essay on true love

The Concept of True Love Definition Essay

Introduction, understanding the unrealistic notion of true love, the concept of love itself is an illusion, works cited.

The concept of true love is based on the belief that to truly love someone you have to accept them for who they are (including their shortcoming and faults), put their happiness above your own (even if your heart is broken in the process) and that you will always love them even if they are not by your side.

In essence it is a self-sacrificing act wherein a person puts another person’s happiness and well-being above their own. For example in the poem “To my Dear and Loving Husband” by Anne Bradstreet she compares her love for her spouse as “more than whole mines of gold or all the riches that the East doth hold” (Bradstreet, 1). While such an example is archaic it does present itself as an excellent example of the value of true love for other people.

What must be understood though is that in recent years the concept of true has been adopted by popular culture as a needed facet in a person’s life. Various romantic comedies produced by Hollywood all portray characters that at one point or another exhibit tendencies akin to the realization that their life is incomplete without true love and that they should seek it out in the form of female or male character that has been provided as an embodiment of what true love should be.

Due to the influences of popular culture on modern day society this has resulted in more people believing in the concept of true love and actively seeking it out as a result. The inherent problem with this is that true love is an ideal that can be considered the embodiment of every single positive thing that can happen actually happening. In that a person that fits your idea of the perfect partner suddenly appears, that events lead the two of you to be together and that the end result is a classic happily ever after ending.

Unfortunately it must be noted that the concept of the “ideal” is based on the best possible action, event and circumstance actually happening. The fact remains that the real world, unlike in the movies, does not revolve around fortuitous circumstances and the supposed ideal is nothing more than a fanciful notion created by the movie industry.

For example in the story “Rose for Emily” it can be seen that the main character, Emily Grierson, goes to such lengths of retaining love that she murders Homer Barron in order to keep him by her side (Faulkner, 1). The reason behind this action is simple, by the time Homer Barron came into her life she couldn’t experience true love as we know it in the movies due to the effect of reality.

Due to this she creates the illusion of love which she wraps around herself. While most people don’t go to the lengths Emily had done it must be noted that they often follow the same pattern of developing the illusion of true love and retaining its idea. Since the concept of finding true love revolves around finding the ideal partner and that the ideal partner is nothing more than a fanciful creation it can be said that the reality of true love does not exist since it revolves around a fictitious notion and principle.

In the story of Araby readers are introduced to the concept of an unrealistic idea of the embodiment of love wherein the narrator (in the form of a young boy) falls in apparent rapture at the sight of Mangan’s sister. Though she is never mentioned by name the line “I pressed the palms of my hands together until they trembled, murmuring: ‘O love! O love!’ many times”, shows that the boy indeed developed substantial feelings for her (Joyce, 1).

It fact it is suggested numerous times in the story that the boy thinks that what he feels is true love and this is exemplified by his action of offering to buy the girl some souvenir from the Araby fair. Yet once he gets there he encounters a full grown woman at a stand idly chatting with men on various nonsensical topics.

It is then that he comes to the realization that he had crafted for himself a false ideal and that what lay before him was an example of what he could gain in the future. It must be noted that in essence this particular encounter shows what happens when an “ideal” meets reality in that the boy had been so presumptuous in crafting an “ideal” for himself that he neglected to take into account the possibility of better things in the future.

The line “I saw myself as a creature driven and derided by vanity; and my eyes burned with anguish and anger” is an indication of the point in the story when the boy comes to the realization that his ideal was false and that he only though that way because of his isolated world (Joyce, 1).

The story itself could be considered a microcosm of reality with Mangan’s sister acting as the concept of true love. The isolated nature of the idea of love developed by the boy in the story could be compared to the propagated concept of true love in movie industry wherein concepts related to the ideal partner as exemplified by various movies are in effect false when compared to the realities people face.

All too often people think of a person as their true love in an isolated fashion, conceptualizing in them in a world devoid of the interference of reality wherein their every move is considered lovely and perfect.

While such a concept is seen in numerous films it can be seen though that this particular point of view is usually false since when the outside world of reality is introduced people tend to see their “ideals” for what they really are and as a result their behaviors towards such loves usually change.

In essence it can be boiled down to true love being a fantasy created through the isolation of an individual from reality and as such can never be truly attained since once reality is introduced the fantasies diminish resulting in reality taking over banishing the illusion and subjecting people to the harsh truths that they neglected to see.

In the story bitch by Roald Dahl readers are introduced to the notion that passion incited through the creation of a simple chemical compound. This notion is actually symbolic of an ongoing thought that feelings of love are nothing more than illusion created by chemicals and hormones in the body that induce such feelings in order to propagate the species.

In fact various studies have do indeed show that love is a chemical reaction in the brain and as such if properly triggered through an outside source it can be assumed that this can in effect create the same feelings of love.

In fact the poem “Love is not all” by Edna St Vinven Millay says its best when she states that “Love is not all, is not meat or drink nor slumber nor roof against the rain”; from this it can be said that love is immaterial, nothing more than an illusion created by man (Millay, 1). For example in the story it can be seen that once males are affected by the chemical they all of sudden give into to primal urgings for procreation and don’t remember their actions afterwards (Dahl, 1).

Such an effect is suggestive of the fact that in essence people only consider love as love when there is a thought that tries to explain it. The loss of memory of events in the story is symbolic of the loss of thought and as a result the loss of the ability to associate a particular action with love.

In effect the story suggests that love itself is nothing more than a chemical reaction and that as logical individuals we try to justify it through other means that what it actually is. If this is so, the concept of true love itself is again proven to be nothing more than an illusion since it can be considered nothing more than a chemical and hormonal reaction rather than originating from some arbitrary and yet to be defined origin.

Faulkner, William. “Rose for Emily”.

Dahl, Roald. “Bitch”- Switch bitch”.

Joyce, James.”Araby”.

Bradstreet, Anne.“To My Dear and Loving Husband”

Millay, Edna.“Love Is Not All”

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, November 2). The Concept of True Love. https://ivypanda.com/essays/true-love/

"The Concept of True Love." IvyPanda , 2 Nov. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/true-love/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'The Concept of True Love'. 2 November.

IvyPanda . 2019. "The Concept of True Love." November 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/true-love/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Concept of True Love." November 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/true-love/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Concept of True Love." November 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/true-love/.

• Emily Grierson in “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner
• A Rose for Emily
• Miss Emily Grierson’s Character in “A Rose for Emily”
• “A Rose for Emily” by Faulkner
• Embodiment and Everyday Relationship with the Body
• Miss Emily Grierson’s Character Analysis: “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner
• William Faulkner's “A Rose for Emily” Reaction Paper
• The Use of Symbolic Meaning in "A Rose for Emily" by Faulkner
• Critique for ‘A Rose for Emily’
• Iago’s Character as Embodiment of the Darker Side Which All the People Have
• Franz Kafka’s ‘The Metamorphosis’ and Joseph Conrad’s ‘The Heart of Darkness’. Theme Analysis
• Coming-of-Age Fiction: "The Bell Jar" by Sylvia Plath
• Langston Hughes’ I, Too, Sing America and Nikki Giovanni’s Ego Tripping: Analysis of Two Poems
• “The Lesson” and “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?”
• “Out, Out” by Robert Frost

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

This essay focuses on personal love, or the love of particular persons as such. Part of the philosophical task in understanding personal love is to distinguish the various kinds of personal love. For example, the way in which I love my wife is seemingly very different from the way I love my mother, my child, and my friend. This task has typically proceeded hand-in-hand with philosophical analyses of these kinds of personal love, analyses that in part respond to various puzzles about love. Can love be justified? If so, how? What is the value of personal love? What impact does love have on the autonomy of both the lover and the beloved?

1. Preliminary Distinctions

2. love as union, 3. love as robust concern, 4.1 love as appraisal of value, 4.2 love as bestowal of value, 4.3 an intermediate position, 5.1 love as emotion proper, 5.2 love as emotion complex, 6. the value and justification of love, other internet resources, related entries.

In ordinary conversations, we often say things like the following:

• I love chocolate (or skiing).
• I love doing philosophy (or being a father).
• I love my dog (or cat).
• I love my wife (or mother or child or friend).

However, what is meant by ‘love’ differs from case to case. (1) may be understood as meaning merely that I like this thing or activity very much. In (2) the implication is typically that I find engaging in a certain activity or being a certain kind of person to be a part of my identity and so what makes my life worth living; I might just as well say that I value these. By contrast, (3) and (4) seem to indicate a mode of concern that cannot be neatly assimilated to anything else. Thus, we might understand the sort of love at issue in (4) to be, roughly, a matter of caring about another person as the person she is, for her own sake. (Accordingly, (3) may be understood as a kind of deficient mode of the sort of love we typically reserve for persons.) Philosophical accounts of love have focused primarily on the sort of personal love at issue in (4); such personal love will be the focus here (though see Frankfurt (1999) and Jaworska & Wonderly (2017) for attempts to provide a more general account that applies to non-persons as well).

Even within personal love, philosophers from the ancient Greeks on have traditionally distinguished three notions that can properly be called “love”: eros , agape , and philia . It will be useful to distinguish these three and say something about how contemporary discussions typically blur these distinctions (sometimes intentionally so) or use them for other purposes.

‘ Eros ’ originally meant love in the sense of a kind of passionate desire for an object, typically sexual passion (Liddell et al., 1940). Nygren (1953a,b) describes eros as the “‘love of desire,’ or acquisitive love” and therefore as egocentric (1953b, p. 89). Soble (1989b, 1990) similarly describes eros as “selfish” and as a response to the merits of the beloved—especially the beloved’s goodness or beauty. What is evident in Soble’s description of eros is a shift away from the sexual: to love something in the “erosic” sense (to use the term Soble coins) is to love it in a way that, by being responsive to its merits, is dependent on reasons. Such an understanding of eros is encouraged by Plato’s discussion in the Symposium , in which Socrates understands sexual desire to be a deficient response to physical beauty in particular, a response which ought to be developed into a response to the beauty of a person’s soul and, ultimately, into a response to the form, Beauty.

Soble’s intent in understanding eros to be a reason-dependent sort of love is to articulate a sharp contrast with agape , a sort of love that does not respond to the value of its object. ‘ Agape ’ has come, primarily through the Christian tradition, to mean the sort of love God has for us persons, as well as our love for God and, by extension, of our love for each other—a kind of brotherly love. In the paradigm case of God’s love for us, agape is “spontaneous and unmotivated,” revealing not that we merit that love but that God’s nature is love (Nygren 1953b, p. 85). Rather than responding to antecedent value in its object, agape instead is supposed to create value in its object and therefore to initiate our fellowship with God (pp. 87–88). Consequently, Badhwar (2003, p. 58) characterizes agape as “independent of the loved individual’s fundamental characteristics as the particular person she is”; and Soble (1990, p. 5) infers that agape , in contrast to eros , is therefore not reason dependent but is rationally “incomprehensible,” admitting at best of causal or historical explanations. [ 1 ]

Finally, ‘ philia ’ originally meant a kind of affectionate regard or friendly feeling towards not just one’s friends but also possibly towards family members, business partners, and one’s country at large (Liddell et al., 1940; Cooper, 1977). Like eros , philia is generally (but not universally) understood to be responsive to (good) qualities in one’s beloved. This similarity between eros and philia has led Thomas (1987) to wonder whether the only difference between romantic love and friendship is the sexual involvement of the former—and whether that is adequate to account for the real differences we experience. The distinction between eros and philia becomes harder to draw with Soble’s attempt to diminish the importance of the sexual in eros (1990).

Maintaining the distinctions among eros , agape , and philia becomes even more difficult when faced with contemporary theories of love (including romantic love) and friendship. For, as discussed below, some theories of romantic love understand it along the lines of the agape tradition as creating value in the beloved (cf. Section 4.2 ), and other accounts of romantic love treat sexual activity as merely the expression of what otherwise looks very much like friendship.

Given the focus here on personal love, Christian conceptions of God’s love for persons (and vice versa ) will be omitted, and the distinction between eros and philia will be blurred—as it typically is in contemporary accounts. Instead, the focus here will be on these contemporary understandings of love, including romantic love, understood as an attitude we take towards other persons. [ 2 ]

In providing an account of love, philosophical analyses must be careful to distinguish love from other positive attitudes we take towards persons, such as liking. Intuitively, love differs from such attitudes as liking in terms of its “depth,” and the problem is to elucidate the kind of “depth” we intuitively find love to have. Some analyses do this in part by providing thin conceptions of what liking amounts to. Thus, Singer (1991) and Brown (1987) understand liking to be a matter of desiring, an attitude that at best involves its object having only instrumental (and not intrinsic) value. Yet this seems inadequate: surely there are attitudes towards persons intermediate between having a desire with a person as its object and loving the person. I can care about a person for her own sake and not merely instrumentally, and yet such caring does not on its own amount to (non-deficiently) loving her, for it seems I can care about my dog in exactly the same way, a kind of caring which is insufficiently personal for love.

