My apologies if this has come up before.
Is there such a person as a soulmate?
I’m not sure. I thought my first husband, father of my kids, was. We couldn’t have been closer, more open, more passionate. Yet it fell apart within five years.
I don’t ever want to love that hard again, it hurts too much. If that means I have no soulmate, so be it.
I don’t know if humans are meant to always have just one love in a lifetime, or just one that’s ‘perfect’. Just my opinion, of course.
I had two relationships in my life that I easily could call soulmate... but since they fell apart, I believe ANY relationship has that same possibility. Even if another soulmate exists that doesn’t automatically mean the relationship will last. Never take a good one for granted!!
Alvin Toffler (In his book, Future Shock) pointed out that the growing population has a reverse affect on our finding and staying with a "soulmate"; the more crowded it gets, the harder it becomes to find, and stay with, that "ideal" partner.
"When neighbors are not physically "close by" you seek them out, you make friends. As our neighborhood has grown, your desire to "know your neighbor" diminishes...."
"We live longer, go through more changes faster than ever. Thus it's harder to stay and continue on a parallel development path with the "soulmate" today than it was decades, and centuries ago".
John B. Calhoun did the science on this, in his landmark study "Population Density and Social pathology"...in '62.
Basically he said, the more crowded it gets, the crazier we get, the more sexually deviant/asexual we become, the more child neglect/abuse evolves, the more we hoard, the greedier we become.
I can't help but think the harder you look for something like this the more disappointment with ensue. Perhaps that's too cynical of an answer, and I think the concept is romantic but not necessarily realistic without knowing that person for a while.
That's like asking me if I can find someone in god. I don't believe in a soul, nor a soul mate. However, it appears that your supplied Webster's definition is a good description of a harmonious relationship. I can get behind that. But i don't like the "soul mate" term as it implies other fallacies.
It depends on what you mean.
I think some couples are so well connected...."in love"... and everything, that I see no problem with the term soul mate.
What I do have a problem with is the idea that there is only one possible match for everyone that would meet this criteria.
While it's not a scientific study , seems to me , as we've become less dependent , we've become less willing to force ourselves , to stay with someone whom we've learned , is not someone we would choose to stay with . The more we're around someone , the more we learn about who they truly are , and not the face they put on to , "win," our acceptance . But yes , I do believe that there are truly those who , always make us feel great when we are in their presence . And if it works for both of them , then I would consider them soul mates .
I don't think so. I think there are handfuls of people one may be perfectly compatible with and their values perfectly alligned, but that does not mean they are "the one". That just means you have a very good compatibility with this person, in all respects intellectually, emotionally, sexually, physically, psychologically (ie temperaments, conflict resolution styles), etc.
My sister has been married 36 years this week. He's perfect for her, he'd drive me mad within days. I thought I had met one once, but he reneged and broke promises; so that wasn't to be. I'd like to meet someone strong enough to be my soulmate, but I'm not sure he exists.