Love, and its designs..
A friend of mine recently brought up a subject, the subject being love, saying that love was prey to logic, not a victim of feeling. He believed that if you logically saw reasons to be with a person, feeling should mean little. Or nothing. Mostly nothing. He went on to say that emotion was useless, as it is merely a chemical response to external stimuli. He also brought up that God's love was one based of logic, and not of emotion, as God has no physical body, and thereby, no chemicals to respond to external stimuli.
I won't be addressing these entirely in order, but when have I ever kept an order, anyway?^^ It is true. Love, and all other emotions are merely chemical responses to external stimuli. We know it. When you feel angry, logic be Expletive deleted (like I said, written elsewhere, I speak somewhat less PG when off DS), it is the chemical that evokes the emotion. However, your body controls the response, without your knowing it. If the chemicals themselves could decide, then everyone would anger at the same thing, everyone would depress at one, laugh at another. We don't. Our minds interpret the stimuli, and give the appropriate response based on our perceptions and beliefs. I wouldn't be angry if you spoke against something that meant little to me, but I might when it was something dear. It is a physical response, but it is grounded in mentality.
Now, I am not going to argue entirely that God's "love" is what it is or isn't. I don't know, and neither do you. However, if love is of logic, then you should be making choices based on reason. You should be able to give a sensible explanation as to why God saw fit (yes, he is christian, therefore we're speaking of a christian God) to save us even after we took from him. Logically, when someone encroaches on your domain, you do not seek to enlarge him. Logic tells us that when you give to those who've a mind to take, they've only a mind to take more. If there wasn't something more to God's love, what rationale could he have to grant forgiveness. I'll remind you I am atheist, and this is all theoretical for me. I am not attuned to God's love, assuming he exists, so I've no sure idea of it's capacity or even existence, but I imagine those who believe in it can weigh my words against their feeling, and take its measure for themselves.
If logic governs love, and love is not an emotion, then you could reasonably choose to love someone or not to. You could make any relationship work that you could logically accept. This isn't only to say that you can 'love' any person you chose, but also that you could love anything you so chose. Choose to love a rock! Why not? I can reason it as acceptable, to an extent. A rock requires little, and may offer much. I keep the rock from harm, and the rock may be useful in many things. The rock is incapable of unfaithfulness, as I don't require much of it, and it less of me. It has no opinion, and thusly, no differences of opinion. A rock could be an ideal companion, as could many inanimate objects. But, there is no mutual enrichment. There is nothing between a rock and I, as the rock can't even choose to make a choice of me.
I believe there are varying and differing forms of love. A choice to love, based on logic alone should be reserved for an ideal or a cause. You can choose to love democracy. Or religion. These shouldn't be based on feelings. You should have a logical reason to love your political views. Or a logical reason to love your religion and diety (or lack thereof, or dieties).. Feelings aren't involved in this, it is simply reasoning that they are worth your devotion, and devoting yourself to them. There may be feeling associated with them for making these decisions, but not in making them. Then, there is love based on feeling alone. There are multiple forms of this, as well.
Love based on feeling alone depends on the feeling associated with it. This form of love can be anything from lust to the love between family. Many wouldn't associate lust with love, however, it could be argued. Love is simply an intense emotional attachment in this form, based on a feeling, and the feeling needn't be love. It could be based on physical need, or on dependence, or happiness. This form of love is the easiest to form, I think. Attachment to the cause of a feeling is a simple thing to do. I could love a pet because it brings me joy in its actions and manners. I could love my family because they could be close to me, even if I didn't necessarily enjoy their company, I might enjoy the feeling family invokes. There are many ways to feel this love, and they can vary from person to person. This love is not necessarily a temporary or passing thing. Some of these can last your entire life, because if the feeling invoked is always there, the love can remain.
The more complex love is one that requires both logic and feeling. I think there are two forms to this. There is a love between true friends, and between true loves (soulmates, companions, lovers, what have you). The love between friends is one that is more complex than between family for one reason, really. Choice. You tend to choose your friends, and thereby, there must be some logic behind it. I don't associate with those who haven't an interest in common with myself. Many would share my thoughts on this. You feel closer to these friends because of the logic that started and continues the relationship, but feeling pulls more from it than acquaintances. This causes the love between trusted friends.
The love between true loves is different, I think. I don't believe true love means there is a single person for you. You could feel this love with several different people. However, with what this love takes makes it unlikely that many people will find this person. You can't fall in love with this love, either. You love these people already, you simply haven't met them to love. How can that be, you ask? You already have an idea of what these people are to you ideally. You've already made a decision that makes you want these people, even if you don't know anyone who fits that description. All you can do is realize that a person fits this mold that you wanted. You may be surprised to find the person has qualities you wanted or didn't, but you could also find a person whom you could care for just as intensely, with some shared and unshared qualities with this other person. There isn't necessarily one person for everyone, but perhaps ten, perhaps 100, perhaps 1000. Who knows how many for each person? This also means that it is feasible that two people could consider the same person their true love, but it is not necessarily a shared opinion between the shared love. Just because someone is your true love, it doesn't mean the same hold true in the opposite direction. I think some people must understand that their loves may be unrequited.
This form of love is most difficult because it invokes a terrific amount of feeling. It often can cause irrational feelings, and tends to be the most difficult to maintain and handle. That is where the logic comes in. The logic must maintain the situation, understand where compromises can be made, and when there is the possibility that one person must forego a lesser want to preserve the greater one. Not all true loves will sustain, either. It isn't a fated relationship, merely one that is very well-tailored to an individual, but if there isn't sufficient effort, of course the relationship will fail. However, this form of love is tremendously worth working to maintain, and shouldn't be abandoned without great reason.
Now, I don't expect everyone to agree with my assessment, many not even in part, and enough who disagree with it as a whole. I am not really writing it to tell you you're belief is wrong, merely to state what mine is. I don't force you to accept mine, so if you should tell me if yours, don't do it by dismissing mine with naught but a "You're wrong"..
It's long, but aimed at those with the patience to read it, so don't go on about how you won't read something that long, it's well past you, anyway..
Stand for something or you'll fall for anything.