On Love

"On Love"

January 24 - February 7, 2014

   

    The human condition is one of constants. Throughout the whole of human history, humanity has sought to record, to preserve, to critique, and to commentate on its condition, despite the invariability of its core nature and aspects. Upon leaves of ancient parchment as well as inscribed upon the mightiest monoliths, humanity tells its story time and time again – a story of birth, of death, of reason, of insanity, of peace, of strife, of order, of chaos, of hope, of hopelessness, of love, and of hate – that has repeated and reiterated in various developed and diminished guises an unknown multitude of times over the course of eons, only to remain unfinished, as the human condition, along with the face of humanity itself, remains in a state of constant evolution. Of the numerous plot elements featured in the composition of the human story, love has been, and remains, one of the most, if not the most, ardent of them all. There stand many cogent arguments to be proposed in the assertion that love is the single force that inspires the continued existence of humanity as it is, or should be, the impetus for acts of procreation, as well as humans’ fostering of their young in the hopes that their offspring will continue the human legacy at some future juncture. This postulate of love is rather objective and utilitarian - if not coldly stark - and is certainly quite incomplete in its examination of love as a driving force of humanity; love is far greater a concept than any strictly utilitarian explanation thereof could ever sufficiently expound – love is deeply personal, multifaceted, extremely satisfying, and extremely taxing for all those who find themselves consigned to its timeless tugging at reason and emotion, at mind and body, and at heart and soul. Herein, the personal experience of love shall grace center stage.

   

    To assign a particular single definition to the concept of love is an impossible task – even in language, love exhibits a dual nature as both noun and verb – but love is manifest via a plethora of circumstances and situations. Herein, an attempt to clarify further the denotation of the concept of love shall be undertaken. As has been established prior, the utilitarian and obvious result of acts of amorousness between two individuals, heterosexual individuals for the sake of present inquiry, is procreation and the continuation of the human species. For the benefit of clarity hereafter, this type of emotionally-inspired behavior of which procreation, or procreative activity, is thereby resultant, shall be referred to as amorousness, implying that the emotions experienced by each of the parties of the relationship therein implicated are characterized largely, but not by any means principally, by physical and sexual attraction. This notion of amorousness is what shall be hereafter characterized as the first manifestation of love. The second manifestation of love which shall be examined is the platonic and asexual love which exists between those individuals implicated within a bond of friendship. The final manifestation of love to be investigated concerns families and familiar relationships, particularly those relationships extant between parents and children, as well as between siblings. Via exploration and examination of these three manifestations of love, it is the principle endeavor of this inquiry to shed light upon the particular nature of love, as well as to, ultimately, provide clearer denotation thereof.

   

    Amorousness, as previously established, is love resultant in, among other permutations, procreation. In modern society, amorousness is typically manifested by a multitude of social rituals and institutions, the most obvious and prevalent of which being marriage or some other equal, socially established, and widely – if not universally-recognized - union. It is not of particular interest to this inquiry the precise origins, architecture, or ramifications of the social structures and institutions of amorousness, but, rather, are the personal human elements thereof: behavioral and emotional responses.

   

      In contemporary Western society, there are several extant behaviors manifested by and associated with amorous individuals and the dynamic thereof pertinent. Notwithstanding several others, those behaviors most commonly ascribed to people who are, as colloquially described, in love, are behaviors such as kissing, embracing, handholding, and, in the overwhelming majority of cases – all cases for the sake of present inquiry – sexual behaviors including intercourse. Notwithstanding the notable exception, in nearly all situations, of sexual behavior, these acts may be, and often are, performed in both public and private, and are even seen as symbolic for they are often performed as part of the ritual associated with the establishment of socially-viable unions between amorous individuals, such as weddings. Such behaviors are accepted and are, to an extremely large extent, expected of those united in amorousness – but behavior is only the physical manifestation of the inner mechanisms of the human psyche by which it is inspired: emotion.

   

      Emotion is perhaps the source of greatest conflict within the human spirit – it may both assist as well as undermine the purest of rational exploits and the most carefully-choreographed strategies, but, as with rationality, emotion and emotive response are fundamentally-important to the existence of a fully shaped human being. The experience of love, rather than the behaviors thereof indicative, is purely emotional – that is to say inherently irrational, or, at very least, far removed from the realm of rational objectivity – and it is this fundamental lack of rationality, this lack of objective justification, which creates such havoc for anyone who decides to take up the challenge to survey emotion in any sort of logical manner. An informal and cursory examination of the very existence of human emotion, however, yields an interesting product: human emotion both serves to inspire, as stated before, as well as to guide human behavior, as virtually any decision as to whether or not to take a particular course of action is thereby influenced. It is, therefore, within this postulation – the postulation that ascribes emotion as the inspirer of action – that the symbiotic dynamic between emotive response, rationality, and behavior is realized – that neither could properly exist without the other, for the essence of a human being, and of humanity itself, as referenced earlier via citation of the striking frequency of examination of such themes within the written record throughout the centuries, is fundamentally incomplete without the existence of and, at times, concession to emotion.

Thus, the elements associated with and indicative of love are established - but what of love itself? The survey of the other manifestations of love hitherto established, the emotions associated with friendly and familiar relationships, endeavors to expound hereupon.