It is more common to distinguish loving from liking via the intuition that the “depth” of love is to be explained in terms of a notion of identification: to love someone is somehow to identify yourself with him, whereas no such notion of identification is involved in liking. As Nussbaum puts it, “The choice between one potential love and another can feel, and be, like a choice of a way of life, a decision to dedicate oneself to these values rather than these” (1990, p. 328); liking clearly does not have this sort of “depth” (see also Helm 2010; Bagley 2015). Whether love involves some kind of identification, and if so exactly how to understand such identification, is a central bone of contention among the various analyses of love. In particular, Whiting (2013) argues that the appeal to a notion of identification distorts our understanding of the sort of motivation love can provide, for taken literally it implies that love motivates through self -interest rather than through the beloved’s interests. Thus, Whiting argues, central to love is the possibility that love takes the lover “outside herself”, potentially forgetting herself in being moved directly by the interests of the beloved. (Of course, we need not take the notion of identification literally in this way: in identifying with one’s beloved, one might have a concern for one’s beloved that is analogous to one’s concern for oneself; see Helm 2010.)

Another common way to distinguish love from other personal attitudes is in terms of a distinctive kind of evaluation, which itself can account for love’s “depth.” Again, whether love essentially involves a distinctive kind of evaluation, and if so how to make sense of that evaluation, is hotly disputed. Closely related to questions of evaluation are questions of justification: can we justify loving or continuing to love a particular person, and if so, how? For those who think the justification of love is possible, it is common to understand such justification in terms of evaluation, and the answers here affect various accounts’ attempts to make sense of the kind of constancy or commitment love seems to involve, as well as the sense in which love is directed at particular individuals.

In what follows, theories of love are tentatively and hesitantly classified into four types: love as union, love as robust concern, love as valuing, and love as an emotion. It should be clear, however, that particular theories classified under one type sometimes also include, without contradiction, ideas central to other types. The types identified here overlap to some extent, and in some cases classifying particular theories may involve excessive pigeonholing. (Such cases are noted below.) Part of the classificatory problem is that many accounts of love are quasi-reductionistic, understanding love in terms of notions like affection, evaluation, attachment, etc., which themselves never get analyzed. Even when these accounts eschew explicitly reductionistic language, very often little attempt is made to show how one such “aspect” of love is conceptually connected to others. As a result, there is no clear and obvious way to classify particular theories, let alone identify what the relevant classes should be.

The union view claims that love consists in the formation of (or the desire to form) some significant kind of union, a “we.” A central task for union theorists, therefore, is to spell out just what such a “we” comes to—whether it is literally a new entity in the world somehow composed of the lover and the beloved, or whether it is merely metaphorical. Variants of this view perhaps go back to Aristotle (cf. Sherman 1993) and can also be found in Montaigne ([E]) and Hegel (1997); contemporary proponents include Solomon (1981, 1988), Scruton (1986), Nozick (1989), Fisher (1990), and Delaney (1996).

Scruton, writing in particular about romantic love, claims that love exists “just so soon as reciprocity becomes community: that is, just so soon as all distinction between my interests and your interests is overcome” (1986, p. 230). The idea is that the union is a union of concern, so that when I act out of that concern it is not for my sake alone or for your sake alone but for our sake. Fisher (1990) holds a similar, but somewhat more moderate view, claiming that love is a partial fusion of the lovers’ cares, concerns, emotional responses, and actions. What is striking about both Scruton and Fisher is the claim that love requires the actual union of the lovers’ concerns, for it thus becomes clear that they conceive of love not so much as an attitude we take towards another but as a relationship: the distinction between your interests and mine genuinely disappears only when we together come to have shared cares, concerns, etc., and my merely having a certain attitude towards you is not enough for love. This provides content to the notion of a “we” as the (metaphorical?) subject of these shared cares and concerns, and as that for whose sake we act.

Solomon (1988) offers a union view as well, though one that tries “to make new sense out of ‘love’ through a literal rather than metaphoric sense of the ‘fusion’ of two souls” (p. 24, cf. Solomon 1981; however, it is unclear exactly what he means by a “soul” here and so how love can be a “literal” fusion of two souls). What Solomon has in mind is the way in which, through love, the lovers redefine their identities as persons in terms of the relationship: “Love is the concentration and the intensive focus of mutual definition on a single individual, subjecting virtually every personal aspect of one’s self to this process” (1988, p. 197). The result is that lovers come to share the interests, roles, virtues, and so on that constitute what formerly was two individual identities but now has become a shared identity, and they do so in part by each allowing the other to play an important role in defining his own identity.

Nozick (1989) offers a union view that differs from those of Scruton, Fisher, and Solomon in that Nozick thinks that what is necessary for love is merely the desire to form a “we,” together with the desire that your beloved reciprocates. Nonetheless, he claims that this “we” is “a new entity in the world…created by a new web of relationships between [the lovers] which makes them no longer separate” (p. 70). In spelling out this web of relationships, Nozick appeals to the lovers “pooling” not only their well-beings, in the sense that the well-being of each is tied up with that of the other, but also their autonomy, in that “each transfers some previous rights to make certain decisions unilaterally into a joint pool” (p. 71). In addition, Nozick claims, the lovers each acquire a new identity as a part of the “we,” a new identity constituted by their (a) wanting to be perceived publicly as a couple, (b) their attending to their pooled well-being, and (c) their accepting a “certain kind of division of labor” (p. 72):

A person in a we might find himself coming across something interesting to read yet leaving it for the other person, not because he himself would not be interested in it but because the other would be more interested, and one of them reading it is sufficient for it to be registered by the wider identity now shared, the we . [ 3 ]

Opponents of the union view have seized on claims like this as excessive: union theorists, they claim, take too literally the ontological commitments of this notion of a “we.” This leads to two specific criticisms of the union view. The first is that union views do away with individual autonomy. Autonomy, it seems, involves a kind of independence on the part of the autonomous agent, such that she is in control over not only what she does but also who she is, as this is constituted by her interests, values, concerns, etc. However, union views, by doing away with a clear distinction between your interests and mine, thereby undermine this sort of independence and so undermine the autonomy of the lovers. If autonomy is a part of the individual’s good, then, on the union view, love is to this extent bad; so much the worse for the union view (Singer 1994; Soble 1997). Moreover, Singer (1994) argues that a necessary part of having your beloved be the object of your love is respect for your beloved as the particular person she is, and this requires respecting her autonomy.

Union theorists have responded to this objection in several ways. Nozick (1989) seems to think of a loss of autonomy in love as a desirable feature of the sort of union lovers can achieve. Fisher (1990), somewhat more reluctantly, claims that the loss of autonomy in love is an acceptable consequence of love. Yet without further argument these claims seem like mere bullet biting. Solomon (1988, pp. 64ff) describes this “tension” between union and autonomy as “the paradox of love.” However, this a view that Soble (1997) derides: merely to call it a paradox, as Solomon does, is not to face up to the problem.

The second criticism involves a substantive view concerning love. Part of what it is to love someone, these opponents say, is to have concern for him for his sake. However, union views make such concern unintelligible and eliminate the possibility of both selfishness and self-sacrifice, for by doing away with the distinction between my interests and your interests they have in effect turned your interests into mine and vice versa (Soble 1997; see also Blum 1980, 1993). Some advocates of union views see this as a point in their favor: we need to explain how it is I can have concern for people other than myself, and the union view apparently does this by understanding your interests to be part of my own. And Delaney, responding to an apparent tension between our desire to be loved unselfishly (for fear of otherwise being exploited) and our desire to be loved for reasons (which presumably are attractive to our lover and hence have a kind of selfish basis), says (1996, p. 346):

Given my view that the romantic ideal is primarily characterized by a desire to achieve a profound consolidation of needs and interests through the formation of a we , I do not think a little selfishness of the sort described should pose a worry to either party.

The objection, however, lies precisely in this attempt to explain my concern for my beloved egoistically. As Whiting (1991, p. 10) puts it, such an attempt “strikes me as unnecessary and potentially objectionable colonization”: in love, I ought to be concerned with my beloved for her sake, and not because I somehow get something out of it. (This can be true whether my concern with my beloved is merely instrumental to my good or whether it is partly constitutive of my good.)

Although Whiting’s and Soble’s criticisms here succeed against the more radical advocates of the union view, they in part fail to acknowledge the kernel of truth to be gleaned from the idea of union. Whiting’s way of formulating the second objection in terms of an unnecessary egoism in part points to a way out: we persons are in part social creatures, and love is one profound mode of that sociality. Indeed, part of the point of union accounts is to make sense of this social dimension: to make sense of a way in which we can sometimes identify ourselves with others not merely in becoming interdependent with them (as Singer 1994, p. 165, suggests, understanding ‘interdependence’ to be a kind of reciprocal benevolence and respect) but rather in making who we are as persons be constituted in part by those we love (cf., e.g., Rorty 1986/1993; Nussbaum 1990).

Along these lines, Friedman (1998), taking her inspiration in part from Delaney (1996), argues that we should understand the sort of union at issue in love to be a kind of federation of selves:

On the federation model, a third unified entity is constituted by the interaction of the lovers, one which involves the lovers acting in concert across a range of conditions and for a range of purposes. This concerted action, however, does not erase the existence of the two lovers as separable and separate agents with continuing possibilities for the exercise of their own respective agencies. [p. 165]

Given that on this view the lovers do not give up their individual identities, there is no principled reason why the union view cannot make sense of the lover’s concern for her beloved for his sake. [ 4 ] Moreover, Friedman argues, once we construe union as federation, we can see that autonomy is not a zero-sum game; rather, love can both directly enhance the autonomy of each and promote the growth of various skills, like realistic and critical self-evaluation, that foster autonomy.

Nonetheless, this federation model is not without its problems—problems that affect other versions of the union view as well. For if the federation (or the “we”, as on Nozick’s view) is understood as a third entity, we need a clearer account than has been given of its ontological status and how it comes to be. Relevant here is the literature on shared intention and plural subjects. Gilbert (1989, 1996, 2000) has argued that we should take quite seriously the existence of a plural subject as an entity over and above its constituent members. Others, such as Tuomela (1984, 1995), Searle (1990), and Bratman (1999) are more cautious, treating such talk of “us” having an intention as metaphorical.

As this criticism of the union view indicates, many find caring about your beloved for her sake to be a part of what it is to love her. The robust concern view of love takes this to be the central and defining feature of love (cf. Taylor 1976; Newton-Smith 1989; Soble 1990, 1997; LaFollette 1996; Frankfurt 1999; White 2001). As Taylor puts it:

To summarize: if x loves y then x wants to benefit and be with y etc., and he has these wants (or at least some of them) because he believes y has some determinate characteristics ψ in virtue of which he thinks it worth while to benefit and be with y . He regards satisfaction of these wants as an end and not as a means towards some other end. [p. 157]

In conceiving of my love for you as constituted by my concern for you for your sake, the robust concern view rejects the idea, central to the union view, that love is to be understood in terms of the (literal or metaphorical) creation of a “we”: I am the one who has this concern for you, though it is nonetheless disinterested and so not egoistic insofar as it is for your sake rather than for my own. [ 5 ]

At the heart of the robust concern view is the idea that love “is neither affective nor cognitive. It is volitional” (Frankfurt 1999, p. 129; see also Martin 2015). Frankfurt continues:

That a person cares about or that he loves something has less to do with how things make him feel, or with his opinions about them, than with the more or less stable motivational structures that shape his preferences and that guide and limit his conduct.

This account analyzes caring about someone for her sake as a matter of being motivated in certain ways, in part as a response to what happens to one’s beloved. Of course, to understand love in terms of desires is not to leave other emotional responses out in the cold, for these emotions should be understood as consequences of desires. Thus, just as I can be emotionally crushed when one of my strong desires is disappointed, so too I can be emotionally crushed when things similarly go badly for my beloved. In this way Frankfurt (1999) tacitly, and White (2001) more explicitly, acknowledge the way in which my caring for my beloved for her sake results in my identity being transformed through her influence insofar as I become vulnerable to things that happen to her.

