I am not sure there are soulmates 🤷🏼‍♀️
iamonfire696 · 41-45, F
@Reject have you found one?
Reject · 26-30, M
@iamonfire696 I’ve found multiple. It’s simple really. Just understand that a soulmate is your ideal with means it doesn’t have to be perfect. It just needs to be perfect for you.

But you could argue that a soul mate needs to be mutual. In that case I haven’t found one because I’ve never been perfect to anyone.
iamonfire696 · 41-45, F
@Reject well I am sorry that you haven’t found one that has reciprocated. I hope you find what you are looking for 💖

 
Post Comment