You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

JoshuaZ comments on Open thread, Dec. 22 - Dec. 28, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: Gondolinian 22 December 2014 02:34AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (218)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 25 December 2014 01:54:05PM *  3 points [-]

Is that really accurate? A number of the stories in Ovid's Amores and Metamorphoses which sound pretty close to what we'd call "romantic love" and that's from around 20 BCE and there's no indication that anything there is shocking or surprising to roman notions of love.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 29 December 2014 11:37:20AM *  2 points [-]

I would guess that in the past "romantic love" was a luxury that only wealthy people could afford (e.g. citizens of the Ancient Rome) and often happened outside of marriage; most people married for economical reasons.

In other words "you can love someone" is old, but "you should marry the person you love" is new.