Essay On Love
I've come to a rather novel but nevertheless important realisation about something generally considered extremely important, that is the topic of love and in particular that subset known as romantic love or true love (however misconceived). Avid readers of FF are no doubt aware that the good doctor has been generally suspicious of the whole romantic love concept or movement (yes it is a movement that feeds the wedding, chocolate, greeting card and trashy novel industries).
The reasons for Dr K's scepticism are founded in science, observation, a little experience and philosophy of late. On an appreciation of the insights found from these sources he concludes that romantic love is neither rational nor is it really love in its true or best form. In reality it is a biochemical state induced by biological drives of the human animal designed to get the male and female of the species together for you know what. These imperatives do not necessarily conform nor are they congruent with motivations of love or the basis of love in relationships between humans. It is not an exercise of an informed or rational decision. This is probably the underlying reason for a great deal of broken relationships and unhappiness amongst people.
To recapitulate earlier posts on the science of love in a nutshell: in the state of romantic love, the participants (or less kindly, the victims), are subject to an extremely potent cocktail of neurotransmitters, phenylethylamine, dopamine etc which produce the powerful feelings of attachment, attraction, euphoria etc. So basically science tells us that when people are "in love" they basically lose their minds so to speak in a similar way to people on cocaine. But let's take a step back to the beginnings of this state. What causes attraction? What brings two people together in the first place (apart from a chance meeting in a supermarket or a cafe in Marrakesh or a carriage on the Orient Express)?
Why do two people like or love each other?
On the basis of self reporting we would get a range of answers to that question. Most of which would have some element of reasoning or good sense to it. Like the two people have common interests, they like each other's sense of humour, their personalities and outlook are compatible, or she liked his nose, he liked her hands. Well you probably won't get anybody to admit the last two (because it sounds too superficial), but it may be that they are the more telling factors, in so much as they speak of the unconscious biological forces at work, which are bringing the two people together.
Although the frequently reported personality/character/lifestyle factors make a lot of sense and probably do help in maintaining good relationships they in themselves are not enough. It would seem that many if not all of these factors could be found in one's friends and the platonic relations between friends. What is the difference for romantic relationships? It's sex. Even in the absence of lust. By that I mean, even if the attachment or attraction is not primarily of a sexual nature, what is happening is that the biological programming of the persons is nevertheless trying to steer them into such conditions for sex. This is perhaps what the 19th century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer described as, Wille Zum Leben - the 'Will to Live', the unconscious drive to stay alive and reproduce.
This drive or will to live being based on such raw biological goals therefore does not operate on the rational level. It does not necessarily factor into account those qualities which make for a good, sustainable relationship between two people. It instead focuses on socially superficial but biologically significant factors such as appearance which on evolutionary grounds provide indicators to health and fertility. Basically this is why guys are attracted to supermodels (hmm probably not catwalk models because they are too skinny) and girls are attracted to rugby players (they probably most resemble the pre-historic alpha male).
If romantic love is a biological game is it really love? The emotional response to this question is probably - of course it is! But why? It's because it feels like love. But feeling and reality do not necessarily meet. As mentioned earlier, in the state of romantic love, the brains of the afflicted persons are bombarded with so many feel-good chemicals that it's almost impossible to think otherwise. In this heady state, the 'loved' person is never too far from one's thoughts, and their mere presence can make one feel suprisingly good. This powerful state of addiction is nevertheless no more than that. A great feeling. Can this be love? One loves because of how one feels. But why does one feel? How long will one feel the same way? What happens when we no longer feel the same way? What if he or she feels different? You see not only how superficial but how tenuous and capricious these foundations are?
The biological factors of attraction that bring people together in the state of romantic love do not necessarily keep them together. This is as we have learnt because the factors of attraction being biologically based ignore those personality/character/lifestyle compatibility factors which help make good relationships. So after the initial heady days of attraction pass, and two people settle down, perhaps have kids, the 'spark' dies. Biology has triumphed in so much as the couple have had children, so it doesn't really give a shit whether the people are happy or not. Meanwhile the husband and wife start having to deal with the realities of work, the enormous drain on energy, time and money that children pose. The chemical highs of romantic love have long since faded into at best a comfortable but boring routine of familiarity and at worst a jaded relationship of mutual indifference or barely concealed contempt. These outcomes are apparently not uncommon (statistically tends to kick in after about 4-7 years) and would perhaps go towards explaining the current divorce rates of 40-50%.
What then is love? Dr. K would say in its purest form, that it's caring, a deep valuing of a fellow human being or human beings. It's something that's far more generous and not a selfish or possessive thing in the way that romantic love is or can be. We don't love just because the other person makes us feel good. Here at FF we're not too big on religious themes but this time I think I we can borrow a line from the so called good book (1 Corinthians 13:4-8):
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.
