Multiple Soul Mates?

It is common to believe in soul mates. From what little i've read bout it the belief in them itself is never really questioned(at least not in psychology), its rather the consequences of that said belief that are questioned and examined. For example, Knees research in 1998 compared the quality of relationships of people who believed in soul mates to those who didn't. He basically found that the people who tend to believe in soul mates(romantic destiny) are initially more passionate and happy with their partners, especially while things are going good, but if the relationship encountered problems(which all relationships do) they were more likely to leave and look elsewhere for their true match.(so assuming you've found a soul mate sort of kills(if not at least decreases) the motivation to work on a relationship)
The people who didn't believe in soul mates and focused more on romantic growth(rather than assuming they have found a perfect match/other half/soul mate) were usually less passionate but when encountering problems in their relationships they were more motivated to stay and solve them. Needless to say their relationships tented to last longer and were more satisfying over time.

Other interesting research on this:
(Knee, Patrick, Vietor 2004)Implicit theories of relationships: Moderators of the link between conflict and commitment.
(Finkel, Burnette 2007) Vengefully ever after: Destiny beliefs, state attachment anxiety, and forgiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Harsh.. LOL

Dead or otherwise unavailable.

There is also the factor of timing.

There are times when ten years difference in age matters,

A lot.

Say the difference between Chinese Horoscopes Water Rat and Water Boar.

Ah, but thanks to the ideas of Chinese Horoscopes, Planetary Horoscopes, Years, Elements (the Chinese 5 or more), Ethnicity, Country of residence, Country of birth, religion, personal philosophy; the possibilities are endless.
And not endless in a bad way where only specific binary connections are made, but where theoretically finding 'the one' is harder because of the choice/chance/possibility.
Opposites can also attract and defy status labels.

How are horoscopes relevant to this discussion?

and yes opposites may attract but people who share similar views tend to get along better.

Horoscopes are relevant in that they form a frame or template for compatibility, leading to the idea that certain types go better together. A soul mate can then be considered the epitome of compatability, say not just any old Virgo to the Aries but 'THE' Virgo to the Aries.
Bear in mind that with views, there can be thousands, not just the big topic ones like an afterlife, and not just ones spoken out loud. (Though those can often be said to be internal judgements.)

The template for compatibility thing only makes sense if you believe that there is any truth to horoscopes. The shared belief in horoscopes is much more likely to be something that makes people more compatible...slightly delusional, but compatible nonetheless.

Ooo said:The template for compatibility thing only makes sense if you believe that there is any truth to horoscopes. The shared belief in horoscopes is much more likely to be something that makes people more compatible...slightly delusional, but compatible nonetheless.

Yes... but cannot that be simply be stated about all beliefs and ideas? "Slightly delusional, but compatible". The 'templates' are not always things to be taken as true beyond doubt, but can be a nice indicator, a way to narrow down the field if you want, but otherwise just a thing.
After all a Soul Mate, is not one because of what they represent or what someone else tells you they are, but what they are themselves.

Viddax said:
Yes... but cannot that be simply be stated about all beliefs and ideas? "Slightly delusional, but compatible". The 'templates' are not always things to be taken as true beyond doubt, but can be a nice indicator, a way to narrow down the field if you want, but otherwise just a thing.
After all a Soul Mate, is not one because of what they represent or what someone else tells you they are, but what they are themselves.


a "soul mate" if anything is just a person who fascinates you more than anyone else(or at least interests you half as much as you interest yourself). In reality they are nothing more than just another human being, your perception of them as being your soul mate is what makes them so(at least to you).

however grand it must be to believe in the existence of soul mates, in my opinion the more difficult task is realizing and being content with the fact that you are your own person and as such are responsible for your own happiness. Sure, a compatible life partner may contribute to this but I see no point in calling that person a soul mate. It just seems unnecessary.

also all beliefs are not "Slightly delusional, but compatible" and horoscopes are still useless, whats the term..., hogwash(whatever that means).

