PLEASE HELP Marmee teaches another lesson of sacrifice and selflessness. What is necessary to truly love others? Do people have a “claim” on each other (parents over grown children, siblings over each other, romantic partners over each other, etc.)? Your response should be 50-100 words long.

To Love Someone, Do You Really Need to Love Yourself First?

Conventional wisdom about love and relationships can be more myth than reality.

It’s become commonplace to proclaim that truly loving another depends on first loving yourself. But just how warranted is this maxim? Is it supported by science or academic research? Or is it little more than folk wisdom—or maybe, pseudo-wisdom? I’ve sought to track down any authoritative studies on this so-intriguing topic . . . and come up with nothing.

I could be wrong here, but it’s always felt to me like one of those aphorisms that’s accepted as valid primarily because it sounds valid. And the truism does exude a tone of wise, loving self-compassion. It seems completely reasonable that we can’t really know love until we experience it from within—for ourselves. But might this all somehow be begging the question?

Given my professional role as a psychologist for the past 30+ years, I’ve come, empirically, to a rather different conclusion about self-love. To me, it’s extremely unlikely that without the ability to love oneself a person can ever be happy. That is, what’s necessary and sufficient—not for loving another but for a state of inner contentment and well-being—is healthy self-love and acceptance. For it only makes sense that if you’re not on very good terms with yourself, you’re not going to be happy with life generally.

Explanation:

If this helps please mark me as brainliest and be my friend.

THANK YOU!

- "a nonrestrictive clause functions as a modifier to a noun (that is an object, person or concept). these clauses can be described by the following three options: it is set off by comas, it contains a subject and a verbs and it adds nonessential information to the sentence.

for example, in "here is bill gates, who confounded microsoft software company" we can identify "who confounded microsoft software company" as a nonrestrictive clause modifying the noun bill gates. this clause can be describes as a nonrestrictive clause because it is separated by a comma, it adds nonessential information to identify who bill gates is and it must contain both a subject (who) and a verb (confounded)."

"the sandy walls seemed to collapse in on themselves"

and

"the bloodshot waters seemed to have no bottom"