Let's see... what am I doing to actualize my dreams/goals?
For my dreams, nothing really since that is why they are dreams, not goals: I have no idea how to go about actualizing it.
But for my goals, unfortunately, a lot less than I'd like, which means now you know my great weakness (which, slightly to my dismay, is a terribly common weakness). I'm slightly bipolar in that regard (metaphorically speaking); I get incredibly passionate about a project, work on it night and day, but eventually that passion wanes and I struggle on for a while, trying to finish something I am not as passionate about while there is some other project that I am now passionate about that is calling my name. Eventually, I simply forget that I was working on the project for a while. In short, I suck at finishing what I start. I'm an idea man and the newest thought, the next idea, is always tempting me away from the present. That is weakness, but one that I should be able to turn into a strength (which I suppose is another dream).
But even at that, I am still making progress on my goals. I don't write as much as I'd like, but my reading has taken off this year since I've put an effort into it (my new year's resolution was at least 1 book a month, so far I'm closer to 3 or 4, and my range of reading materials has expanded as well). As for history, I am currently looking into Ph.D. programs and hope to enter one in about 2 years, maybe three. Unfortunately for that, I also need to work on polishing up one of my research papers.
Nicely enough, reading helps with personal development, and my wife and I have been working on creating stress free places in our home where, ideally, in the future I will be able to retreat and think freely. There is still the need for discipline, but that is part of my weakness (see above).
As for some of the other goals, those are still years off in actualization, but I keep an eye out for beautiful architecture and I am aiming to start saving money specifically towards the purchasing of a home within the next 3 months (previously I've just been saving money in general, and I must still wait a few months because of expensive bills coming first).
Now as to love:
Love is a manyfold thing, one that saddens me to an extent since it is often limited so needlessly. For example, the concept of love as an emotion chaffs me; I might be angry, but anger fades. I might be sad, but sadness fades. I might laugh, but laughter stops. Love? If I "love" and the love ends, then that was not love at all. Emotions come and go but love remains.
Likewise, the application of the word "love" to physical attraction, or indeed just to relationships between individuals of sexual compatibility, is also distasteful. Two individuals in love might have sex every day, yet two individuals in love might never have a hint of it. The release of oxytocin after carnal love certainly can help foster love, but it isn't required in the least. Furthermore, sexual attraction is a common, cheap thing, while love is rarified. It would not be uncommon for me to see numerous individuals in the course of a week that I find sexually attractive but it would certainly be incorrect to state that I love them, or indeed that the potential for love is even there!
As sexual attractive is primarily a visual thing, we now have two things that I would claim describe love: It is permanent and it is not material. Again, love might be bolstered by change and material considerations, but it is not those things.
Yet even love as a thought or a matter of the brain is slightly dubious. There is no string of logic, no train of thought, that can lead one to love or withdraw one from it, so it doesn't seem to be strictly a matter of the mind (though I would quite agree that persistent thoughts can effect a non-intellectual change in that regard).
But if love is permanent, non-material, and not intellectual in nature, what is it? I would claim, then, that love is fundamentally spiritual. If I call love a little piece of heaven, then that is essentially no different than calling Rhode Island a little piece of the United States; I mean it quite literally, not metaphorically.
But again, I am no dualist. The spiritual isn't devoid of the physical, though it is superior -- the physical can and does augment the spiritual.
Being not limited to the physical, the best love can develop between a man and man as with a man and woman or with a woman and a woman, regardless of sexual orientation, though to be fair, in the modern world few people except those who live together spend the time and energy needed to reach such a love, and so sexual orientation is still a limiting factor.
It has been said that love is blind, which is bunk. Loves senses are keen, its mind sharp; those in love are not blind to the faults of the other, rather they are well aware of them. They do not love them because of those flaws, but neither do they love them in spite of those flaws. Rather, love loves; “in spite of” and “because of” are not phrases to be applied here.
