Disputatio:Amor
Usor ignotus scripsit:[fontem recensere]
i love you
(ita Latine "amo")
cur verbae primae, quamquam nomen non sunt, semper capital in prima portant? non decourm est hic rem!
This is a strange article[fontem recensere]
What's that about Hitler? and where are the sources? The weirdness begins at the beginning: "Amor (-is, m.) affectus est animi, quo ad desiderium hominis alterius homo commovetur." Compare that with how en:Love begins: "Love is any of a number of emotions and experiences related to a sense of strong affection." The Latin is narrow, and derives love from lust; the English is wide, and reads more like a psychologically informed statement. Our whole article is suspect, but we don't have a code for that, except "delenda," do we? or does "ScDub" suffice? IacobusAmor 03:45, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
- Delenda is a bit too severe but, no doubt, the article has to rewritten from the beginning. I think ScDB works for now...The english sentence you cite isn't perfect either because it's circular. For how is strong affection in this context different from love?--71.87.208.246 04:18, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe "love" is too slippery a concept to have universal meaning, and its definition depends on the philosophical or psychological theories of reality that form the cultural matrix in which it's embedded. It would help if our author would supply sources for the statements about Hitler, Stalin, and so on. In fact, the article cites no fontes whatsoever. IacobusAmor 13:31, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
- I think we ought to invent a formula or two about "pagina fontium egens" saying perhaps "haec pagina fontes omnino caret. Ambo te, has adde." or "haec pagina vel paginae sectio fontibus caret. Fontes adde ut lectores possunt sententias hic datas comperiri"--Rafaelgarcia 14:05, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
- I think a lot of this is derived from writings on moral theology - Summa Thologica by Noldin & Schmitt perhaps? 82.36.94.228 15:45, 18 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
- I think we ought to invent a formula or two about "pagina fontium egens" saying perhaps "haec pagina fontes omnino caret. Ambo te, has adde." or "haec pagina vel paginae sectio fontibus caret. Fontes adde ut lectores possunt sententias hic datas comperiri"--Rafaelgarcia 14:05, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe "love" is too slippery a concept to have universal meaning, and its definition depends on the philosophical or psychological theories of reality that form the cultural matrix in which it's embedded. It would help if our author would supply sources for the statements about Hitler, Stalin, and so on. In fact, the article cites no fontes whatsoever. IacobusAmor 13:31, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
Amicitas[fontem recensere]
The word "amicitas" appears a couple of times in the article. While it's a late vulgar form from which the French, Spanish, Catalan and Portuguese derived, it's not in classical texts AFAIK (it doesn't appear in Lewis&Short). I'm changing the forms. If 'amicitas' is correct please explain your sources. Loqu 06:18, 30 Octobris 2010 (UTC)