Not all robust concern theorists seem to accept this line, however; in particular, Taylor (1976) and Soble (1990) seem to have a strongly individualistic conception of persons that prevents my identity being bound up with my beloved in this sort of way, a kind of view that may seem to undermine the intuitive “depth” that love seems to have. (For more on this point, see Rorty 1986/1993.) In the middle is Stump (2006), who follows Aquinas in understanding love to involve not only the desire for your beloved’s well-being but also a desire for a certain kind of relationship with your beloved—as a parent or spouse or sibling or priest or friend, for example—a relationship within which you share yourself with and connect yourself to your beloved. [ 6 ]

One source of worry about the robust concern view is that it involves too passive an understanding of one’s beloved (Ebels-Duggan 2008). The thought is that on the robust concern view the lover merely tries to discover what the beloved’s well-being consists in and then acts to promote that, potentially by thwarting the beloved’s own efforts when the lover thinks those efforts would harm her well-being. This, however, would be disrespectful and demeaning, not the sort of attitude that love is. What robust concern views seem to miss, Ebels-Duggan suggests, is the way love involves interacting agents, each with a capacity for autonomy the recognition and engagement with which is an essential part of love. In response, advocates of the robust concern view might point out that promoting someone’s well-being normally requires promoting her autonomy (though they may maintain that this need not always be true: that paternalism towards a beloved can sometimes be justified and appropriate as an expression of one’s love). Moreover, we might plausibly think, it is only through the exercise of one’s autonomy that one can define one’s own well-being as a person, so that a lover’s failure to respect the beloved’s autonomy would be a failure to promote her well-being and therefore not an expression of love, contrary to what Ebels-Duggan suggests. Consequently, it might seem, robust concern views can counter this objection by offering an enriched conception of what it is to be a person and so of the well-being of persons.

Another source of worry is that the robust concern view offers too thin a conception of love. By emphasizing robust concern, this view understands other features we think characteristic of love, such as one’s emotional responsiveness to one’s beloved, to be the effects of that concern rather than constituents of it. Thus Velleman (1999) argues that robust concern views, by understanding love merely as a matter of aiming at a particular end (viz., the welfare of one’s beloved), understand love to be merely conative. However, he claims, love can have nothing to do with desires, offering as a counterexample the possibility of loving a troublemaking relation whom you do not want to be with, whose well being you do not want to promote, etc. Similarly, Badhwar (2003) argues that such a “teleological” view of love makes it mysterious how “we can continue to love someone long after death has taken him beyond harm or benefit” (p. 46). Moreover Badhwar argues, if love is essentially a desire, then it implies that we lack something; yet love does not imply this and, indeed, can be felt most strongly at times when we feel our lives most complete and lacking in nothing. Consequently, Velleman and Badhwar conclude, love need not involve any desire or concern for the well-being of one’s beloved.

This conclusion, however, seems too hasty, for such examples can be accommodated within the robust concern view. Thus, the concern for your relative in Velleman’s example can be understood to be present but swamped by other, more powerful desires to avoid him. Indeed, keeping the idea that you want to some degree to benefit him, an idea Velleman rejects, seems to be essential to understanding the conceptual tension between loving someone and not wanting to help him, a tension Velleman does not fully acknowledge. Similarly, continued love for someone who has died can be understood on the robust concern view as parasitic on the former love you had for him when he was still alive: your desires to benefit him get transformed, through your subsequent understanding of the impossibility of doing so, into wishes. [ 7 ] Finally, the idea of concern for your beloved’s well-being need not imply the idea that you lack something, for such concern can be understood in terms of the disposition to be vigilant for occasions when you can come to his aid and consequently to have the relevant occurrent desires. All of this seems fully compatible with the robust concern view.

One might also question whether Velleman and Badhwar make proper use of their examples of loving your meddlesome relation or someone who has died. For although we can understand these as genuine cases of love, they are nonetheless deficient cases and ought therefore be understood as parasitic on the standard cases. Readily to accommodate such deficient cases of love into a philosophical analysis as being on a par with paradigm cases, and to do so without some special justification, is dubious.

Nonetheless, the robust concern view as it stands does not seem properly able to account for the intuitive “depth” of love and so does not seem properly to distinguish loving from liking. Although, as noted above, the robust concern view can begin to make some sense of the way in which the lover’s identity is altered by the beloved, it understands this only an effect of love, and not as a central part of what love consists in.

This vague thought is nicely developed by Wonderly (2017), who emphasizes that in addition to the sort of disinterested concern for another that is central to robust-concern accounts of love, an essential part of at least romantic love is the idea that in loving someone I must find them to be not merely important for their own sake but also important to me . Wonderly (2017) fleshes out what this “importance to me” involves in terms of the idea of attachment (developed in Wonderly 2016) that she argues can make sense of the intimacy and depth of love from within what remains fundamentally a robust-concern account. [ 8 ]

4. Love as Valuing

A third kind of view of love understands love to be a distinctive mode of valuing a person. As the distinction between eros and agape in Section 1 indicates, there are at least two ways to construe this in terms of whether the lover values the beloved because she is valuable, or whether the beloved comes to be valuable to the lover as a result of her loving him. The former view, which understands the lover as appraising the value of the beloved in loving him, is the topic of Section 4.1 , whereas the latter view, which understands her as bestowing value on him, will be discussed in Section 4.2 .

Velleman (1999, 2008) offers an appraisal view of love, understanding love to be fundamentally a matter of acknowledging and responding in a distinctive way to the value of the beloved. (For a very different appraisal view of love, see Kolodny 2003.) Understanding this more fully requires understanding both the kind of value of the beloved to which one responds and the distinctive kind of response to such value that love is. Nonetheless, it should be clear that what makes an account be an appraisal view of love is not the mere fact that love is understood to involve appraisal; many other accounts do so, and it is typical of robust concern accounts, for example (cf. the quote from Taylor above , Section 3 ). Rather, appraisal views are distinctive in understanding love to consist in that appraisal.

In articulating the kind of value love involves, Velleman, following Kant, distinguishes dignity from price. To have a price , as the economic metaphor suggests, is to have a value that can be compared to the value of other things with prices, such that it is intelligible to exchange without loss items of the same value. By contrast, to have dignity is to have a value such that comparisons of relative value become meaningless. Material goods are normally understood to have prices, but we persons have dignity: no substitution of one person for another can preserve exactly the same value, for something of incomparable worth would be lost (and gained) in such a substitution.

On this Kantian view, our dignity as persons consists in our rational nature: our capacity both to be actuated by reasons that we autonomously provide ourselves in setting our own ends and to respond appropriately to the intrinsic values we discover in the world. Consequently, one important way in which we exercise our rational natures is to respond with respect to the dignity of other persons (a dignity that consists in part in their capacity for respect): respect just is the required minimal response to the dignity of persons. What makes a response to a person be that of respect, Velleman claims, still following Kant, is that it “arrests our self-love” and thereby prevents us from treating him as a means to our ends (p. 360).

Given this, Velleman claims that love is similarly a response to the dignity of persons, and as such it is the dignity of the object of our love that justifies that love. However, love and respect are different kinds of responses to the same value. For love arrests not our self-love but rather

our tendencies toward emotional self-protection from another person, tendencies to draw ourselves in and close ourselves off from being affected by him. Love disarms our emotional defenses; it makes us vulnerable to the other. [1999, p. 361]

This means that the concern, attraction, sympathy, etc. that we normally associate with love are not constituents of love but are rather its normal effects, and love can remain without them (as in the case of the love for a meddlesome relative one cannot stand being around). Moreover, this provides Velleman with a clear account of the intuitive “depth” of love: it is essentially a response to persons as such, and to say that you love your dog is therefore to be confused.

Of course, we do not respond with love to the dignity of every person we meet, nor are we somehow required to: love, as the disarming of our emotional defenses in a way that makes us especially vulnerable to another, is the optional maximal response to others’ dignity. What, then, explains the selectivity of love—why I love some people and not others? The answer lies in the contingent fit between the way some people behaviorally express their dignity as persons and the way I happen to respond to those expressions by becoming emotionally vulnerable to them. The right sort of fit makes someone “lovable” by me (1999, p. 372), and my responding with love in these cases is a matter of my “really seeing” this person in a way that I fail to do with others who do not fit with me in this way. By ‘lovable’ here Velleman seems to mean able to be loved, not worthy of being loved, for nothing Velleman says here speaks to a question about the justification of my loving this person rather than that. Rather, what he offers is an explanation of the selectivity of my love, an explanation that as a matter of fact makes my response be that of love rather than mere respect.

This understanding of the selectivity of love as something that can be explained but not justified is potentially troubling. For we ordinarily think we can justify not only my loving you rather than someone else but also and more importantly the constancy of my love: my continuing to love you even as you change in certain fundamental ways (but not others). As Delaney (1996, p. 347) puts the worry about constancy:

while you seem to want it to be true that, were you to become a schmuck, your lover would continue to love you,…you also want it to be the case that your lover would never love a schmuck.

The issue here is not merely that we can offer explanations of the selectivity of my love, of why I do not love schmucks; rather, at issue is the discernment of love, of loving and continuing to love for good reasons as well as of ceasing to love for good reasons. To have these good reasons seems to involve attributing different values to you now rather than formerly or rather than to someone else, yet this is precisely what Velleman denies is the case in making the distinction between love and respect the way he does.

It is also questionable whether Velleman can even explain the selectivity of love in terms of the “fit” between your expressions and my sensitivities. For the relevant sensitivities on my part are emotional sensitivities: the lowering of my emotional defenses and so becoming emotionally vulnerable to you. Thus, I become vulnerable to the harms (or goods) that befall you and so sympathetically feel your pain (or joy). Such emotions are themselves assessable for warrant, and now we can ask why my disappointment that you lost the race is warranted, but my being disappointed that a mere stranger lost would not be warranted. The intuitive answer is that I love you but not him. However, this answer is unavailable to Velleman, because he thinks that what makes my response to your dignity that of love rather than respect is precisely that I feel such emotions, and to appeal to my love in explaining the emotions therefore seems viciously circular.

Although these problems are specific to Velleman’s account, the difficulty can be generalized to any appraisal account of love (such as that offered in Kolodny 2003). For if love is an appraisal, it needs to be distinguished from other forms of appraisal, including our evaluative judgments. On the one hand, to try to distinguish love as an appraisal from other appraisals in terms of love’s having certain effects on our emotional and motivational life (as on Velleman’s account) is unsatisfying because it ignores part of what needs to be explained: why the appraisal of love has these effects and yet judgments with the same evaluative content do not. Indeed, this question is crucial if we are to understand the intuitive “depth” of love, for without an answer to this question we do not understand why love should have the kind of centrality in our lives it manifestly does. [ 9 ] On the other hand, to bundle this emotional component into the appraisal itself would be to turn the view into either the robust concern view ( Section 3 ) or a variant of the emotion view ( Section 5.1 ).

In contrast to Velleman, Singer (1991, 1994, 2009) understands love to be fundamentally a matter of bestowing value on the beloved. To bestow value on another is to project a kind of intrinsic value onto him. Indeed, this fact about love is supposed to distinguish love from liking: “Love is an attitude with no clear objective,” whereas liking is inherently teleological (1991, p. 272). As such, there are no standards of correctness for bestowing such value, and this is how love differs from other personal attitudes like gratitude, generosity, and condescension: “love…confers importance no matter what the object is worth” (p. 273). Consequently, Singer thinks, love is not an attitude that can be justified in any way.

What is it, exactly, to bestow this kind of value on someone? It is, Singer says, a kind of attachment and commitment to the beloved, in which one comes to treat him as an end in himself and so to respond to his ends, interests, concerns, etc. as having value for their own sake. This means in part that the bestowal of value reveals itself “by caring about the needs and interests of the beloved, by wishing to benefit or protect her, by delighting in her achievements,” etc. (p. 270). This sounds very much like the robust concern view, yet the bestowal view differs in understanding such robust concern to be the effect of the bestowal of value that is love rather than itself what constitutes love: in bestowing value on my beloved, I make him be valuable in such a way that I ought to respond with robust concern.

For it to be intelligible that I have bestowed value on someone, I must therefore respond appropriately to him as valuable, and this requires having some sense of what his well-being is and of what affects that well-being positively or negatively. Yet having this sense requires in turn knowing what his strengths and deficiencies are, and this is a matter of appraising him in various ways. Bestowal thus presupposes a kind of appraisal, as a way of “really seeing” the beloved and attending to him. Nonetheless, Singer claims, it is the bestowal that is primary for understanding what love consists in: the appraisal is required only so that the commitment to one’s beloved and his value as thus bestowed has practical import and is not “a blind submission to some unknown being” (1991, p. 272; see also Singer 1994, pp. 139ff).

