The Nature of Love free essay sample

What does such a statement imply about the nature of love? Write an essay which argues your particular view on the nature of love and the object of that love. Limit your answer to the notion of romantic love and use Robert Ehman as a starting point. Everybody seems to believe that love is a good thing. However, not all agree on what love is. Is love that warm fuzzy feeling a person has when they are with a familiar person? According to the Bible, love is caring in action. Love is not what we feel, but what we do; however the object of love is not defined. (Bible Gateway, 2012) In this discussion I will describe what the nature of love is based on the idea of love as a verb, as something one does and how the object of that love is affected by nature. I believe love is an event that happens to us, that is out of our control and not an action. As Robert Ehman (1989) suggests to experience true love, it is the qualities of a person and not the person themselves that leads you to feel and act upon your love. Not everyone will experience being in love. The idea that nature affects how one defines love shows how in different cultures love has become socialised and what is normal when referring to love. As stated by Harlow, (1958) love responses begin to form extremely early on in the development of an infant between an infant and the mother. This reflects the idea that love is a verb to love being an emotion. Robert Ehman, (1989) argues the exclusivity of love is â€Å"a mere species of either ethical relationships sexual desire or the dialectical struggle to dominate the other. (p. 256) To expand further he suggests it is an event, where the event is the act of ‘doing. ’ To experience true love is about the personal connection between two individuals and how they are emotionally drawn to one another. The ‘dialectical struggle’ refers to the â€Å"truth of opinions† that become important as a person adapts to sharing their personal side with their lover. (Oxford dictionary, 2012) Ehman (1989) continues to state the aim of personal love is to show that powerful emotions of love itself are unique in an individual’s style of life. The feeling of the beloved can be different for different people but only true love exists when the connection is the same. The aim of true love is always to â€Å"share the private and intimate dimensions of both your lives. †(p. 256) The statement â€Å"Harry couldn’t help it, he was in love,† reflects the idea of Ehman’s belief that love is a verb, something we do. It suggests that it is something one does without any control. How does one ‘do love’ can be argued from many points of view. Sigmund Freud (2006) describes the basis of doing love is mostly driven by uncontrollable feelings of the â€Å"sexual attractiveness of the object. (p. 34) The object of Harry’s love is who he loves and an example of Harry ‘doing’ love could be sharing his personal side with who he loves as well as putting the relationship with who he loves above all other relationships in his life. This idea is described by Ehman is called true love. True love is when both lovers share a connection with each other where their personal sides are shared. For example both partners share their love for each other. If Harry loved a girl but she did not love him back from Ehman’s view this is not true love. It is merely Harry confusing his emotions of lust with emotions of love. Ehman, 1989) Love can be viewed as an emotion and according to Stendhal, Tennov and Proust, (1954) emotions of love can be generated by many other emotions and thoughts. For example what could have been done or what might have happened to cause this emotion and event of love. An emotion can be characterized by a number of things a person does or ways the react in situations that are immediately noticeable before any scientific analysis is carried out. (Elster, 1999) Not all emotions are necessary, good or bad. This draws upon the idea of why love itself is portrayed throughout general society as a good thing. Stendhal (1980) states â€Å"love withers away both when one is certain that it is reciprocated and when one is certain it is not. † (p. 23) This statement highlights the idea that love can also be a bad thing as if love ‘withers away’ it is uncontrolled and we can not stop it. If lust is confused as feelings of love in one individual this begins to draw upon the consequences where a lover may be hurt causing emotional pain. For this reason I agree with Ehman that love demands both individuals to experience the same levels of emotional connections to define ‘true love. Harry may drive way his lover through romantic acts of what he believes to show love (kissing etc) which may mean different things to his lover if she is not sharing the connection of true love with him. In relation to Ehman’s view of romantic love Hatfield and Rapson, (1987) also distinguished there are different types of love, known as romantic and affectionate love. Romantic love is passionate and involves strong feelings of longing, desire and excitement towards a special person. (Baumeister amp; Bushman, 2008) The emotional values of romantic love make people want to spend as much time together as possible. Romantic lovers tend to want to touch each other and engage in intimate activities such as sex to show how they do love. ‘Doing love’ from a passionate and romanticised angle could involve thoughts of not being able to control emotional feelings. For example always thinking about a lover is a common way of ‘doing love. ’ (Baumeister amp; Bushman, 2008) Affectionate love is known as companionate love and is less emotional. This is where both lovers have a mutual understanding and caring to make the relationship succeed and is often done when a lover perceives their lover as a soul mate. This kind of love is what makes people want to remain each other’s good companions. For example someone high in