Love as a higher order quality: just a concept or expression of transcendence?
Love is a concept with a dual meaning. It is considered, in a first sense, as a set of attitudes and behaviors linked to affect, expressed in certain feelings, emotions and typical experiences. In its second meaning, love is considered a virtue of a higher order that condenses all the affection and goodness of which the human being is capable. We find, then, as a starting point, two approaches to what love means or implies, although different in scope: one that considers love in its psycho-physiological-social dimension, and another of a symbolic nature that considers it as a virtue or something spiritual or intangible, linked to attitudes and behaviors aimed at social sharing. We can say then that love has two dimensions: a physical or psycho-physiological-social,and another symbolic or virtual.
We will begin by considering that love is both - the sensitive and the spiritual - and something else. And in this brief reflection we are going to deal with trying to apprehend and -from that apprehension- explain what is something more linked to the essence of love. Indeed, love is not only a set of feelings and sensitive experiences, and a virtue linked to certain attitudes and behaviors. What we qualify as 'something else' - underlying or transcendent - is what would be capable of generating all those various attitudes, feelings and experiences, whether in people or animals. In fact, love is conceived as the greatest, in a positive sense, that someone can experience or experience. From the earliest antiquity until today, many people have been able to spontaneously dedicate or give up, for love, their own lives. Indeed,from love are derived attitudes and behaviors such as understanding, empathy, generosity, brotherhood, tolerance and solidarity, philosophically understood also as virtues. According to this, love would be above - or would be comprehensive - of these attitudes or virtues.
Friendship, as the most daily expression of love, neutrally passionate, also encompasses all the attitudes or virtues indicated, because loving implies being empathetic, understanding, generous, fraternal, tolerant and caring. Now, with the intention of achieving an apprehension of that something else that defines the essence of love, we will emphasize our analysis of love as a quality of a higher order. Let us take as a starting point a contribution by Aristotle, who gives us to understand that virtue is the expression of human excellence, of human action in search of the highest, the most beautiful and the best. Thus, virtue refers to what is proper to the essence of the human condition - and it differentiates us from animals - as an expression of its will inspired by intelligence.
In its physical or psycho-physiological-social perspective, the study of love corresponds to science - in this case psychology - that analyzes and considers everything that is observable, or the various forms of activation and manifestation of love. In its immaterial or symbolic perspective, it is philosophy that deals with investigating what love is, and for this it goes further and delves into hidden or unobservable aspects, through reflection, to capture everything that is inferred. But before continuing to advance in our search, let us specify four points, by way of preliminary conclusions:
- In everyday life, love is presented under two modalities: the psycho-physiological-social expressed by feelings, emotions and sensitive experiences, and as a virtue that generates in us certain attitudes and behaviors aimed at social sharing. And we understand that sometimes - depending on the case - there is a tendency towards the former, and sometimes more towards the latter. The psycho-physiological-social does not necessarily derive in the attitudes and behaviors of understanding, empathy, generosity, brotherhood, tolerance and solidarity; and thus it can imply a kind of shared egoism, like feelings, emotions and experiences of a simply erotic nature. Love -as well as reality- is the sum of both aspects: the observable or the psycho-physiological-social,and the unobservable or only inferred aspects through analysis and philosophical reflection. Precisely, philosophical thought is what we are using to approach the apprehension of that unobservable 'something more'. The analysis that we advance will lead us to one of three conclusions: a. love is only a set of feelings, attitudes and behaviors linked to the psycho-physiological-social; b. love understood as a virtue of a higher order does not exist, it does not have an ontic character; it is just a notion; c. love as a virtue of a higher order, is a theoretical, intangible or transcendent entity that impacts the reality of the psycho-physiological-social.Our analysis will lead us to one of three conclusions: a. love is only a set of feelings, attitudes and behaviors linked to the psycho-physiological-social; b. love understood as a virtue of a higher order does not exist, it does not have an ontic character; it is just a notion; c. love as a virtue of a higher order, is a theoretical, intangible or transcendent entity that impacts the reality of the psycho-physiological-social.Our analysis will lead us to one of three conclusions: a. love is only a set of feelings, attitudes and behaviors linked to the psycho-physiological-social; b. love understood as a virtue of a higher order does not exist, it does not have an ontic character; it is just a notion; c. love as a virtue of a higher order, is a theoretical, intangible or transcendent entity that impacts the reality of the psycho-physiological-social.
The notion of higher order virtue obtained from the philosophical approach shows us love as a notion or theoretical entity referring to something that encompasses - or is beyond or above - the indicated attitudes or virtues. And in a simplistic way, anyone could say that then love would only be a theoretical construct - a simple human notion - and that real attitudes would only be understanding, empathy, generosity, brotherhood, tolerance and solidarity. Seen in this way, love as a virtue would only be a classifying concept or name that we give to that set of attitudes or virtues. But, reality shows us that understanding or lack of it, empathy or its lack, and generosity or its lack, by themselves, do not impact the human being as love does, unless it were a case of total abandonment,where someone lacks all that and nobody pays attention to it. But, precisely, a total abandonment would be a case of total lack of love, since we would be referring to the whole. Furthermore, we perceive that the attitudes or virtues indicated have a certain affinity, or as Wittgenstein would say, they have a certain air of family, which would seem to reflect a point of common origin. So perhaps it is not that the sum of the attitudes or virtues indicated are what is called love, but that they are the implications or derivations of love, being love something that underlies or transcends them.or as Wittgenstein would say, they have a certain family air, which would seem to reflect a point of common origin. So perhaps it is not that the sum of the attitudes or virtues indicated are what is called love, but that they are the implications or derivations of love, being love something that underlies or transcends them.or as Wittgenstein would say, they have a certain family air, which would seem to reflect a point of common origin. So perhaps it is not that the sum of the attitudes or virtues indicated are what is called love, but that they are the implications or derivations of love, being love something that underlies or transcends them.