Singer is walking a tightrope in trying to make room for appraisal in his account of love. Insofar as the account is fundamentally a bestowal account, Singer claims that love cannot be justified, that we bestow the relevant kind of value “gratuitously.” This suggests that love is blind, that it does not matter what our beloved is like, which seems patently false. Singer tries to avoid this conclusion by appealing to the role of appraisal: it is only because we appraise another as having certain virtues and vices that we come to bestow value on him. Yet the “because” here, since it cannot justify the bestowal, is at best a kind of contingent causal explanation. [ 10 ] In this respect, Singer’s account of the selectivity of love is much the same as Velleman’s, and it is liable to the same criticism: it makes unintelligible the way in which our love can be discerning for better or worse reasons. Indeed, this failure to make sense of the idea that love can be justified is a problem for any bestowal view. For either (a) a bestowal itself cannot be justified (as on Singer’s account), in which case the justification of love is impossible, or (b) a bestowal can be justified, in which case it is hard to make sense of value as being bestowed rather than there antecedently in the object as the grounds of that “bestowal.”

More generally, a proponent of the bestowal view needs to be much clearer than Singer is in articulating precisely what a bestowal is. What is the value that I create in a bestowal, and how can my bestowal create it? On a crude Humean view, the answer might be that the value is something projected onto the world through my pro-attitudes, like desire. Yet such a view would be inadequate, since the projected value, being relative to a particular individual, would do no theoretical work, and the account would essentially be a variant of the robust concern view. Moreover, in providing a bestowal account of love, care is needed to distinguish love from other personal attitudes such as admiration and respect: do these other attitudes involve bestowal? If so, how does the bestowal in these cases differ from the bestowal of love? If not, why not, and what is so special about love that requires a fundamentally different evaluative attitude than admiration and respect?

Nonetheless, there is a kernel of truth in the bestowal view: there is surely something right about the idea that love is creative and not merely a response to antecedent value, and accounts of love that understand the kind of evaluation implicit in love merely in terms of appraisal seem to be missing something. Precisely what may be missed will be discussed below in Section 6 .

Perhaps there is room for an understanding of love and its relation to value that is intermediate between appraisal and bestowal accounts. After all, if we think of appraisal as something like perception, a matter of responding to what is out there in the world, and of bestowal as something like action, a matter of doing something and creating something, we should recognize that the responsiveness central to appraisal may itself depend on our active, creative choices. Thus, just as we must recognize that ordinary perception depends on our actively directing our attention and deploying concepts, interpretations, and even arguments in order to perceive things accurately, so too we might think our vision of our beloved’s valuable properties that is love also depends on our actively attending to and interpreting him. Something like this is Jollimore’s view (2011). According to Jollimore, in loving someone we actively attend to his valuable properties in a way that we take to provide us with reasons to treat him preferentially. Although we may acknowledge that others might have such properties even to a greater degree than our beloved does, we do not attend to and appreciate such properties in others in the same way we do those in our beloveds; indeed, we find our appreciation of our beloved’s valuable properties to “silence” our similar appreciation of those in others. (In this way, Jollimore thinks, we can solve the problem of fungibility, discussed below in Section 6 .) Likewise, in perceiving our beloved’s actions and character, we do so through the lens of such an appreciation, which will tend as to “silence” interpretations inconsistent with that appreciation. In this way, love involves finding one’s beloved to be valuable in a way that involves elements of both appraisal (insofar as one must thereby be responsive to valuable properties one’s beloved really has) and bestowal (insofar as through one’s attention and committed appreciation of these properties they come to have special significance for one).

One might object that this conception of love as silencing the special value of others or to negative interpretations of our beloveds is irrational in a way that love is not. For, it might seem, such “silencing” is merely a matter of our blinding ourselves to how things really are. Yet Jollimore claims that this sense in which love is blind is not objectionable, for (a) we can still intellectually recognize the things that love’s vision silences, and (b) there really is no impartial perspective we can take on the values things have, and love is one appropriate sort of partial perspective from which the value of persons can be manifest. Nonetheless, one might wonder about whether that perspective of love itself can be distorted and what the norms are in terms of which such distortions are intelligible. Furthermore, it may seem that Jollimore’s attempt to reconcile appraisal and bestowal fails to appreciate the underlying metaphysical difficulty: appraisal is a response to value that is antecedently there, whereas bestowal is the creation of value that was not antecedently there. Consequently, it might seem, appraisal and bestowal are mutually exclusive and cannot be reconciled in the way Jollimore hopes.

Whereas Jollimore tries to combine separate elements of appraisal and of bestowal in a single account, Helm (2010) and Bagley (2015) offer accounts that reject the metaphysical presupposition that values must be either prior to love (as with appraisal) or posterior to love (as with bestowal), instead understanding the love and the values to emerge simultaneously. Thus, Helm presents a detailed account of valuing in terms of the emotions, arguing that while we can understand individual emotions as appraisals , responding to values already their in their objects, these values are bestowed on those objects via broad, holistic patterns of emotions. How this amounts to an account of love will be discussed in Section 5.2 , below. Bagley (2015) instead appeals to a metaphor of improvisation, arguing that just as jazz musicians jointly make determinate the content of their musical ideas through on-going processes of their expression, so too lovers jointly engage in “deep improvisation”, thereby working out of their values and identities through the on-going process of living their lives together. These values are thus something the lovers jointly construct through the process of recognizing and responding to those very values. To love someone is thus to engage with them as partners in such “deep improvisation”. (This account is similar to Helm (2008, 2010)’s account of plural agency, which he uses to provide an account of friendship and other loving relationships; see the discussion of shared activity in the entry on friendship .)

5. Emotion Views

Given these problems with the accounts of love as valuing, perhaps we should turn to the emotions. For emotions just are responses to objects that combine evaluation, motivation, and a kind of phenomenology, all central features of the attitude of love.

Many accounts of love claim that it is an emotion; these include: Wollheim 1984, Rorty 1986/1993, Brown 1987, Hamlyn 1989, Baier 1991, and Badhwar 2003. [ 11 ] Thus, Hamlyn (1989, p. 219) says:

It would not be a plausible move to defend any theory of the emotions to which love and hate seemed exceptions by saying that love and hate are after all not emotions. I have heard this said, but it does seem to me a desperate move to make. If love and hate are not emotions what is?

The difficulty with this claim, as Rorty (1980) argues, is that the word, ‘emotion,’ does not seem to pick out a homogeneous collection of mental states, and so various theories claiming that love is an emotion mean very different things. Consequently, what are here labeled “emotion views” are divided into those that understand love to be a particular kind of evaluative-cum-motivational response to an object, whether that response is merely occurrent or dispositional (‘emotions proper,’ see Section 5.1 , below), and those that understand love to involve a collection of related and interconnected emotions proper (‘emotion complexes,’ see Section 5.2 , below).

An emotion proper is a kind of “evaluative-cum-motivational response to an object”; what does this mean? Emotions are generally understood to have several objects. The target of an emotion is that at which the emotion is directed: if I am afraid or angry at you, then you are the target. In responding to you with fear or anger, I am implicitly evaluating you in a particular way, and this evaluation—called the formal object —is the kind of evaluation of the target that is distinctive of a particular emotion type. Thus, in fearing you, I implicitly evaluate you as somehow dangerous, whereas in being angry at you I implicitly evaluate you as somehow offensive. Yet emotions are not merely evaluations of their targets; they in part motivate us to behave in certain ways, both rationally (by motivating action to avoid the danger) and arationally (via certain characteristic expressions, such as slamming a door out of anger). Moreover, emotions are generally understood to involve a phenomenological component, though just how to understand the characteristic “feel” of an emotion and its relation to the evaluation and motivation is hotly disputed. Finally, emotions are typically understood to be passions: responses that we feel imposed on us as if from the outside, rather than anything we actively do. (For more on the philosophy of emotions, see entry on emotion .)

What then are we saying when we say that love is an emotion proper? According to Brown (1987, p. 14), emotions as occurrent mental states are “abnormal bodily changes caused by the agent’s evaluation or appraisal of some object or situation that the agent believes to be of concern to him or her.” He spells this out by saying that in love, we “cherish” the person for having “a particular complex of instantiated qualities” that is “open-ended” so that we can continue to love the person even as she changes over time (pp. 106–7). These qualities, which include historical and relational qualities, are evaluated in love as worthwhile. [ 12 ] All of this seems aimed at spelling out what love’s formal object is, a task that is fundamental to understanding love as an emotion proper. Thus, Brown seems to say that love’s formal object is just being worthwhile (or, given his examples, perhaps: worthwhile as a person), and he resists being any more specific than this in order to preserve the open-endedness of love. Hamlyn (1989) offers a similar account, saying (p. 228):

With love the difficulty is to find anything of this kind [i.e., a formal object] which is uniquely appropriate to love. My thesis is that there is nothing of this kind that must be so, and that this differentiates it and hate from the other emotions.

Hamlyn goes on to suggest that love and hate might be primordial emotions, a kind of positive or negative “feeling towards,” presupposed by all other emotions. [ 13 ]

The trouble with these accounts of love as an emotion proper is that they provide too thin a conception of love. In Hamlyn’s case, love is conceived as a fairly generic pro-attitude, rather than as the specific kind of distinctively personal attitude discussed here. In Brown’s case, spelling out the formal object of love as simply being worthwhile (as a person) fails to distinguish love from other evaluative responses like admiration and respect. Part of the problem seems to be the rather simple account of what an emotion is that Brown and Hamlyn use as their starting point: if love is an emotion, then the understanding of what an emotion is must be enriched considerably to accommodate love. Yet it is not at all clear whether the idea of an “emotion proper” can be adequately enriched so as to do so. As Pismenny & Prinz (2017) point out, love seems to be too varied both in its ground and in the sort of experience it involves to be capturable by a single emotion.

The emotion complex view, which understands love to be a complex emotional attitude towards another person, may initially seem to hold out great promise to overcome the problems of alternative types of views. By articulating the emotional interconnections between persons, it could offer a satisfying account of the “depth” of love without the excesses of the union view and without the overly narrow teleological focus of the robust concern view; and because these emotional interconnections are themselves evaluations, it could offer an understanding of love as simultaneously evaluative, without needing to specify a single formal object of love. However, the devil is in the details.

Rorty (1986/1993) does not try to present a complete account of love; rather, she focuses on the idea that “relational psychological attitudes” which, like love, essentially involve emotional and desiderative responses, exhibit historicity : “they arise from, and are shaped by, dynamic interactions between a subject and an object” (p. 73). In part this means that what makes an attitude be one of love is not the presence of a state that we can point to at a particular time within the lover; rather, love is to be “identified by a characteristic narrative history” (p. 75). Moreover, Rorty argues, the historicity of love involves the lover’s being permanently transformed by loving who he does.

Baier (1991), seeming to pick up on this understanding of love as exhibiting historicity, says (p. 444):

Love is not just an emotion people feel toward other people, but also a complex tying together of the emotions that two or a few more people have; it is a special form of emotional interdependence.

To a certain extent, such emotional interdependence involves feeling sympathetic emotions, so that, for example, I feel disappointed and frustrated on behalf of my beloved when she fails, and joyful when she succeeds. However, Baier insists, love is “more than just the duplication of the emotion of each in a sympathetic echo in the other” (p. 442); the emotional interdependence of the lovers involves also appropriate follow-up responses to the emotional predicaments of your beloved. Two examples Baier gives (pp. 443–44) are a feeling of “mischievous delight” at your beloved’s temporary bafflement, and amusement at her embarrassment. The idea is that in a loving relationship your beloved gives you permission to feel such emotions when no one else is permitted to do so, and a condition of her granting you that permission is that you feel these emotions “tenderly.” Moreover, you ought to respond emotionally to your beloved’s emotional responses to you: by feeling hurt when she is indifferent to you, for example. All of these foster the sort of emotional interdependence Baier is after—a kind of intimacy you have with your beloved.

Badhwar (2003, p. 46) similarly understands love to be a matter of “one’s overall emotional orientation towards a person—the complex of perceptions, thoughts, and feelings”; as such, love is a matter of having a certain “character structure.” Central to this complex emotional orientation, Badhwar thinks, is what she calls the “look of love”: “an ongoing [emotional] affirmation of the loved object as worthy of existence…for her own sake” (p. 44), an affirmation that involves taking pleasure in your beloved’s well-being. Moreover, Badhwar claims, the look of love also provides to the beloved reliable testimony concerning the quality of the beloved’s character and actions (p. 57).

