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

1. I agree with the above definition of romantic love. 2.Romantic love enables two individuals to be committed to one another. 3. This commitment is possible with only one other individual because it involves chemistry, attachment, the time and energy, and the security needed to pursue a life together. 4. In order to properly describe romantic love, it is important to differentiate between love and lust. Lust is a craving of a sexual nature, which usually dissipates once gratified, but can return a few hours or days later. Love is an intense feeling of affection or care towards an individual. Lust is short-term, while love is a lifelong commitment to one person. It is possible to feel feelings of lust and attachment to other people, but this should not be confused for romantic love. 5. Chemistry and attraction produces feelings of lust, however, once those feelings disappear and we still feel deep affectionate for our partner, then it is love. 6. Love is honesty and a commitment that involves you putting your all into a relationship, therefore there is not enough time, nor does one have the energy and ability to love many romantically. 7. Psychologically, "loving" two people at the same time would cause dissonance and therefore extreme pain to an individual thinking about their partner with someone else. This also signals in the brain that something is amiss. 8. Research done on individuals who claim to love multiple partners shows that they created two personas, and treated each partner differently- making sure to separate the two. This experience is not only stressful but takes the pleasure out of any relationships. 9. The more you love a person, the more time and energy you will give them. Romantic love needs to be worked for, it is not readily available, and also not easy to find. 10. Concurrent love is problematic because it is not very stable, research done in Mormon communities shows that no family has successful reached the ideal of "loving everyone equally" for the long term. 11. Therefore, it is not possible to love more than one person romantically. Non-controversial: Premises 1, 2 3 and 7 & 8 because they are things we have agreed upon. Also, they have been studied in the field of psychology where there is much evidence against the possibility of concurrent relationships due to research. Controversial: Premise 4, because one could argue that relationships require both lust and love. However, lust is something we can feel with almost anyone we have chemistry with. It is immediate and fleeting, where love takes not only a place in our hearts but in our lives. Lust is based on the foundation of a physical attraction, which does not last. Love is built on a physical and emotional level, and provides both partners with fulfillment and the opportunity to create a lasting relationship on a stable foundation. Lust focuses on the surface value of a person while love digs deeper into the person. Premise 5- again, the argument that both lust and love are mutual can be made. Although just because you are attached to someone and feel attracted o them does not indicate that you are indeed in love with that person. There is a difference. Premises 6 and 7 may be controversial because they invoke time, which is perceived differently by different people. However, there literally is not enough time to put the proper energy and nurturing needed into a romantic relationship with more than one person. Premise 10 can be argued but it is based on research done on concurrent relationships, which are mostly unsuccessful and very few have lasted. It places a lot of stress and tension on the relationship and forces the individual in question to balance two separate relationships. It becomes more of a task than a loving experience between two individuals, which makes it very difficult to not only maintain but to gain fulfillment from it. Most people have sought the love of a singular partner after failing to create a stable concurrent relationship. Thus supporting the argument that success of romantic concurrent relationships it's not possible because a person can not supply the necessary needs to their partner(s). I would like to point out here that the argument is being romantically in love with multiple people at the same time, meaning at once. Therefore your premise 7 cannot hold, as it uses instances that involve falling in love at different points in life when an individual has loved before. Although this is possible, it does not apply to the current argument and is not relevant. Once someone passes we cannot nurture the relationship as we once had, and it is no longer in the present.