From Kierkegaard to Beauvoir: Philosophers on ‘love’
Here are some interesting takes on the concept
Defining ‘love’
Philosophers, and people in general, haven’t agreed upon a single definition for love, and probably never will, given the extremely personal nature of the emotion. Some might say “Love is 5 minutes of pleasure and a lifetime of pain” (quoting Pope from Outer Banks) and while others might say “The greatest thing you’ll ever learn is just to love, and be loved in return.” (quoting Toulouse-Lautrec from Moulin Rouge).
Philosophers on ‘love’
Let’s see how philosophers from different time periods viewed the concept of romantic love.
Plato — “Love makes us whole, again.”
Plato, in his Symposium, wrote that he encountered the comic playwright Aristophanes in a dinner party. Aristophanes recited the story of human beings with two faces and four hands and feet, that initially inhabited the planet. One day, they angered God Zeus, who then divided these beings into two. Since then, humans have been searching for their ‘other half’.
He also discusses the concept of ‘platonic love’, in which love begins because of physical attraction but continues because of the ‘virtues of a beautiful soul’. It leads to a general appreciation of the beauty in the world.
Arthur Schopenhauer — “The final aim of all love intrigues, be they comic or tragic, is really of more importance than all other ends in human life.”
Even though Schopenhauer was unlucky in his own love life, he harbored an almost positive view for the concept itself. He thought that love was among the foremost motivations of human life. Then, maintaining his pessimistic reputation, he added that most people suffer in their love lives because of incompatible partners or the burden of raising a family.
Also, he believed that those who think of love as a path to happiness are sorely mistaken, as it is nothing but a trick to get the human race to procreate and continue the cycle of human suffering. I guess that’s one way to look at it.
Soren Kierkegaard — “When one has once fully entered the realm of love, the world — no matter how imperfect — becomes rich and beautiful, it consists solely of opportunities for love.”
Kierkegaard’s story makes for a great tragic romance. He and Regine Olsen had been engaged for a month and were very much in love, when Kierkegaard, fearing that being a husband will come in the way of being a good Christian and philosopher, called off the engagement. This left both of them brokenhearted, and influenced the tone of much of his work. Among his popular writings is a book named Works of Love, which offers insight into Kierkegaard's concept of love and the emotional working of the human heart.
Out of the three forms of love, he held agape to be the only true one. For this, he wrote “All other love, whether humanly speaking it withers early and is altered or lovingly preserves itself for a round of time — such love is still transient; it merely blossoms.”
Friedrich Nietzsche — “One must stand bravely on one’s own two legs, otherwise one is simply incapable of loving.”
Just like Schopenhauer, Nietzsche too was unlucky in his love life. He was rejected thrice by the same woman, Lou Salome, which consequently extinguished his desire for further romantic pursuits, and he spent the rest of his life living by himself. That doesn’t mean he didn’t write about love.
He viewed the idea of marriage positively, but had serious reservations about how people actually practiced it. His support for ‘serial marriage’ for men and sexist outlook of women as mere ‘domestic breeders’ is appalling and misogynistic.
He had an interesting interpretation of ‘Amor Fati’, Latin for ‘love for one’s fate’. In The Gay Science, he wrote, "I want to learn more and more to see as beautiful what is necessary in things; then I shall be one of those who make things beautiful. Amor Fati: let that be my love henceforth! I do not want to wage war against what is ugly.” But in order to achieve such love, one has to first love oneself: “… one must stand bravely on one’s own two legs, otherwise one is simply incapable of loving.”
Bertrand Russell — “To fear love is to fear life, and those who fear life are already three parts dead.”
The world is an unwelcoming and unsparing place, and the one thing that makes human life easier and happier is love, claimed Russell. Love helps us cope with the darkness and see the light in life, making it the best thing one can experience.
Russell’s argument in support of love is a complete opposite of Schopenhauer’s, but one premise is the same — romantic love makes the continuation of species easier.
