Armin A. Zadeh

The Forgotten Art of Love


Скачать книгу

merely of intense feelings.1 He differentiated falling in love from the state of love. He argued that the overwhelming sensations we experience when falling in love in fact are not love at all but a state of infatuation. This claim stirred up quite a controversy. But anybody who has ever been in love knows that the obsessive, all-consuming feelings of the early stages of a romantic relationship don’t last. Eventually they fade, and while we still may feel very affectionate toward the beloved, we are not as infatuated as we were in the beginning.

      Even couples still very much in love after decades admit that there is a distinct difference between the early and later stages of their relationship. Many marriages actually begin to crumble over the disillusionment that sets in when these very intense initial feelings begin to fade.

      About half a century after Fromm, methods of biological analysis provided new insights into the phenomenon of romantic love. Researchers compared the blood levels of several hormones in individuals who had recently fallen in love with those in single people and people in long-term relationships.2 They found higher levels of cortisol (a steroid hormone released in response to stress) and a number of other differences among blood hormones in the group that had recently fallen in love compared to those in long-term relationships. Furthermore, differences in hormone levels correlated with more intense feelings of falling in love, and hormone levels returned to normal in later phases of a relationship. The precise combination of hormones responsible for the emotions that arise when we fall in love has not yet been fully elucidated, but they include dopamine, oxytocin, glucocorticoids, endorphins, and amphetamines. These are hormones that may induce states of euphoria and, in the case of oxytocin, foster attachment. Indeed, the powerful effects of some of these hormones have been compared to those of cocaine.3 Cortisol is also released when we are stressed, which explains why falling in love also has some uncomfortable effects, such as anxiety and sleeplessness.

      New tools for studying the brain and nervous system have also yielded novel insights into love. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies comparing the brains of two groups of people — those who had recently fallen in love and those in long-term relationships — corroborate the findings from blood-hormone analyses: they show some distinct differences in brain activity during these stages.4 Specifically, the brain areas associated with compulsive behavior were much more active in people who had recently fallen in love than those in long-term relationships. These findings may explain our obsession with love during this phase.

      Furthermore, studies show that the rise and fall of blood hormones associated with the falling-in-love phase are quite consistent and predictable. Typically, hormone levels return to the normal range after one to four years of courtship, and this decrease correlates with the fading of the intense feelings of being in love. Divorce rates peak at four years of marriage, suggesting that breakups may be linked to falling levels of love hormones and the associated decrease of powerful sensations.5

      Blood analyses and brain MRIs thus suggest that falling in love is different from long-term love. While falling in love, we are totally consumed with thoughts of the beloved. Elevated levels of dopamine induce a state of euphoria and energy that is difficult to match even with the use of powerful drugs. Research has revealed that we fall in love instantly — within a second of looking at a person.6 Subconsciously and at lightning speed, our brain runs through a list of criteria, and if these criteria are met, we fall in love. Because the list of criteria is extensive (and likely keeps expanding throughout our lives), we don’t fall in love too often. Our criteria for falling in love are to some degree inherent, but they are also formed by our upbringing. If we pay close attention, we may recognize a pattern in the people we fall in love with.

      Why do we fall in love? It appears to be nature’s way of jump-starting a relationship. From the perspective of evolutionary psychology, the energy and euphoria generated in our brains serve to establish a strong bond between two people for the purpose of reproduction. Unlike the sex drive, however, falling in love functions not only to foster an environment for sexual intercourse but also to allow sufficient attachment between the partners that they will cooperate to protect the offspring beyond her or his most vulnerable period.7 Three to four years of coupling is generally sufficient time for successful childbearing and for guarding children through the stage of entire helplessness. After that, one parent is often able to safely raise the offspring to reproductive age — the critical goal for evolution. Since evolution is all about efficiency, falling in love only needs to last about three to four years.

      This is a sobering view. Are all of these wonderful feelings just nature’s way of inducing us to mate and reproduce successfully? Is love programmed not to last? Well, the answer depends on whether we equate the sensations experienced when we fall in love with those we experience when we love. To address these issues, we need to define love — which is not an easy task. For millennia, philosophers, spiritual leaders, poets, writers, and others have tried to define love, but we still have no widely accepted definition that takes into account all its complexities. Some philosophical texts contend that love cannot be defined at all.

      Interpretations and definitions of love are strongly influenced by societal, philosophical, and spiritual beliefs. Thus, love may have different meanings in different cultures. And many of the feelings frequently associated with love are, in my view, not part of the spectrum of love itself.

      Gottfried Leibniz, a German polymath and philosopher in the seventeenth century, defined love as the capacity “to be delighted by the happiness of others,” which captures much of the essence of love.8 If we love somebody, we indeed derive a sense of bliss from seeing them happy. Most of us have known the contentment that comes from seeing the joy in our loved one’s eyes. On the other hand, Leibniz’s definition of love does not take into account the intensity of the lover’s emotion or his/her active role in creating it. “Being delighted by the happiness of others” can describe both a fleeting moment of sympathy and the lasting, deep sensation of love.

      A more precise definition of love might be the urge and continuous effort for the happiness and well-being of somebody (or something). Thus, love is a more intense form of caring or compassion. Love is associated with a stronger impulse, greater satisfaction, and more intense emotion than simply caring. But the border between compassion and love is not sharply delineated. It is a matter of degree — of the intensity of our feelings and our level of commitment, such as our willingness to make sacrifices for someone else’s well-being. For example, we may chat with a neighbor once in a while. We like her, and when we hear that she has broken her hip and needs help with commuting or grocery shopping, we gladly offer to help. However, we would not quit our job or make some other big sacrifice in order to help her. These are things we would do for people we love, those to whom we are very close. Thus, our commitment to the well-being of others and our associated emotions determine whether we consider it love or merely compassion.

      Just as we find it difficult to define love, we have no comprehensive understanding of how love originates. Contrary to the common view that love descends upon us without any conscious volition on our part, Fromm argued that love is an activity, something that requires enormous effort and concentration — in fact, an art. To master the art of loving, we must devote ourselves to it and give it priority over all other activities. Fromm argued that we can essentially love anybody if we commit ourselves to the effort. Loving is not a matter of the object of our love, but of the subject, meaning our own perception of someone we love.

      Fromm’s view of love was enthusiastically embraced by many but also met with criticism. Some people felt that such a sober, rational description left out the emotional aspects of love and ruled out the possibility of a unique bond between two people. Indeed, emotions are essential to loving. Everybody recognizes the sensation of delight in looking at a loved one and feeling the urge to hug and hold that person. These feelings persist after the falling-in-love phase: they are an intrinsic part of love. While Fromm was right to emphasize the active, conscious component of love, I believe he shifted the balance too far and created an overly cerebral, intellectual concept of love.

      Love has both active and passive components. Active loving involves the conscious or subconscious prioritizing of loving over other human impulses. The emotions of loving, such as joy at seeing the happiness