There is surely something very right about the idea that love, as an attitude central to deeply personal relationships, should not be understood as a state that can simply come and go. Rather, as the emotion complex view insists, the complexity of love is to be found in the historical patterns of one’s emotional responsiveness to one’s beloved—a pattern that also projects into the future. Indeed, as suggested above, the kind of emotional interdependence that results from this complex pattern can seem to account for the intuitive “depth” of love as fully interwoven into one’s emotional sense of oneself. And it seems to make some headway in understanding the complex phenomenology of love: love can at times be a matter of intense pleasure in the presence of one’s beloved, yet it can at other times involve frustration, exasperation, anger, and hurt as a manifestation of the complexities and depth of the relationships it fosters.

This understanding of love as constituted by a history of emotional interdependence enables emotion complex views to say something interesting about the impact love has on the lover’s identity. This is partly Rorty’s point (1986/1993) in her discussion of the historicity of love ( above ). Thus, she argues, one important feature of such historicity is that love is “ dynamically permeable ” in that the lover is continually “changed by loving” such that these changes “tend to ramify through a person’s character” (p. 77). Through such dynamic permeability, love transforms the identity of the lover in a way that can sometimes foster the continuity of the love, as each lover continually changes in response to the changes in the other. [ 14 ] Indeed, Rorty concludes, love should be understood in terms of “a characteristic narrative history” (p. 75) that results from such dynamic permeability. It should be clear, however, that the mere fact of dynamic permeability need not result in the love’s continuing: nothing about the dynamics of a relationship requires that the characteristic narrative history project into the future, and such permeability can therefore lead to the dissolution of the love. Love is therefore risky—indeed, all the more risky because of the way the identity of the lover is defined in part through the love. The loss of a love can therefore make one feel no longer oneself in ways poignantly described by Nussbaum (1990).

By focusing on such emotionally complex histories, emotion complex views differ from most alternative accounts of love. For alternative accounts tend to view love as a kind of attitude we take toward our beloveds, something we can analyze simply in terms of our mental state at the moment. [ 15 ] By ignoring this historical dimension of love in providing an account of what love is, alternative accounts have a hard time providing either satisfying accounts of the sense in which our identities as person are at stake in loving another or satisfactory solutions to problems concerning how love is to be justified (cf. Section 6 , especially the discussion of fungibility ).

Nonetheless, some questions remain. If love is to be understood as an emotion complex, we need a much more explicit account of the pattern at issue here: what ties all of these emotional responses together into a single thing, namely love? Baier and Badhwar seem content to provide interesting and insightful examples of this pattern, but that does not seem to be enough. For example, what connects my amusement at my beloved’s embarrassment to other emotions like my joy on his behalf when he succeeds? Why shouldn’t my amusement at his embarrassment be understood instead as a somewhat cruel case of schadenfreude and so as antithetical to, and disconnected from, love? Moreover, as Naar (2013) notes, we need a principled account of when such historical patterns are disrupted in such a way as to end the love and when they are not. Do I stop loving when, in the midst of clinical depression, I lose my normal pattern of emotional concern?

Presumably the answer requires returning to the historicity of love: it all depends on the historical details of the relationship my beloved and I have forged. Some loves develop so that the intimacy within the relationship is such as to allow for tender, teasing responses to each other, whereas other loves may not. The historical details, together with the lovers’ understanding of their relationship, presumably determine which emotional responses belong to the pattern constitutive of love and which do not. However, this answer so far is inadequate: not just any historical relationship involving emotional interdependence is a loving relationship, and we need a principled way of distinguishing loving relationships from other relational evaluative attitudes: precisely what is the characteristic narrative history that is characteristic of love?

Helm (2009, 2010) tries to answer some of these questions in presenting an account of love as intimate identification. To love another, Helm claims, is to care about him as the particular person he is and so, other things being equal, to value the things he values. Insofar as a person’s (structured) set of values—his sense of the kind of life worth his living—constitutes his identity as a person, such sharing of values amounts to sharing his identity, which sounds very much like union accounts of love. However, Helm is careful to understand such sharing of values as for the sake of the beloved (as robust concern accounts insist), and he spells this all out in terms of patterns of emotions. Thus, Helm claims, all emotions have not only a target and a formal object (as indicated above), but also a focus : a background object the subject cares about in terms of which the implicit evaluation of the target is made intelligible. (For example, if I am afraid of the approaching hailstorm, I thereby evaluate it as dangerous, and what explains this evaluation is the way that hailstorm bears on my vegetable garden, which I care about; my garden, therefore, is the focus of my fear.) Moreover, emotions normally come in patterns with a common focus: fearing the hailstorm is normally connected to other emotions as being relieved when it passes by harmlessly (or disappointed or sad when it does not), being angry at the rabbits for killing the spinach, delighted at the productivity of the tomato plants, etc. Helm argues that a projectible pattern of such emotions with a common focus constitute caring about that focus. Consequently, we might say along the lines of Section 4.3 , while particular emotions appraise events in the world as having certain evaluative properties, their having these properties is partly bestowed on them by the overall patterns of emotions.

Helm identifies some emotions as person-focused emotions : emotions like pride and shame that essentially take persons as their focuses, for these emotions implicitly evaluate in terms of the target’s bearing on the quality of life of the person that is their focus. To exhibit a pattern of such emotions focused on oneself and subfocused on being a mother, for example, is to care about the place being a mother has in the kind of life you find worth living—in your identity as a person; to care in this way is to value being a mother as a part of your concern for your own identity. Likewise, to exhibit a projectible pattern of such emotions focused on someone else and subfocused on his being a father is to value this as a part of your concern for his identity—to value it for his sake. Such sharing of another’s values for his sake, which, Helm argues, essentially involves trust, respect, and affection, amounts to intimate identification with him, and such intimate identification just is love. Thus, Helm tries to provide an account of love that is grounded in an explicit account of caring (and caring about something for the sake of someone else) that makes room for the intuitive “depth” of love through intimate identification.

Jaworska & Wonderly (2017) argue that Helm’s construal of intimacy as intimate identification is too demanding. Rather, they argue, the sort of intimacy that distinguishes love from mere caring is one that involves a kind of emotional vulnerability in which things going well or poorly for one’s beloved are directly connected not merely to one’s well-being, but to one’s ability to flourish. This connection, they argue, runs through the lover’s self-understanding and the place the beloved has in the lover’s sense of a meaningful life.

Why do we love? It has been suggested above that any account of love needs to be able to answer some such justificatory question. Although the issue of the justification of love is important on its own, it is also important for the implications it has for understanding more clearly the precise object of love: how can we make sense of the intuitions not only that we love the individuals themselves rather than their properties, but also that my beloved is not fungible—that no one could simply take her place without loss. Different theories approach these questions in different ways, but, as will become clear below, the question of justification is primary.

One way to understand the question of why we love is as asking for what the value of love is: what do we get out of it? One kind of answer, which has its roots in Aristotle, is that having loving relationships promotes self-knowledge insofar as your beloved acts as a kind of mirror, reflecting your character back to you (Badhwar, 2003, p. 58). Of course, this answer presupposes that we cannot accurately know ourselves in other ways: that left alone, our sense of ourselves will be too imperfect, too biased, to help us grow and mature as persons. The metaphor of a mirror also suggests that our beloveds will be in the relevant respects similar to us, so that merely by observing them, we can come to know ourselves better in a way that is, if not free from bias, at least more objective than otherwise.

Brink (1999, pp. 264–65) argues that there are serious limits to the value of such mirroring of one’s self in a beloved. For if the aim is not just to know yourself better but to improve yourself, you ought also to interact with others who are not just like yourself: interacting with such diverse others can help you recognize alternative possibilities for how to live and so better assess the relative merits of these possibilities. Whiting (2013) also emphasizes the importance of our beloveds’ having an independent voice capable of reflecting not who one now is but an ideal for who one is to be. Nonetheless, we need not take the metaphor of the mirror quite so literally; rather, our beloveds can reflect our selves not through their inherent similarity to us but rather through the interpretations they offer of us, both explicitly and implicitly in their responses to us. This is what Badhwar calls the “epistemic significance” of love. [ 16 ]

In addition to this epistemic significance of love, LaFollette (1996, Chapter 5) offers several other reasons why it is good to love, reasons derived in part from the psychological literature on love: love increases our sense of well-being, it elevates our sense of self-worth, and it serves to develop our character. It also, we might add, tends to lower stress and blood pressure and to increase health and longevity. Friedman (1993) argues that the kind of partiality towards our beloveds that love involves is itself morally valuable because it supports relationships—loving relationships—that contribute “to human well-being, integrity, and fulfillment in life” (p. 61). And Solomon (1988, p. 155) claims:

Ultimately, there is only one reason for love. That one grand reason…is “because we bring out the best in each other.” What counts as “the best,” of course, is subject to much individual variation.

This is because, Solomon suggests, in loving someone, I want myself to be better so as to be worthy of his love for me.

Each of these answers to the question of why we love understands it to be asking about love quite generally, abstracted away from details of particular relationships. It is also possible to understand the question as asking about particular loves. Here, there are several questions that are relevant:

• What, if anything, justifies my loving rather than not loving this particular person?
• What, if anything, justifies my coming to love this particular person rather than someone else?
• What, if anything, justifies my continuing to love this particular person given the changes—both in him and me and in the overall circumstances—that have occurred since I began loving him?

These are importantly different questions. Velleman (1999), for example, thinks we can answer (1) by appealing to the fact that my beloved is a person and so has a rational nature, yet he thinks (2) and (3) have no answers: the best we can do is offer causal explanations for our loving particular people, a position echoed by Han (2021). Setiya (2014) similarly thinks (1) has an answer, but points not to the rational nature of persons but rather to the other’s humanity , where such humanity differs from personhood in that not all humans need have the requisite rational nature for personhood, and not all persons need be humans. And, as will become clear below , the distinction between (2) and (3) will become important in resolving puzzles concerning whether our beloveds are fungible, though it should be clear that (3) potentially raises questions concerning personal identity (which will not be addressed here).

It is important not to misconstrue these justificatory questions. Thomas (1991) , for example, rejects the idea that love can be justified: “there are no rational considerations whereby anyone can lay claim to another’s love or insist that an individual’s love for another is irrational” (p. 474). This is because, Thomas claims (p. 471):

no matter how wonderful and lovely an individual might be, on any and all accounts, it is simply false that a romantically unencumbered person must love that individual on pain of being irrational. Or, there is no irrationality involved in ceasing to love a person whom one once loved immensely, although the person has not changed.

However, as LaFollette (1996, p. 63) correctly points out,

reason is not some external power which dictates how we should behave, but an internal power, integral to who we are.… Reason does not command that we love anyone. Nonetheless, reason is vital in determining whom we love and why we love them.

That is, reasons for love are pro tanto : they are a part of the overall reasons we have for acting, and it is up to us in exercising our capacity for agency to decide what on balance we have reason to do or even whether we shall act contrary to our reasons. To construe the notion of a reason for love as compelling us to love, as Thomas does, is to misconstrue the place such reasons have within our agency. [ 17 ]

Most philosophical discussions of the justification of love focus on question (1) , thinking that answering this question will also, to the extent that we can, answer question (2) , which is typically not distinguished from (3) . The answers given to these questions vary in a way that turns on how the kind of evaluation implicit in love is construed. On the one hand, those who understand the evaluation implicit in love to be a matter of the bestowal of value (such as Telfer 1970–71; Friedman 1993; Singer 1994) typically claim that no justification can be given (cf. Section 4.2 ). As indicated above, this seems problematic, especially given the importance love can have both in our lives and, especially, in shaping our identities as persons. To reject the idea that we can love for reasons may reduce the impact our agency can have in defining who we are.

On the other hand, those who understand the evaluation implicit in love to be a matter of appraisal tend to answer the justificatory question by appeal to these valuable properties of the beloved. This acceptance of the idea that love can be justified leads to two further, related worries about the object of love.

The first worry is raised by Vlastos (1981) in a discussion Plato’s and Aristotle’s accounts of love. Vlastos notes that these accounts focus on the properties of our beloveds: we are to love people, they say, only because and insofar as they are objectifications of the excellences. Consequently, he argues, in doing so they fail to distinguish “ disinterested affection for the person we love” from “ appreciation of the excellences instantiated by that person ” (p. 33). That is, Vlastos thinks that Plato and Aristotle provide an account of love that is really a love of properties rather than a love of persons—love of a type of person, rather than love of a particular person—thereby losing what is distinctive about love as an essentially personal attitude. This worry about Plato and Aristotle might seem to apply just as well to other accounts that justify love in terms of the properties of the person: insofar as we love the person for the sake of her properties, it might seem that what we love is those properties and not the person. Here it is surely insufficient to say, as Solomon (1988, p. 154) does, “if love has its reasons, then it is not the whole person that one loves but certain aspects of that person—though the rest of the person comes along too, of course”: that final tagline fails to address the central difficulty about what the object of love is and so about love as a distinctly personal attitude. (Clausen 2019 might seem to address this worry by arguing that we love people not as having certain properties but rather as having “ organic unities ”: a holistic set of properties the value of each of which must be understood in essential part in terms of its place within that whole. Nonetheless, while this is an interesting and plausible way to think about the value of the properties of persons, that organic unity itself will be a (holistic) property held by the person, and it seems that the fundamental problem reemerges at the level of this holistic property: do we love the holistic unity rather than the person?)