It is important to appreciate the modernity and inclusivity that Russell’s concept of love had. In his book, Marriage and Morals, he openly expressed support for gay rights and boundary-free love, which then led to him getting fired.
Simone de Beauvoir — “Love lets us reach beyond ourselves.”
Beauvoir attached great importance to the emotion of love. She defined it as the urge to unite or coalesce with another person, and called true love ‘the reciprocal recognition of two freedoms’ in her popular book, The Second Sex.
Even though she recognized love’s ability to suffuse meaning into life, she observed a problem with the general inclination of lovers to give in to the overwhelming emotion as to make it the only reason for living. This, she observed correctly, makes for a toxic relationship. For a healthy romantic relationship, she emphasizes on the importance of strong friendship. Mutual growth and support pave the way for a healthy, lasting relationship.
Some of Beauvoir’s ideas about romantic notions were ahead of her time. She found the concept of marriage to be sexist in some respects, and stayed in an open relationship with her long-time partner Jean-Paul Sartre. During this time, she had innumerable affairs, which she openly defended after receiving backlash from the society.
In Force of Circumstances, Vol III, Beauvoir wrote — “It was said that I refused to grant any value to the maternal instinct and to love. This was not so. I simply asked that women should experience them truthfully and freely, whereas they often use them as excuses and take refuge in them, only to find themselves imprisoned in that refuge when those emotions have dried up in their hearts. I was accused of preaching sexual promiscuity; but at no point did I ever advise anyone to sleep with just anyone at just any time.”
Jean Paul Sartre — “You know, it’s quite a job starting to love somebody. You have to have energy, generosity, and blindness. There is even a moment, in the very beginning, when you have to jump across a precipice: if you think about it you don’t do it.”
Sartre’s notions about romantic love were as modern as his partner Beauvoir. In their 50 years of relationship, he was involved with a number of other people. In the beginning of their relationship, he wrote to her in a letter, “What we have is an essential love; but it is a good idea for us also to experience contingent love affairs.”
Just like Beauvoir, Sartre held mutual respect and freedom as two main principles of true love. He also believed that the purpose of love is not merely finding ourselves a partner, but also getting to know ourselves better through the other person.
Bell Hooks — “The fear of being alone, or of being unloved, had caused women of all races to passively accept sexism and sexist oppression.”
The feminist philosopher, after going through some tough breakups, pondered about what she could have done to save the relationships. She found an answer and thus, set out to write a book named All About Love. In it, she challenges the contemporary definition of love and claims that its blatant overuse has rendered it almost meaningless. She also points to the problem male chauvinism rooted in modern love practices as one of the most serious problems that need to be overcome to develop healthy relationships. She then gives some suggestions as to how we can improve our perception of the concept.
Judith Butler — “If commitment is to be alive, that is, if it is to belong to the present, the only commitment one can make is to commit oneself again and again.”
Butler was not a fan of the modern conception of love. First, she dismisses the sentence ‘I love you’, claiming it to be thoroughly impotent and lousy. She wrote, “To say ‘I love you,’ of course is to submit to a cliché,” and “In saying ‘I love you,’ a certain ‘I’ is installed in one of the most repeated phrases in the English language, a marketed phrase that belongs to no one and to anyone.”
Second, she claims the idea of monogamy and complete faithfulness to one person as absurd. People are perpetually changing, and therefore need open-ended, changeable relationships. This does not mean that they cannot stay with the same person, only that making this choice requires continuous commitment from both sides.
Is love really that big a deal? Is life meaningless without it?
Given that a majority of movies, books and songs revolve around the concept of love, and so does our life, in some way or the other, it would be wrong to say that love isn’t a big deal. While love, or in this case, romantic love, certainly matters, it is not the only thing in life that does. There are other things like career, family, friends, and other interests that are just as significant, if not more. So, in the absence of romantic love, life does not lose its meaning.
Sources -
https://bigthink.com/neuropsych/10-philosophers-who-were-hopeless-romantics/
https://www.cbc.ca/life/wellness/love-advice-from-three-of-philosophy-s-deepest-thinkers-1.4521152