companion love is more likely to say â€Å"my wife is my best friend,† (Baumeister amp; Bushman, 2008 p. 306) which leads to the next idea where the notion of love and being in love have different meanings based on the expression of common phrases in society. Love can be viewed as an object that â€Å"arises from universal human emotions,† (Baumeister amp; Bushman, 2008 p. 204) that form naturally between two individuals. Throughout society many people argue that defining love itself is different to defining the state of being in love. According to Baumeister and Bushman (2008) it is possible to love many people but the notion of being ‘in love’ can mean something very different. Anthony Giddens and Simon Griffiths (2006) suggest this as they imply love is an experience and refer to falling in love as â€Å"something someone does without intent. † (p. 204) An individual may want to experience a deeper more meaningful love when they fall in love. Ehman (1989) also suggests this as he believes ‘love is not love’ unless both lovers’ share a personal connection equally. Love could simply be ‘done’ by having a family together and therefore this brings a common thing only lovers can share where a point in both individual sides of their personal sides are equal. This reinforces the belief of love as an event because something has happened and due to the emotion of lust leading to love it is out of ones control. For love to be considered ‘true love’ individuals must share their personal sides (Ehman, 1989) as this create the idea of unity in the relationship. Chaney, (2002) states â€Å"The personal identity of an individual is represented by a narrative unity. † By this Chaney is referring to the idea that in romanticised love, unity in the relationship is created from the deep bond of both lovers creating an emotional connection. (p. 4) The nature of love can be derived from this aspect of experiencing love as the result of an action, for example spending lots of time with someone. When referring to the notion of romantic love Ehman (1989) defines doing love as â€Å"sharing the personal side of the life of a friend. †(p. 61) When the ultimate motive in a relationship is sharing their personal sides of life and the relationship is considered most important â€Å"above all other relationships in an individuals’ life they have moved beyond friendship to genuine personal love. † (Ehman,1987 p. 261) The nature of an individual’s upbringing can also effect how one defines love. As stated by Harlow, (1958) love responses begin to form extremely early on in the development of an infant between an infant and the mother. â€Å"The human infant becomes a self, a being capable of speech and action, only by learning to interact in a human community longing for true love. (Sartre 1989 p. 348) This in an example of the idea that it is natural in every human being want to experience true love ultimately searching for it even though some may never find it. Society has socially constructed the idea of ‘doing love’ as the product of affection and an emotion. (Tennov, 1979) The display of affection from an individual to another has become attached to the societal definition of love throughout today’s culture. Commonly individuals (especially when one is male and the other female) who show affection by holding hands and being close to each other are perceived on first impression to love each other. This idea has been accepted throughout society as normal. It is seen as natural throughout everyday life and showing affection towards another can lead others to automatically associate with love. Cultural change challenges the true definition of love and is evident and very current in New Zealand today. Changing culture significantly challenges Ehman’s view of true love. Because true love is an event, it is true to say the event of getting married can also be a way of ‘doing love. The idea of doing love through marriage in New Zealand limits true love to only heterosexual relationships, as homosexual relationship may not legally be joined by marriage. Recently there is a debate to whether homosexual union is a from of doing love. Is ‘doing love’ by the event of civil union true love? Ehman would argue that it is the qualities of a person and not the person themselves that leads you to feel and act upon your love, therefore it is out of our control who we fa ll in love with, gender aside. Joining in civil union is still an event however there are many ways in which true love is signified through other events. Ehman does not state in his opinion that true love may only be between a man and a women, he merely defines it as sharing the connection of personal sides. Today’s culture is changing with the relaxation of moral controls that we as ordinary people and ordinary lovers have become freer in how we define love by events. (Chaney, 2002) In conclusion it is apparent that love cannot be defined by one definition. The Bible (2012) and Robert Ehman, (1989) both support the idea that love is not what we feel, but what we do. Love is ultimately defined by an event in life where both lovers share an emotional connection of their personal sides of life. The nature of an individual’s upbringing constructs the way we view true love as an emotion that is out of our control. It is an emotion that begins with lust that we cannot force or control. True love is the only kind of ‘real love’ as Ehman supports and is defined when both lovers share their personal sides and value their relationship above all other relationship in life. Not everyone will experience being in love, but love responses affect the nature of love as they begin to form extremely early on in the development of an infant between an infant and the mother. Ultimately the acceptance of what true love is in society can be argued from many angles but for me true love is revelled as the ultimate objective for individuals to fully fulfil their own lives.