The reasons for Dr K's scepticism are founded in science, observation, a little experience and philosophy of late. On an appreciation of the insights found from these sources he concludes that romantic love is neither rational nor is it really love in its true or best form. In reality it is a biochemical state induced by biological drives of the human animal designed to get the male and female of the species together for you know what. These imperatives do not necessarily conform nor are they congruent with motivations of love or the basis of love in relationships between humans. It is not an exercise of an informed or rational decision. This is probably the underlying reason for a great deal of broken relationships and unhappiness amongst people.
To recapitulate earlier posts on the science of love in a nutshell: in the state of romantic love, the participants (or less kindly, the victims), are subject to an extremely potent cocktail of neurotransmitters, phenylethylamine, dopamine etc which produce the powerful feelings of attachment, attraction, euphoria etc. So basically science tells us that when people are "in love" they basically lose their minds so to speak in a similar way to people on cocaine. But let's take a step back to the beginnings of this state. What causes attraction? What brings two people together in the first place (apart from a chance meeting in a supermarket or a cafe in Marrakesh or a carriage on the Orient Express)?
Why do two people like or love each other?
On the basis of self reporting we would get a range of answers to that question. Most of which would have some element of reasoning or good sense to it. Like the two people have common interests, they like each other's sense of humour, their personalities and outlook are compatible, or she liked his nose, he liked her hands. Well you probably won't get anybody to admit the last two (because it sounds too superficial), but it may be that they are the more telling factors, in so much as they speak of the unconscious biological forces at work, which are bringing the two people together.
Although the frequently reported personality/character/lifestyle factors make a lot of sense and probably do help in maintaining good relationships they in themselves are not enough. It would seem that many if not all of these factors could be found in one's friends and the platonic relations between friends. What is the difference for romantic relationships? It's sex. Even in the absence of lust. By that I mean, even if the attachment or attraction is not primarily of a sexual nature, what is happening is that the biological programming of the persons is nevertheless trying to steer them into such conditions for sex. This is perhaps what the 19th century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer described as, Wille Zum Leben - the 'Will to Live', the unconscious drive to stay alive and reproduce.
This drive or will to live being based on such raw biological goals therefore does not operate on the rational level. It does not necessarily factor into account those qualities which make for a good, sustainable relationship between two people. It instead focuses on socially superficial but biologically significant factors such as appearance which on evolutionary grounds provide indicators to health and fertility. Basically this is why guys are attracted to supermodels (hmm probably not catwalk models because they are too skinny) and girls are attracted to rugby players (they probably most resemble the pre-historic alpha male).
If romantic love is a biological game is it really love? The emotional response to this question is probably - of course it is! But why? It's because it feels like love. But feeling and reality do not necessarily meet. As mentioned earlier, in the state of romantic love, the brains of the afflicted persons are bombarded with so many feel-good chemicals that it's almost impossible to think otherwise. In this heady state, the 'loved' person is never too far from one's thoughts, and their mere presence can make one feel suprisingly good. This powerful state of addiction is nevertheless no more than that. A great feeling. Can this be love? One loves because of how one feels. But why does one feel? How long will one feel the same way? What happens when we no longer feel the same way? What if he or she feels different? You see not only how superficial but how tenuous and capricious these foundations are?
The biological factors of attraction that bring people together in the state of romantic love do not necessarily keep them together. This is as we have learnt because the factors of attraction being biologically based ignore those personality/character/lifestyle compatibility factors which help make good relationships. So after the initial heady days of attraction pass, and two people settle down, perhaps have kids, the 'spark' dies. Biology has triumphed in so much as the couple have had children, so it doesn't really give a shit whether the people are happy or not. Meanwhile the husband and wife start having to deal with the realities of work, the enormous drain on energy, time and money that children pose. The chemical highs of romantic love have long since faded into at best a comfortable but boring routine of familiarity and at worst a jaded relationship of mutual indifference or barely concealed contempt. These outcomes are apparently not uncommon (statistically tends to kick in after about 4-7 years) and would perhaps go towards explaining the current divorce rates of 40-50%.
What then is love? Dr. K would say in its purest form, that it's caring, a deep valuing of a fellow human being or human beings. It's something that's far more generous and not a selfish or possessive thing in the way that romantic love is or can be. We don't love just because the other person makes us feel good. Here at FF we're not too big on religious themes but this time I think I we can borrow a line from the so called good book (1 Corinthians 13:4-8):
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.
posted by Dr. Kananga at 1:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home