The second worry concerns the fungibility of the object of love. To be fungible is to be replaceable by another relevantly similar object without any loss of value. Thus, money is fungible: I can give you two $5 bills in exchange for a $10 bill, and neither of us has lost anything. Is the object of love fungible? That is, can I simply switch from loving one person to loving another relevantly similar person without any loss? The worry about fungibility is commonly put this way: if we accept that love can be justified by appealing to properties of the beloved, then it may seem that in loving someone for certain reasons, I love him not simply as the individual he is, but as instantiating those properties. And this may imply that any other person instantiating those same properties would do just as well: my beloved would be fungible. Indeed, it may be that another person exhibits the properties that ground my love to a greater degree than my current beloved does, and so it may seem that in such a case I have reason to “trade up”—to switch my love to the new, better person. However, it seems clear that the objects of our loves are not fungible: love seems to involve a deeply personal commitment to a particular person, a commitment that is antithetical to the idea that our beloveds are fungible or to the idea that we ought to be willing to trade up when possible. [ 18 ]

In responding to these worries, Nozick (1989) appeals to the union view of love he endorses (see the section on Love as Union ):

The intention in love is to form a we and to identify with it as an extended self, to identify one’s fortunes in large part with its fortunes. A willingness to trade up, to destroy the very we you largely identify with, would then be a willingness to destroy your self in the form of your own extended self. [p. 78]

So it is because love involves forming a “we” that we must understand other persons and not properties to be the objects of love, and it is because my very identity as a person depends essentially on that “we” that it is not possible to substitute without loss one object of my love for another. However, Badhwar (2003) criticizes Nozick, saying that his response implies that once I love someone, I cannot abandon that love no matter who that person becomes; this, she says, “cannot be understood as love at all rather than addiction” (p. 61). [ 19 ]

Instead, Badhwar (1987) turns to her robust-concern account of love as a concern for the beloved for his sake rather than one’s own. Insofar as my love is disinterested — not a means to antecedent ends of my own—it would be senseless to think that my beloved could be replaced by someone who is able to satisfy my ends equally well or better. Consequently, my beloved is in this way irreplaceable. However, this is only a partial response to the worry about fungibility, as Badhwar herself seems to acknowledge. For the concern over fungibility arises not merely for those cases in which we think of love as justified instrumentally, but also for those cases in which the love is justified by the intrinsic value of the properties of my beloved. Confronted with cases like this, Badhwar (2003) concludes that the object of love is fungible after all (though she insists that it is very unlikely in practice). (Soble (1990, Chapter 13) draws similar conclusions.)

Nonetheless, Badhwar thinks that the object of love is “phenomenologically non-fungible” (2003, p. 63; see also 1987, p. 14). By this she means that we experience our beloveds to be irreplaceable: “loving and delighting in [one person] are not completely commensurate with loving and delighting in another” (1987, p. 14). Love can be such that we sometimes desire to be with this particular person whom we love, not another whom we also love, for our loves are qualitatively different. But why is this? It seems as though the typical reason I now want to spend time with Amy rather than Bob is, for example, that Amy is funny but Bob is not. I love Amy in part for her humor, and I love Bob for other reasons, and these qualitative differences between them is what makes them not fungible. However, this reply does not address the worry about the possibility of trading up: if Bob were to be at least as funny (charming, kind, etc.) as Amy, why shouldn’t I dump her and spend all my time with him?

A somewhat different approach is taken by Whiting (1991). In response to the first worry concerning the object of love, Whiting argues that Vlastos offers a false dichotomy: having affection for someone that is disinterested —for her sake rather than my own—essentially involves an appreciation of her excellences as such. Indeed, Whiting says, my appreciation of these as excellences, and so the underlying commitment I have to their value, just is a disinterested commitment to her because these excellences constitute her identity as the person she is. The person, therefore, really is the object of love. Delaney (1996) takes the complementary tack of distinguishing between the object of one’s love, which of course is the person, and the grounds of the love, which are her properties: to say, as Solomon does, that we love someone for reasons is not at all to say that we only love certain aspects of the person. In these terms, we might say that Whiting’s rejection of Vlastos’ dichotomy can be read as saying that what makes my attitude be one of disinterested affection—one of love—for the person is precisely that I am thereby responding to her excellences as the reasons for that affection. [ 20 ]

Of course, more needs to be said about what it is that makes a particular person be the object of love. Implicit in Whiting’s account is an understanding of the way in which the object of my love is determined in part by the history of interactions I have with her: it is she, and not merely her properties (which might be instantiated in many different people), that I want to be with; it is she, and not merely her properties, on whose behalf I am concerned when she suffers and whom I seek to comfort; etc. This addresses the first worry, but not the second worry about fungibility, for the question still remains whether she is the object of my love only as instantiating certain properties, and so whether or not I have reason to “trade up.”

To respond to the fungibility worry, Whiting and Delaney appeal explicitly to the historical relationship. [ 21 ] Thus, Whiting claims, although there may be a relatively large pool of people who have the kind of excellences of character that would justify my loving them, and so although there can be no answer to question (2) about why I come to love this rather than that person within this pool, once I have come to love this person and so have developed a historical relation with her, this history of concern justifies my continuing to love this person rather than someone else (1991, p. 7). Similarly, Delaney claims that love is grounded in “historical-relational properties” (1996, p. 346), so that I have reasons for continuing to love this person rather than switching allegiances and loving someone else. In each case, the appeal to both such historical relations and the excellences of character of my beloved is intended to provide an answer to question (3) , and this explains why the objects of love are not fungible.

There seems to be something very much right with this response. Relationships grounded in love are essentially personal, and it would be odd to think of what justifies that love to be merely non-relational properties of the beloved. Nonetheless, it is still unclear how the historical-relational propreties can provide any additional justification for subsequent concern beyond that which is already provided (as an answer to question (1) ) by appeal to the excellences of the beloved’s character (cf. Brink 1999). The mere fact that I have loved someone in the past does not seem to justify my continuing to love him in the future. When we imagine that he is going through a rough time and begins to lose the virtues justifying my initial love for him, why shouldn’t I dump him and instead come to love someone new having all of those virtues more fully? Intuitively (unless the change she undergoes makes her in some important sense no longer the same person he was), we think I should not dump him, but the appeal to the mere fact that I loved him in the past is surely not enough. Yet what historical-relational properties could do the trick? (For an interesting attempt at an answer, see Kolodny 2003 and also Howard 2019.)

If we think that love can be justified, then it may seem that the appeal to particular historical facts about a loving relationship to justify that love is inadequate, for such idiosyncratic and subjective properties might explain but cannot justify love. Rather, it may seem, justification in general requires appealing to universal, objective properties. But such properties are ones that others might share, which leads to the problem of fungibility. Consequently it may seem that love cannot be justified. In the face of this predicament, accounts of love that understand love to be an attitude towards value that is intermediate between appraisal and bestowal, between recognizing already existing value and creating that value (see Section 4.3 ) might seem to offer a way out. For once we reject the thought that the value of our beloveds must be either the precondition or the consequence of our love, we have room to acknowledge that the deeply personal, historically grounded, creative nature of love (central to bestowal accounts) and the understanding of love as responsive to valuable properties of the beloved that can justify that love (central to appraisal accounts) are not mutually exclusive (Helm 2010; Bagley 2015).

• Annas, J., 1977, “Plato and Aristotle on Friendship and Altruism”, Mind , 86: 532–54.
• Badhwar, N. K., 1987, “Friends as Ends in Themselves”, Philosophy & Phenomenological Research , 48: 1–23.
• –––, 2003, “Love”, in H. LaFollette (ed.), Practical Ethics , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 42–69.
• Badhwar, N. K. (ed.), 1993, Friendship: A Philosophical Reader , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• Bagley, B., 2015, “Loving Someone in Particular”, Ethics , 125: 477–507.
• –––, 2018. “(The Varieties of) Love in Contemporary Anglophone Philosophy”, in Adrienne M. Martin (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Love in Philosophy , New York, NY: Routledge, 453–64.
• Baier, A. C., 1991, “Unsafe Loves”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 433–50.
• Blum, L. A., 1980, Friendship, Altruism, and Morality , London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• –––, 1993, “Friendship as a Moral Phenomenon”, in Badhwar (1993), 192–210.
• Bransen, J., 2006, “Selfless Self-Love”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 9: 3–25.
• Bratman, M. E., 1999, “Shared Intention”, in Faces of Intention: Selected Essays on Intention and Agency , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 109–29.
• Brentlinger, J., 1970/1989, “The Nature of Love”, in Soble (1989a), 136–48.
• Brink, D. O., 1999, “Eudaimonism, Love and Friendship, and Political Community”, Social Philosophy & Policy , 16: 252–289.
• Brown, R., 1987, Analyzing Love , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Clausen, G., 2019, “Love of Whole Persons”, The Journal of Ethics , 23 (4): 347–67.
• Cocking, D. & Kennett, J., 1998, “Friendship and the Self”, Ethics , 108: 502–27.
• Cooper, J. M., 1977, “Aristotle on the Forms of Friendship”, Review of Metaphysics , 30: 619–48.
• Delaney, N., 1996, “Romantic Love and Loving Commitment: Articulating a Modern Ideal”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 33: 375–405.
• Ebels-Duggan, K., 2008, “Against Beneficence: A Normative Account of Love”, Ethics , 119: 142–70.
• Fisher, M., 1990, Personal Love , London: Duckworth.
• Frankfurt, H., 1999, “Autonomy, Necessity, and Love”, in Necessity, Volition, and Love , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 129–41.
• Friedman, M. A., 1993, What Are Friends For? Feminist Perspectives on Personal Relationships and Moral Theory , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• –––, 1998, “Romantic Love and Personal Autonomy”, Midwest Studies in Philosophy , 22: 162–81.
• Gilbert, M., 1989, On Social Facts , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• –––, 1996, Living Together: Rationality, Sociality, and Obligation , Rowman & Littlefield.
• –––, 2000, Sociality and Responsibility: New Essays in Plural Subject Theory , Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Grau, C. & Smuts, A., 2017, Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Love , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hamlyn, D. W., 1989, “The Phenomena of Love and Hate”, in Soble (1989a), 218–234.
• Han, Y., 2021, “Do We Love for Reasons?”, Philosophy & Phenomenological Research , 102: 106–126.
• Hegel, G. W. F., 1997, “A Fragment on Love”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 117–20.
• Helm, B. W., 2008, “Plural Agents”, Noûs , 42: 17–49.
• –––, 2009, “Love, Identification, and the Emotions”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 46: 39–59.
• –––, 2010, Love, Friendship, and the Self: Intimacy, Identification, and the Social Nature of Persons , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Howard, C., 2019, “Fitting Love and Reasons for Loving” in M. Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics (Volume 9). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198846253.001.0001
• Jaworska, A. & Wonderly, M., 2017, “Love and Caring”, in C. Grau & A. Smuts (2020). doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199395729.013.15
• Jollimore, T, 2011, Love’s Vision , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Kolodny, N., 2003, “Love as Valuing a Relationship”, The Philosophical Review , 112: 135–89.
• Kraut, Robert, 1986 “Love De Re ”, Midwest Studies in Philosophy , 10: 413–30.
• LaFollette, H., 1996, Personal Relationships: Love, Identity, and Morality , Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Press.
• Lamb, R. E., (ed.), 1997, Love Analyzed , Westview Press.
• Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R., 1940, A Greek-English Lexicon , Oxford: Clarendon Press, 9th edition.
• Martin, A., 2015, “Love, Incorporated”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 18: 691–702.
• Montaigne, M., [E], Essays , in The Complete Essays of Montaigne , Donald Frame (trans.), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1958.
• Naar, H., 2013, “A Dispositional Theory of Love”, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 94(3): 342–357.
• Newton-Smith, W., 1989, “A Conceptual Investigation of Love”, in Soble (1989a), 199–217.
• Nozick, R., 1989, “Love’s Bond”, in The Examined Life: Philosophical Meditations , New York: Simon & Schuster, 68–86.
• Nussbaum, M., 1990, “Love and the Individual: Romantic Rightness and Platonic Aspiration”, in Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 314–34.
• Nygren, A., 1953a, Agape and Eros , Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press.
• –––, 1953b, “ Agape and Eros ”, in Soble (1989a), 85–95.
• Ortiz-Millán, G., 2007, “Love and Rationality: On Some Possible Rational Effects of Love”, Kriterion , 48: 127–44.
• Pismenny, A. & Prinz, J., 2017, “Is Love an Emotion?”, in C. Grau & A. Smuts (2017). doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199395729.013.10
• Price, A. W., 1989, Love and Friendship in Plato and Arisotle , New York: Clarendon Press.
• Rorty, A. O., 1980, “Introduction”, in A. O. Rorty (ed.), Explaining Emotions , Berkeley: University of California Press, 1–8.
• –––, 1986/1993, “The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes: Love is Not Love Which Alters Not When It Alteration Finds”, in Badhwar (1993), 73–88.
• Scruton, R., 1986, Sexual Desire: A Moral Philosophy of the Erotic , New York: Free Press.
• Searle, J. R., 1990, “Collective Intentions and Actions”, in P. R. Cohen, M. E. Pollack, & J. L. Morgan (eds.), Intentions in Communication , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 401–15.
• Setiya, K., 2014, “Love and the Value of a Life”, Philosophical Review , 123: 251–80.
• Sherman, N., 1993, “Aristotle on the Shared Life”, in Badhwar (1993), 91–107.
• Singer, I., 1984a, The Nature of Love, Volume 1: Plato to Luther , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd edition.
• –––, 1984b, The Nature of Love, Volume 2: Courtly and Romantic , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• –––, 1989, The Nature of Love, Volume 3: The Modern World , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd edn.
• –––, 1991, “From The Nature of Love ”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 259–78.
• –––, 1994, The Pursuit of Love , Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• –––, 2009, Philosophy of Love: A Partial Summing-up , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Soble, A. (ed.), 1989a, Eros, Agape, and Philia: Readings in the Philosophy of Love , New York, NY: Paragon House.
• –––, 1989b, “An Introduction to the Philosophy of Love”, in Soble (1989a), xi-xxv.
• –––, 1990, The Structure of Love , New Haven: Yale University Press.
• –––, 1997, “Union, Autonomy, and Concern”, in Lamb (1997), 65–92.
• Solomon, R. C., 1976, The Passions , New York: Anchor Press.
• –––, 1981, Love: Emotion, Myth, and Metaphor , New York: Anchor Press.
• –––, 1988, About Love: Reinventing Romance for Our Times , New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Solomon, R. C. & Higgins, K. M. (eds.), 1991, The Philosophy of (Erotic) Love , Lawrence: Kansas University Press.
• Stump, E., 2006, “Love by All Accounts”, Presidential Address to the Central APA, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association , 80: 25–43.
• Taylor, G., 1976, “Love”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 76: 147–64.
• Telfer, E., 1970–71, “Friendship”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 71: 223–41.
• Thomas, L., 1987, “Friendship”, Synthese , 72: 217–36.
• –––, 1989, “Friends and Lovers”, in G. Graham & H. La Follette (eds.), Person to Person , Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 182–98.
• –––, 1991, “Reasons for Loving”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 467–476.
• –––, 1993, “Friendship and Other Loves”, in Badhwar (1993), 48–64.
• Tuomela, R., 1984, A Theory of Social Action , Dordrecht: Reidel.
• –––, 1995, The Importance of Us: A Philosophical Study of Basic Social Notions , Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Velleman, J. D., 1999, “Love as a Moral Emotion”, Ethics , 109: 338–74.
• –––, 2008, “Beyond Price”, Ethics , 118: 191–212.
• Vlastos, G., 1981, “The Individual as Object of Love in Plato”, in Platonic Studies , 2nd edition, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 3–42.
• White, R. J., 2001, Love’s Philosophy , Rowman & Littlefield.
• Whiting, J. E., 1991, “Impersonal Friends”, Monist , 74: 3–29.
• –––, 2013, “Love: Self-Propagation, Self-Preservation, or Ekstasis?”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy , 43: 403–29.
• Willigenburg, T. Van, 2005, “Reason and Love: A Non-Reductive Analysis of the Normativity of Agent-Relative Reasons”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 8: 45–62.
• Wollheim, R., 1984, The Thread of Life , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Wonderly, M., 2016, “On Being Attached”, Philosophical Studies , 173: 223–42.
• –––, 2017, “Love and Attachment”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 54: 235–50.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Aristotle , Nicomachean Ethics , translated by W.D. Ross.
• Moseley, A., “ Philosophy of Love ,” in J. Fieser (ed.), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

