Is it possible to romantically love more than one person at once

Although I see your argument, I said it enables people to be committed to one another. Meaning, that being romantically in love with someone is conducive to a committed relationship. I never said commitment was a requirement. Premise (3) I concede on chemistry, because I do agree with your point that you can have chemistry with multiple people. However, chemistry is different in different circumstances. I have chemistry with my closest friends, because we get along and we compliment each other very well. I have chemistry with my family members because we all get along. Chemistry, by definition, is not what love is. Although I am conceded on behalf of your argument, I do argue further that it doesn"t necessarily mean chemistry between two people who love each other romantically. Also, back to my argument of it isn"t actually possible to have multiple long term relationships because of the amount of energy it takes. its physically and emotionally draining. You compare it to school, yes, but those things are all different. As a student, having many different responsibilities is both challenging and rewarding, as it creates balance. Exerting the same energy and time on different people would create an imbalance. As for the wife and children example, it further proves that chemistry is not confined to loving, as the chemistry within the family proves to create a healthy environment between all members. This argument is not about platonic love, it is about romantic love. Your argument (7) that once someone passes it is possible to fall in love again is a a good argument. However, the debate is actually about being romantically in love with two people simultaneously, meaning at the same time. This does not concern losing a loved one or breaking up with them- in this case there is no end to the relationship. By this alone, I stand by my argument that loving more than one person simultaneously is not emotionally or physically possible. Your argument about the death scenario cannot stand because although it may be the case sometimes, in this argument it is not relevant. We are arguing for whether is possible for these relationships to be concurrent. I am having trouble with understanding how a deceased love one can mean that you're romantically in love with multiple people. Once someone passes, we can still love them, but, like you mentioned, it is not able to be nurtured. Romantic love needs to constantly be nurtured and tended to. You may still have love and care for the deceased person but that does not mean you"re romantically in love with them anymore. Many people have remarried after losing a loved one, and they have created a new life with this person, holding the other person in their hearts but also understanding that moving on is part of healing. I don"t agree with it still being romantic love, because you cannot nurture this relationship. Also, when someone passes, you are no longer "loving them", because they are not on this earth, so you would have "loved them". It is past tense and no longer currently something you are able to act upon. Hence, arguing that you can love someone romantically who has passed just as much as you love someone you are now with and spending all of your time and energy on, is not substantial. In order to let a new relationship form, the old wound ha to heal through the process of letting go, if we were arguing for the case of death. We can argue that these things are subjective, according to your premise (5), which they are in some cases. If that's the case, maybe given a little of themselves is jut enough, because its subjective. We can"t say either way if it is or isn"t enough. However, I am confused by what you're saying here and am under the impression that you are almost arguing my point for me. Someone who is very busy and still makes time for their loved one- is able to make what little extra time they have available. Thus, according to your statement, they would have literally no other time to dedicate to someone else, without sacrificing time with their other partner. For a relationship to flourish, a couple needs to find common ground. A stressful relationship causes tension, and ties to break. Which very well can lead to falling out of love with that person. I understand your point of maybe not losing the feeling of romantic love, however, I state that loving two people causes someone to create two personas. This is because they have to be in love with two different people, and keep those lives separate. I disagree with thisstatement regarding my premise (5), since I have cleared up and corrected my definition of chemistry. However, romantic love requires so much of oneself, almost like sacrificing half of you to become one whole with another person, that it would not be possible to romantically love more than one person at a time. You have to dedicate yourself to someone, and be willing to give them more than you would give anyone else in order to have a fulfilling romantic relationships. It is not possible to supply this love and fulfillment to multiple people, as it is too emotionally taxing on an individual. For someone to be able to pursue a romantic and loving relationship, they need to be able to put forth the time, effort and have emotional stability. Being in concurrent relationships would prove to be very unstable, causing the relationship to be short lived. You cannot put forth the same effort for two separate people, there would not be enough time. Unless you were putting in no effort at all, which would then suggest that you may not love either individual, as you are not willing to put forth what it takes to sustain the relationship at whatever cost.