   

      As with amorousness, the emotive manifestations of those implicated within a coalition of friendship arise spontaneously and by result of happenstance when it is so aligned that the paths of two individuals come to cross. For reasons of no importance of the present discussion, however, these individuals do not become interlocked amidst the throws of amorousness, but, rather, they forge camaraderie by virtue of their commonalities as well as differences, which, in many cases, come to be mutually beneficial in many aspects of each individual’s life, private, public, and otherwise. In terms of the behavior of friends, many friends spend considerable time conversing with one another, as well as engaging in other pertinent activities of merriment. Friends often share in each other’s joys, pains, successes, failures, and passions, and often learn from each other with regard to each of these aspects of the other’s life experience as well as personality. Inasmuch of these aspects, the relationship between friends is highly-resembling of one of amorousness, but notable exception is to be made of the fact that, in the vast majority of circumstances, there is inherent lack of a physical or sexual relationship within the dynamics of friendship. Although it is quite common for friends to discuss such matters, it is typically mutually-understood that such circumstances shall not come to pass within the particular dynamic of the friendship-implicated individuals. Friendship is near-exclusively reserved for comradeship.

   

      Familial love, however, is fundamentally differentiated from both amorousness and friendship by virtue of happenstance. Unlike the other two manifestations of love hitherto examined, familiar association is not one made by choice on the part of the parties therein implicated; it is, rather, by force of fate that such actors arrive within such association. It is within this reality, however, that many impediments within the familiar dynamic are realized; because love, as hitherto established, is an emotion, it is altogether possible and probably, and in many cases, evident, that individuals familiarly-associated do not experience love for the others within their family – the rational component of human behavior may or may not override the emotional and, thereby, detriments to the familial dynamics may be resultant. In situations wherein the perchance association within familial bonds is accompanied by mutual experience of mutual love, then, the dynamics between family members, in numerous cases, may strongly resemble those present between friends, and the evolutionary impetus thereof inspirational is, essentially, identical.

   

    These hitherto described scenarios are but situational manifestations of love - they, as per aforementioned purpose of here inquest, however, accomplish sufficiently the task of illustrating the principle manifestation of human camaraderie as per the author of whose limited sentience here words flow. To take these three afore-described typologies and scenarios into account, however, is critical upon examination and extrapolation of the theme forthcoming - and the principal concern hereof - the endeavor to accomplish a self-admitted impossible task: the ascertainment of a denotation for the constant of the human condition which has been hitherto ascribed the term love. Although a task impossible, it is, to reiterate, the goal hereof to ascribe denotation, not definition per se, as a singular definition of so volatile an entity surely could never suffice for the task of completely lending descriptive art thereof. Lending not much in the way of regard to such prospect, it is hoped that, in extrapolating this denotative concept of love, additional fodder for future examiners of this text be supplied, most hopefully for their own appreciation and application within pertinent circumstances within their own lives.

   

    Within the prior exposition of the three personal manifestations of love, amorousness, friendly love, and familial love, it should be stressed that, although multitudinous differentiating factors are present in and among each manifestation, they are manifestations of the same and singular concept - the concept of love. Superficially, it may well appear, per matter of inquiry this is discounted, that the inspiration for the behaviors and emotions described is variant, but, at its very core, love is, as hereto established, a constant of the human condition that supersedes all measures of time and place. The question then remains, however, can any ascertainment of love be realized?

   

    As social creatures, human beings are perpetually in need of contact between and amongst one another. Humanity has constructed its existence, throughout history, to reach its total fruition when individuals collaborate their endeavors among a common motivation. On a macro scale, the complexion and conduct of society at large is hereof indicative in obvious manners, but, on a micro scale as well, for the sake of this inquiry, the dynamic between two well-minded individuals predisposed to experience a manifestation of love, humanity is inextricably dependent upon the interpersonal dynamics extant between individuals and the relative devotion of one individual to another, for whatever that reason may be, for individuals implicated in the aforementioned dynamics of friendly, familial, or amorous relations display increased measures of devotion to one another, devotion far exceeding the somewhat dutiful characteristics exhibited among members of the same macro community, most likely attributed to the fact that individuals implicated within any of the three aforementioned circumstances have become so implicated by virtue of their own exercise of their own free will. Love, therefore, if not objectively definable, can be considered as the expression of one's devotion to another.

   

    For as long as there has been humanity, there has been love. Love has divided, united, tormented, and inspired the multitude of humanity throughout the ages, and the human exploits under auspice of this constant so undertaken have been recorded through the centuries. As, perhaps, the most essential plot element present in the ever-unfinished human story, love is timeless and has subsisted, and shall subsist, for the duration of humanities continued substantiation within all known realms of existence. This most ancient of emotions is the utmost measure of devotion - a primal desire fulfilling essential function facilitating most pertinent a cause - a cause transcendent of the centuries, a cause of mutual need - born of mutual responsibility and substantiated by mutual human understanding - a cause predicated by affection and measured by devotion: such cause, the common human cause, of pertinence undiminished throughout the ages, shall never be lost, and, lest the extinction of man, shall never be concluded, but, only with increased devotion - increased acknowledgement and demonstration of love on the part of men to their fellow men - will the desperately-necessary commencement of perfection of the common human cause be ever realized.