Man this is a hard one.
At time of posting, I have yet to experience sex or love so I have absolutly NO point of reference upon which to make my judgement. But in a way, this may be a good thing as it will allow me to think of things on a comparative and logical level (though in retrospect, that may be counterintuitive).
OK, here we go...
Sex first. From what I can tell, the physical sensation of it is the part that makes it appealing. The idea that you would be able to have sex, without engaging in the confusing, complicated, and trying experience of love would indeed seem quite appealing. You would be able to experience that sensation without having to deal with the various forms of bagage inherent in an emotional relationship. You and the person in question would essentially be perpetual "friends with benefits". But there may be a problem with this.
Based on last week's "Extra Credits", I assume that most of you are familier with the Skinner Box concept (YES I know that "Extra Credits" is about video games but the concept can apply here too). As was stated in the video, giving a reward everytime an action is completed isn't the best way to keep someone doing that action. If you get it constantly, it will eventually lose it's appeal. In addition, Sex is what is known a Primary Conditioner (a biological need) and as such, there is a point at which it will loose it's appeal (satiation point).
OK, Love's turn. Love (real love that is) is commonly labled as a Commited Relationship. And with such a relationship, comes some bagage (on both sides) and a pair must be willing and able to deal with said bagage if they wish the relationship to work. This can be difficult and it may take a long time before both parties have managed to deal with everything.
In the context of Skinner's Box, I can't be positive but I think that Love can be classified as a Secondary Re-enforcer, which don't hit a satiation point. In addition, the fact that there are dificulties makes those moments when everything is going well all the more enjoyable. A great many of my friends who are in relationships have made the jump from a purly emotional one, to one that includes physical interaction (sex); and most have said that the introduction of sex to their relationships made them complicated and confused for some time (some even decided to backtrack and return to a no-sex type relationship).
Sigh... Well, there it is. I've used all that I currently know to provide a cross section of both Love and Sex, in what has clearly been a vain attempt to make the desision easyer. I guess there is no...
Hmm... But... Maybe there is a way... *Face Palm* Of course. There is a way for me to use what I've given to expadite my desision.
Alright, I've made my desision.
Given a choice between Loveless-Sex and Sexless-Love, I would have to choose Sexless-Love.
It's hard to explain why, but it has something to do with the fact I'd prefer to experience the range of shifting and changing emotions that come with Love over the simple physical exertion of emotionless sex.