Ooo you say about the term 'soul mate' being unecessary but then retain a description of one: "just a person who fascinates you more than anyone else". Which in my book is just picking which words to stand behind, but it is also nitpicking on my part.

I am highly doubtful that any individual is truly responsible for their own happiness in modern western society. The reason being that there are many priorities: job, home, relationships, friends, money, which they do not have total power over. Also, there is the fact of family: you cannot choose who they are. (Even an orphan who never knew them still had a family at one time.)

You can call horoscopes hogwash 'nonsense', fine, no problem. But for others it could serve as an interesting or relevant tool.

Anyway a person is never truly 'just' anything. Reality even with the best eyes and the best machines cannot observe everything. Never mind the human capacity for fantasy, love is blind some say. Might be an irony if platonic love is blind...

Hm ... met my husband 40 years ago (sweet sixteen). We're still together and do still have fun and enrich each other. Does that fall into the 'soulmate' category? I think it does.
And there's my best friend Sabine who always knows in advance when I'll try to call her and vice versa :-). When she hurts, I do, too and when I'm sad she never fails to cheer me up. She's my soulmate, too. Perhaps we're not supposed to have many of them? I don't know, just feel they exist.

Viddax said:Ooo you say about the term 'soul mate' being unecessary but then retain a description of one: "just a person who fascinates you more than anyone else". Which in my book is just picking which words to stand behind, but it is also nitpicking on my part.

I am highly doubtful that any individual is truly responsible for their own happiness in modern western society. The reason being that there are many priorities: job, home, relationships, friends, money, which they do not have total power over. Also, there is the fact of family: you cannot choose who they are. (Even an orphan who never knew them still had a family at one time.)

You can call horoscopes hogwash 'nonsense', fine, no problem. But for others it could serve as an interesting or relevant tool.

Anyway a person is never truly 'just' anything. Reality even with the best eyes and the best machines cannot observe everything. Never mind the human capacity for fantasy, love is blind some say. Might be an irony if platonic love is blind...

Fine, feel free to disregard my unnecessary description of an even more unnecessary concept.

and if you believe that to achieve happiness a person must have total power over their priorities, or is less responsible for not having achieved it due to their circumstances then who am I to dispute that. We obviously share different views on what happiness is and how people can achieve it.

(Horoscopes: an uninteresting and irrelevant tool used to inaccurately narrow down some sort of field by use of overgeneralized information.)

(by 'information' I of course mean misconceptions.)

Ooo said:(by 'information' I of course mean misconceptions.)

Yes... but reminds me of a bit from the Big Bang Theory tv show.
"Sheldon: But evolution is not opinion, it's a fact.
Sheldon's mom: And that is your opinion."

I must forgive it seems for not keeping up with my train of thought, or scold you for not being clearer. Either way a lot seems to be lost in translation of the same langauge.

And on that note, one aspect of a soul mate could be something along the lines of being 'tuned in' or 'understanding' each other. By that I mean the case where you or they say something or say a vague description or reference, to which you or they instantly understand. Though the words used do not necessarily match what they meant to convey.
An example would run along the lines of 'that beardy bloke from that film' and a specific actor is meant; who not necessarily is seen with a beard in their movies, but is instantly (or quickly) remembered.

Viddax said:
I must forgive it seems for not keeping up with my train of thought, or scold you for not being clearer. Either way a lot seems to be lost in translation of the same langauge.

A quote about islands and seas of misunderstanding by Kipling would fit well here, as would Kafka's “All language is but a poor translation”

Being 'tuned in' or having some sort of superficial understanding of another person(because no one can fully understand anyone) doesn't indicate anything more than a slight familiarity with either the person you think you understand or whatever the subject of the understanding is(like beardy blokes/movies)...much less the existence of an intrinsic connection with another being. If it did, I'm pretty sure that at least 50% of all mothers would be considered their children's soul mates.


If the idea of soul mates isn't just another unconventional human construct then why isn't it more apparent in nature? For example in other species.(assuming that souls exist in all animals, not just humans)