character, moral | emotion | friendship | impartiality | obligations: special | personal identity | Plato: ethics | Plato: rhetoric and poetry | respect | value: intrinsic vs. extrinsic

Copyright © 2021 by Bennett Helm < bennett . helm @ fandm . edu >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2024 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Before You Write a Love Essay, Read This to Get Examples

The day will come when you can’t escape the fate of all students: You will have to write a what is love essay.

No worries:

Here you’ll find tons of love essay topics and examples. No time to read everything? Scroll down to get a free PDF with original samples.

Definition: Essay on Love

First, let’s define what is love essay?

The most common topics are:

• Definition of love
• What is love?
• Meaning of love

Why limit yourself to these hackneyed, general themes? Below, I’ll show how to make your paper on love original yet relevant to the prompt you get from teachers.

Love Essay Topics: 20 Ideas to Choose for Your Paper

Your essay on love and relationship doesn’t have to be super official and unemotional. It’s ok to share reflections and personal opinions when writing about romance.

Often, students get a general task to write an essay on love. It means they can choose a theme and a title for their paper. If that’s your case,  feel free to try any of these love essay topics:

• Exploring the impact of love on individuals and relationships.
• Love in the digital age: Navigating romance in a tech world.
• Is there any essence and significance in unconditional love?
• Love as a universal language: Connecting hearts across cultures.
• Biochemistry of love: Exploring the process.
• Love vs. passion vs. obsession.
• How love helps cope with heartbreak and grief.
• The art of loving. How we breed intimacy and trust.
• The science behind attraction and attachment.
• How love and relationships shape our identity and help with self-discovery.
• Love and vulnerability: How to embrace emotional openness.
• Romance is more complex than most think: Passion, intimacy, and commitment explained.
• Love as empathy: Building sympathetic connections in a cruel world.
• Evolution of love. How people described it throughout history.
• The role of love in mental and emotional well-being.
• Love as a tool to look and find purpose in life.
• Welcoming diversity in relations through love and acceptance.
• Love vs. friendship: The intersection of platonic and romantic bonds.
• The choices we make and challenges we overcome for those we love.
• Love and forgiveness: How its power heals wounds and strengthens bonds.

Love Essay Examples: Choose Your Sample for Inspiration

Essays about love are usually standard, 5-paragraph papers students write in college:

• One paragraph is for an introduction, with a hook and a thesis statement
• Three are for a body, with arguments or descriptions
• One last passage is for a conclusion, with a thesis restatement and final thoughts

Below are the ready-made samples to consider. They’ll help you see what an essay about love with an introduction, body, and conclusion looks like.

What is love essay: 250 words

Lao Tzu once said, “Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength while loving someone deeply gives you courage.” Indeed, love can transform individuals, relationships, and our world.

A word of immense depth and countless interpretations, love has always fascinated philosophers, poets, and ordinary individuals. This  emotion breaks boundaries and has a super power to change lives. But what is love, actually?

It’s a force we feel in countless ways. It is the warm embrace of a parent, filled with care and unwavering support. It is the gentle touch of a lover, sparking a flame that ignites passion and desire. Love is the kind words of a friend, offering solace and understanding in times of need. It is the selfless acts of compassion and empathy that bind humanity together.

Love is not confined to romantic relationships alone. It is found in the family bonds, the connections we forge with friends, and even the compassion we extend to strangers. Love is a thread that weaves through the fabric of our lives, enriching and nourishing our souls.

However, love is not without its complexities. It can be both euphoric and agonizing, uplifting and devastating. Love requires vulnerability, trust, and the willingness to embrace joy and pain. It is a delicate balance between passion and compassion, independence and interdependence.

Finally, the essence of love may be elusive to define with mere words. It is an experience that surpasses language and logic, encompassing a spectrum of emotions and actions. Love is a profound connection that unites us all, reminding us of our shared humanity and the capacity for boundless compassion.

What is love essay: 500 words

A 500-word essay on why I love you

Trying to encapsulate why I love you in a mere 500 words is impossible. My love for you goes beyond the confines of language, transcending words and dwelling in the realm of emotions, connections, and shared experiences. Nevertheless, I shall endeavor to express the depth and breadth of my affection for you.

First and foremost, I love you for who you are. You possess a unique blend of qualities and characteristics that captivate my heart and mind. Your kindness and compassion touch the lives of those around you, and I am grateful to be the recipient of your unwavering care and understanding. Your intelligence and wit constantly challenge me to grow and learn, stimulating my mind and enriching our conversations. You have a beautiful spirit that radiates warmth and joy, and I am drawn to your vibrant energy.

I love the way you make me feel. When I am with you, I feel a sense of comfort and security that allows me to be my true self. Your presence envelops me in a cocoon of love and acceptance, where I can express my thoughts, fears, and dreams without fear of judgment. Your support and encouragement inspire me to pursue my passions and overcome obstacles. With you by my side, I feel empowered to face the world, knowing I have a partner who believes in me.

I love the memories we have created together. From the laughter-filled moments of shared adventures to the quiet and intimate conversations, every memory is etched in my heart. Whether exploring new places, indulging in our favorite activities, or simply enjoying each other’s company in comfortable silence, each experience reinforces our bond. Our shared memories serve as a foundation for our relationship, a testament to the depth of our connection and the love that binds us.

I love your quirks and imperfections. Your true essence shines through these unique aspects! Your little traits make me smile and remind me of the beautiful individual you are. I love how you wrinkle your nose when you laugh, become lost in thought when reading a book, and even sing off-key in the shower. These imperfections make you human, relatable, and utterly lovable.

I love the future we envision together. We support each other’s goals, cheering one another on as we navigate the path toward our dreams. The thought of building a life together, creating a home filled with love and shared experiences, fills my heart with anticipation and excitement. The future we imagine is one that I am eager to explore with you by my side.

In conclusion, the reasons why I love you are as vast and varied as the universe itself. It is a love that defies logic and surpasses the limitations of language. From the depths of my being, I love you for the person you are, the way you make me feel, the memories we cherish, your quirks and imperfections, and the future we envision together. My love for you is boundless, unconditional, and everlasting.

A 5-paragraph essay about love

I’ve gathered all the samples (and a few bonus ones) in one PDF. It’s free to download. So, you can keep it at hand when the time comes to write a love essay.

Ready to Write Your Essay About Love?

Now that you know the definition of a love essay and have many topic ideas, it’s time to write your A-worthy paper! Here go the steps:

• Check all the examples of what is love essay from this post.
• Choose the topic and angle that fits your prompt best.
• Write your original and inspiring story.

Any questions left? Our writers are all ears. Please don’t hesitate to ask!

• Essay samples
• Essay writing
• Writing tips

Recent Posts

• Writing the “Why Should Abortion Be Made Legal” Essay: Sample and Tips
• 3 Examples of Enduring Issue Essays to Write Yours Like a Pro
• Writing Essay on Friendship: 3 Samples to Get Inspired
• How to Structure a Leadership Essay (Samples to Consider)
• What Is Nursing Essay, and How to Write It Like a Pro

Essay on Love for Students and Children

500+ words essay on love.

Love is the most significant thing in human’s life. Each science and every single literature masterwork will tell you about it. Humans are also social animals. We lived for centuries with this way of life, we were depended on one another to tell us how our clothes fit us, how our body is whether healthy or emaciated. All these we get the honest opinions of those who love us, those who care for us and makes our happiness paramount.

What is Love?

Love is a set of emotions, behaviors, and beliefs with strong feelings of affection. So, for example, a person might say he or she loves his or her dog, loves freedom, or loves God. The concept of love may become an unimaginable thing and also it may happen to each person in a particular way.

Love has a variety of feelings, emotions, and attitude. For someone love is more than just being interested physically in another one, rather it is an emotional attachment. We can say love is more of a feeling that a person feels for another person. Therefore, the basic meaning of love is to feel more than liking towards someone.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Need of Love

We know that the desire to love and care for others is a hard-wired and deep-hearted because the fulfillment of this wish increases the happiness level. Expressing love for others benefits not just the recipient of affection, but also the person who delivers it. The need to be loved can be considered as one of our most basic and fundamental needs.