Indeed, love is something inherent in the essentials of life, belonging to the vital order. We are born from the love of a couple, and we need care and attention to overcome or survive that stage of disability characteristic of early childhood. As Levinás emphasized, by basing ethics on love, we are because someone took care of us before us; without love we would not be nor would we be. In fact, the deficiencies related to love and linked to the origin of each human life and childhood, later become psycho-social disorders that can - in some cases - become serious. On the other hand, love -in its symbolic character- surpasses or overflows the individual and the biological. The psycho-physiological components of love have their roots in the genetic, they are part of the human constitution,and they are activated through stimuli that trigger hormonal reactions, which, in turn, generate behavioral responses. But love - as a quality of a higher order - connects with the symbolic function of thought, with our spiritual dimension. According to Savater, human life unfolds in a dual context: biological and symbolic. In this sense, the philosopher comments: "The child goes through two pregnancies: the first in the maternal uterus according to biological determinations, and the second in the social matrix, subjected to various symbolic determinations."human life unfolds in a dual context: biological and symbolic. In this sense, the philosopher comments: "The child goes through two pregnancies: the first in the maternal uterus according to biological determinations, and the second in the social matrix, subjected to various symbolic determinations."human life unfolds in a dual context: biological and symbolic. In this sense, the philosopher comments: "The child goes through two pregnancies: the first in the maternal uterus according to biological determinations, and the second in the social matrix, subjected to various symbolic determinations."
When we observe a mother caring for and caring for her children - be it in the human social sphere or in the animal kingdom - we appreciate that love surpasses the sentimental and places the one who loves on the edge of himself - of existence - and places him in the limit that separates being from non-being, and thus the mother is able to renounce or give her own life in favor of her children. There is a transcendence, something that transcends and even becomes a negation of the individual or the biological. And human history is full of cases of almost spontaneous surrender - for love - of one's life in defense of children, and even of other loved ones. Love has shown itself capable of mobilizing radical behaviors in the human being where the symbolic surpasses the biological. And what is the symbolic? The symbolic,in the cases linked to human existence -like love- it is an integration of meanings, valuations from meanings, expectations linked to valuations and learned responses. Let's bring two phrases from Savater to the table, which help us understand how the symbolic -the intangible- can influence the material, the reality:
"Things are not what they are, but what they mean to us"
"The life that we try to conserve and perpetuate is not a mere biological process, but a becoming of symbols"
To say that love is a virtue or quality of a higher order inherent in life and linked to other virtues, such as those already indicated, is not enough to define it, since it would be necessary to clarify that virtue or quality in its internal determinations. And in an attempt to get closer to the essential of love, to try to define it, we must distinguish it - as such a vital quality - from the verb to love, which is equivalent to love in action. We can describe what it is to love from observable behaviors linked to affection, passion, feelings, emotions and with understanding, generosity and other attitudes typical of loving, but what is underlying or essential would escape analysis. For just as being -the primary ontological notion- has no definition of its own, and is only defined as the opposite of not being,the essential of love goes beyond the very notion, and it is necessary to refer to good and good to define it, as shown in the following statement: love is the highest expression of good, of the vital order and of the good; which, even though it is not a definition with a valid epistemological structure, hints at its significance.
Love is not just a comprehensive notion of a set of virtuous attitudes and behaviors. Love - as a quality of a higher order - is something intangible that belongs to its own structure, to the vital order and to the dynamics of life, an immaterial entity that triggers virtuous attitudes and behaviors; it is the intangible or transcendent, enabling and modifying reality. It is somewhat similar to the Higgs bosons, which - from their immateriality or their only inferible existence - determine the mass possession of material particles. In his case, love makes life possible.
Love is something inherent in the essential of the human. For this reason, without love, life is meaningless: here is the most shocking conclusion, since it makes direct mention of the transcendent, the meaning of life. We are reminded of a certain famous statement by Wittgenstein in the Tractatus, which relates meaning to the transcendent: "The meaning of the world must be outside the world, because -if it were not so- it would be subject to everything that happens and to all being- thus, that is, subject to causality. And it turns out that what makes the world non-causal -sense- cannot remain in the world, because otherwise it would be in turn causal ». And it is that the human world is not only subject to causality -like the genetically programmed animal world- because our world is continually modified by human action,in which the actions linked to love are those that tend to the positive, to the constructive, while the actions oriented by the absence of love -by hate- are directed towards the destructive.
We close by citing Luc Ferry, a current French philosopher, who - from his position as an unbeliever - maintains that there are clear indications of transcendence in the world, even after so many attempts - initiated by Nietzsche - to end all signs of the transcendent. And he gives love as an example of it, considered beyond the immanent conception that qualifies it as a retributive feeling, as one more emotion, being that love overflows us and is capable of taking us outside the limits of the existential. And he affirms in his book "Learning to Live" that total immanence is nonsense, since breaking with all kinds of transcendence means breaking with the human as well.
