What is love?
Baby don’t hurt me...don’t hurt me...no more…
Sorry. I had to.
Seriously, though--for a word that is arguably the most important word in the English language, we have so many different views on the word.
At the risk of being pedantic (though I should probably just embrace my inner pedant) I like the ways the ancient Greeks looked at the word. They had several terms for the various kinds of love. “Eros” was one such word, from where we get the word “erotic.” But it didn’t mean just sexual love--it meant passionate love, and even Plato defined it to mean “deep love for the beauty of another person,” even and especially inner beauty. Hence “Platonic” love in the sense of “love that isn’t predicated on physical attraction. Then there was “philia,” which meant a kind of love and loyalty between friends, as well as love towards an activity. It came gradually to mean “love” in its most general sense, as in the suffix -philia or -phile that we see in so many words, not all of them “bad.” Bibliophile, for example, is a person who loves books. There was also “storge,” which was love in the sense of empathy, like love parents might have for their children, or perhaps love of country or of a tribe. Lastly, there was “agape,” which was a sort of godly love, a sort of “pure” love one might have for one’s spouse or for God.
So what does any of this have to do with “love” in the modern sense?
Well, let’s see. I am quite attracted in a physical sense to my wife. I don’t wish this to become naughty, so suffice to say I have difficulty maintaining a rational thought process when I see her. I find that whatever I was thinking about prior to looking at her just sort of fades away and different feelings take their place. More to the point, though, is how I feel about her “inner beauty.” Specifically, her deep and fierce passion in defense of child welfare. She is not only a highly competent teacher, fighting for her students in every facet of their education, she is equally fierce in her defense and advocacy of our children. So, let’s just say eros is very much alive.
I also consider her my dearest, closest, and most long-standing friend. I have never subscribed to the theory that one’s spouse and one’s “best” friend can or should be different people. To me, I just don’t know how else I could have lived my life without Sue walking next to me for about 35 years now. So, philia is between us.
Storge doesn’t quite apply here--she’s not my offspring, nor does she represent a nation or tribe. I suppose I could say I love her in the sense that she is the mother of my children, but I don’t think that is quite what the word means.
On the agape level, I am not religious. I don’t believe in destiny, or fate, or any plan for the cosmos. I don’t believe that every person has a “soulmate” or a “true love.” Things just happen, and we humans make them happen or not. But at the same time I firmly and solidly believe that, I also believe that Sue and I were destined to be with each other and that we are one another’s soul mates. Yes, I know--contradictory. But to quote Walt Whitman, “Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes.” Or to quote Francois de La Rochefoucauld, “when we are in love, we often doubt what we most believe.” So there is no divine being, and he or she brought Sue and I together to fulfil the plan for us that doesn’t exist.
I love my wife, my friend, and my partner Sue. The ancient Greeks came closest to summarizing my feelings for her, but even they fell short. I guess the testament of 35 years and counting is the closest definition for the word.
Baby don’t hurt me...don’t hurt me...no more…
Sorry. I had to.
Seriously, though--for a word that is arguably the most important word in the English language, we have so many different views on the word.
At the risk of being pedantic (though I should probably just embrace my inner pedant) I like the ways the ancient Greeks looked at the word. They had several terms for the various kinds of love. “Eros” was one such word, from where we get the word “erotic.” But it didn’t mean just sexual love--it meant passionate love, and even Plato defined it to mean “deep love for the beauty of another person,” even and especially inner beauty. Hence “Platonic” love in the sense of “love that isn’t predicated on physical attraction. Then there was “philia,” which meant a kind of love and loyalty between friends, as well as love towards an activity. It came gradually to mean “love” in its most general sense, as in the suffix -philia or -phile that we see in so many words, not all of them “bad.” Bibliophile, for example, is a person who loves books. There was also “storge,” which was love in the sense of empathy, like love parents might have for their children, or perhaps love of country or of a tribe. Lastly, there was “agape,” which was a sort of godly love, a sort of “pure” love one might have for one’s spouse or for God.
So what does any of this have to do with “love” in the modern sense?
Well, let’s see. I am quite attracted in a physical sense to my wife. I don’t wish this to become naughty, so suffice to say I have difficulty maintaining a rational thought process when I see her. I find that whatever I was thinking about prior to looking at her just sort of fades away and different feelings take their place. More to the point, though, is how I feel about her “inner beauty.” Specifically, her deep and fierce passion in defense of child welfare. She is not only a highly competent teacher, fighting for her students in every facet of their education, she is equally fierce in her defense and advocacy of our children. So, let’s just say eros is very much alive.
I also consider her my dearest, closest, and most long-standing friend. I have never subscribed to the theory that one’s spouse and one’s “best” friend can or should be different people. To me, I just don’t know how else I could have lived my life without Sue walking next to me for about 35 years now. So, philia is between us.
Storge doesn’t quite apply here--she’s not my offspring, nor does she represent a nation or tribe. I suppose I could say I love her in the sense that she is the mother of my children, but I don’t think that is quite what the word means.
On the agape level, I am not religious. I don’t believe in destiny, or fate, or any plan for the cosmos. I don’t believe that every person has a “soulmate” or a “true love.” Things just happen, and we humans make them happen or not. But at the same time I firmly and solidly believe that, I also believe that Sue and I were destined to be with each other and that we are one another’s soul mates. Yes, I know--contradictory. But to quote Walt Whitman, “Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes.” Or to quote Francois de La Rochefoucauld, “when we are in love, we often doubt what we most believe.” So there is no divine being, and he or she brought Sue and I together to fulfil the plan for us that doesn’t exist.
I love my wife, my friend, and my partner Sue. The ancient Greeks came closest to summarizing my feelings for her, but even they fell short. I guess the testament of 35 years and counting is the closest definition for the word.
RSS Feed