One of the forms that this need can take is contact comfort. It is the desire to be held and touched. So there are many experiments showing that babies who are not having contact comfort, especially during the first six months, grow up to be psychologically damaged.

Significance of Love

Love is as critical for the mind and body of a human being as oxygen. Therefore, the more connected you are, the healthier you will be physically as well as emotionally. It is also true that the less love you have, the level of depression will be more in your life. So, we can say that love is probably the best antidepressant.

It is also a fact that the most depressed people don’t love themselves and they do not feel loved by others. They also become self-focused and hence making themselves less attractive to others.

Society and Love

It is a scientific fact that society functions better when there is a certain sense of community. Compassion and love are the glue for society. Hence without it, there is no feeling of togetherness for further evolution and progress. Love , compassion, trust and caring we can say that these are the building blocks of relationships and society.

Relationship and Love

A relationship is comprised of many things such as friendship , sexual attraction , intellectual compatibility, and finally love. Love is the binding element that keeps a relationship strong and solid. But how do you know if you are in love in true sense? Here are some symptoms that the emotion you are feeling is healthy, life-enhancing love.

Love is the Greatest Wealth in Life

Love is the greatest wealth in life because we buy things we love for our happiness. For example, we build our dream house and purchase a favorite car to attract love. Being loved in a remote environment is a better experience than been hated even in the most advanced environment.

Love or Money

Love should be given more importance than money as love is always everlasting. Money is important to live, but having a true companion you can always trust should come before that. If you love each other, you will both work hard to help each other live an amazing life together.

Love has been a vital reason we do most things in our life. Before we could know ourselves, we got showered by it from our close relatives like mothers , fathers , siblings, etc. Thus love is a unique gift for shaping us and our life. Therefore, we can say that love is a basic need of life. It plays a vital role in our life, society, and relation. It gives us energy and motivation in a difficult time. Finally, we can say that it is greater than any other thing in life.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Picture Prompts

Do you believe in soul mates?

By The Learning Network

Valentine’s Day is fast approaching. For many, it’s a day to celebrate with a special someone. What plans, if any, do you have for Valentine’s Day?

Are you a “romantic” at heart? Do you believe in things like “love at first sight?” How do you feel about “soul mates,” or the notion that there is a perfect person out there for everyone? What traits would your ideal partner possess?

Tell us in the comments, then read the related essay to learn more about one writer’s thoughts on romantic love.

Want more Picture Prompts? Find them all in this column .

Students 13 and older in the United States and Britain, and 16 and older elsewhere, are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

• Relationships

Is There Really True Love?

To find true love, focus on giving, not receiving..

Posted December 23, 2017 | Reviewed by Jessica Schrader

• Why Relationships Matter
• Find a therapist to strengthen relationships

Is there an emotional bond that deserves to be called true love? Is true love possible? In their 1986 hit song, the Judds sang: “Grandpa, take me back to yesterday ... Did lovers really fall in love to stay and stand beside each other come what may?”

The lyrics reflect the declining stability of marital relationships over four decades. Although the U.S. divorce rate declined slightly three years in a row from 2013 to 2016, typical marriages still have only about a 50% chance of lasting. For years, marriage rates declined, in part because young adults have waited longer to get married. Many say that they don’t intend to ever get married.

The belief that love is true when it lasts is not an outdated concept. In her 2015 song, True Love , Ariana Grande describes how her relationship grew into true love from kisses to a commitment to last forever. But how can a person know that a relationship will last forever? Lovers don’t expect that even a genuine relationship will consist only of passionate positive emotions. In 1960, Buddy Holly’s song, True Love Ways , was released posthumously. Written as a wedding gift for his wife, Holly’s song predicted: “Sometimes we’ll sigh; sometimes we’ll cry ... Throughout the days our true love ways will bring us joys to share with those who really care.”

Looking back on his marriage in his song, Remember When , Alan Jackson recounts the ups and downs over the years: “There was joy, there was hurt ... We came together, fell apart and broke each other’s hearts.” Despite it all, Jackson anticipated: “We won’t be sad, we’ll be glad for all the life we’ve had.”

Do conflicting emotions characterize or define true love? In her 2012 song, True Love , pop artist Pink expresses the mixed emotions of her relationship: “Sometimes I hate every single stupid word you say ... At the same time, I wanna hug you.” In fact, Pink explains: “I really hate you so much, I think it must be true love,” because “nothing else can break my heart like true love ... And no one else can break my heart like you.” Despite hurt and heartbreak, Pink identifies her feelings as true love because “without you I’m incomplete.”

In his song, All of Me , dedicated to his fiancée, John Legend also admits to complex emotions: “You’re my downfall, you’re my muse. My worst distraction, my rhythm and blues.” But ultimately completeness is the core of his relationship: “You’re my end and my beginning. Even when I lose I’m winning, ‘cause I give you all of me and you give me all of you.” Do we know a love is true when we don’t feel complete without our lover?

Research suggests that people share a common image of what it means to be loved. Key characteristics of knowing someone loves you include: support without expectation of anything in return, compassion in difficult times, quality time together, being told you are loved, feeling special and appreciated, and being forgiven for something you did wrong. By contrast, people agree that we don’t feel loved when someone is possessive or tries to control us.

But what does it mean to love with a pure or true love? Research has documented a number of different types of love: eros or romantic, ludus or game-playing, storge or friendship , pragma or logical, mania or possessive, and agape or altruistic . Physical attraction and intimacy are central to eros, permissiveness and variety of partners characterize ludus, companionship and stability are the foundation of storge, and compatibility in social and personal characteristics is the core of pragma. Mania is obsessive, dependent, jealous and intensely emotional, whereas agape is altruistic, all-giving, and selfless with no expectation of love in return.

How we love others can vary for different relationships and in various situations. But does one style of loving represent what we envision as true love? While each style illustrates our yearning to find the right person who will satisfy our need to be loved, one—agape—reveals our capacity for what might come closest to pure love. Rather than being concerned with how a relationship benefits us, agape is focused on the best interests of the one we love. It is the love that puts the other first. Researchers identify this style as one in which a person tries to always help their lover through difficult times, sacrifice their own wishes to let their lover achieve theirs, endure all for the sake of their lover, and suffer in place of their lover.

This love is expressed in Freddy Fender’s hit recording of Before the Next Teardrop Falls : “If he brings you happiness , then I wish you all the best. It’s your happiness that matters most of all.” Beyond the emotional, the essence of this selfless love is behavioral commitment: “But if he ever breaks your heart, if the teardrops ever start, I’ll be there before the next teardrop falls.”

The benefits of agape have been highlighted by research. Selfless caring is associated with deep love, intimate communication, relationship satisfaction, loyalty and commitment. Couples in agape relationships are likely to deal more effectively with stress by supporting each other and by dealing with problems jointly, promoting their sense of “ we-ness .” Employing healthy coping strategies can deepen commitment and strengthen satisfaction with the relationship.

But are there costs to loving in such a selfless way? What are the psychological consequences of altruistic love? One would anticipate that the strong commitment and deep bond would mean great emotional pain if the relationship fails. As expected, research suggests that the end of such a rich committed relationship can result in feelings of profound loss and sadness. The more rewarding the love, the greater loss. Taking the risk of one day having to pay such a price is inherent in the essential nature of agape as all-giving and selfless.

Is it realistic to think that we can love in such an all-giving, non-demanding way? Research suggests that this style is rarely, if ever, fully actualized. It might well be the ideal we can hope for and strive toward. In searching for true love, we need to redirect our focus and energy from receiving to giving. Research shows that those who practice other-directed love are less likely to ever have to pay the hefty price. Perhaps there is such a thing as true love, and perhaps it can last.

Cooper, L. R., & Kurstin, G. (2012). True love [Recorded by Pink (Lily Rose Cooper)]. On The Truth About Love [CD]. New York, NY: RCA Records.

Galinha, I. C., Oishi, S., Pereira, C. R., Wirtz, D., & Esteves, F. (2014). Adult attachment, love styles, relationship experiences and subjective well-being: Cross-cultural and gender comparison between Americans, Portuguese, and Mozambicans. Social Indicators Research , 119 , 823-852.

Grande, A. (2015). True Love. On Christmas & Chill [Digital Release on iTunes]. Republic Records.

Hammock, G., & Richardson, D. S. (2011). Love attitudes and relationship experience. The Journal of Social Psychology , 151 , 608-624.

Heaven, P. C. L., Da Silva, T., Carey, C., & Holen, J. (2004). Loving styles: Relationships with personality and attachment styles. European Journal of Personality , 18 , 103-113.

Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 50 , 392-402.

Holly, B., & Petty, N. (1960). True love ways [Recorded by B. Holly]. On The Buddy Holly Story , Volume 2 [Vinyl]. New York, NY: Coral Records.

Jackson, A. (2003). Remember when. On Greatest Hits Volume II [CD]. New York, NY: Arista Records.

Keith, V., & Peters, B. (1974). Before the next teardrop falls [Recorded by F. Fender]. On Before the Next Teardrop Falls [Vinyl]. Nashville, TN: Dot Records.

Legend, J. (2013). All of me. On Love in the Future [CD]. New York, NY: GOOD Music.

O’Hara, J. (1986). Grandpa, tell me ‘bout the good ol’ days [Recorded by The Judds]. On Rockin’ with the Rhythm [CD]. New York, NY: RCA Records.

Oravecz, Z., Muth, C., & Vandekerckhove, J. (2016). Do people agree on what makes one feel loved? A cognitive psychometric approach to the consensus on felt love. PLOS ONE . DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0152803

Sharma, S., & Ahuja, K. K. (2014). Does love last forever? Understanding an elusive phenomenon among dating and married couples. Journal of Psychosocial Research , 9 , 153-162.

Vedes, A., Hilpert, P., Nussbeck, F. W., Randall, A. K., Bodenmann, G., & Lind, W. R. (2016). Love styles, coping, and relationship satisfaction: A dyadic approach. Personal Relationships , 23 , 84-97.

Krystine Batcho, Ph.D. , is a professor at Le Moyne College in Syracuse, New York.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

What Is True Love? Figuring Out If You’ve Found The One

The concept of true love has intrigued poets, philosophers, and everyday individuals for centuries. It’s a term that evokes deep emotion and brings images of fairy tales, romantic movies, and eternal commitment. But what does it really mean? How do you know if you’ve found “the one”? True love is often more complex and multifaceted than the romanticized portrayals in pop culture. 

This article will explore the concept of true love, providing insights to help you determine if you’ve found that special connection and offer guidance to nurture and grow that love in your relationship.

Characteristics of true love

While each relationship and connection will vary, some key characteristics of true love often include the following.

Mutual respect

In true love, both partners recognize and value each other’s individuality, opinions, and feelings. They listen without judgment and show consideration for each other’s needs and wishes. Respect in true love means treating each other with kindness and honor, even in disagreements.

Deep connection

True love fosters a connection that goes beyond the superficial. It’s a bond that often involves understanding each other’s core values, beliefs, and life goals. This connection creates a sense of companionship, where both partners feel they’re on the same team, working towards common dreams.

Trust and honesty

Trust is the bedrock of true love. It means believing in each other’s integrity and having faith in each other’s intentions. Honesty, in turn, nurtures this trust. Being truthful with each other strengthens the bond, even if the truth is difficult to face at times.

Empathy is the ability to deeply understand each other’s feelings. In true love, partners try to understand each other’s perspectives, feelings, and needs, providing support and compassion. Empathy helps partners to be more patient and tolerant with each other.

Unconditional support

True love means standing by each other’s side. Whether in success or failure, happiness or distress, partners in true love support each other’s highs and lows without conditions or reservations.

Commitment is a conscious choice to stay together and make the relationship work, even during challenging times. It’s not just about loyalty; it’s about actively investing in the relationship and nurturing it.

Common growth

True love often encourages personal growth and self-improvement. Partners in a loving relationship motivate each other to become better individuals, supporting each other’s ambitions and helping each other reach their full potential.

Acceptance means embracing each other’s flaws and imperfections. True love doesn’t seek to change the other person but accepts them for who they are, acknowledging that nobody is perfect.

How to know if you’ve found “the one”

Recognizing that you’ve found “the one” can seem like a profound realization, yet it might be elusive or challenging to put into words. Let’s explore some signs that may indicate you’ve found that special person with whom you have a deep, meaningful connection.

Comfort and safety

When you’re with “the one,” you might feel a sense of ease, comfort, and safety. You can be your authentic self without fear of judgment or criticism. There’s generally a feeling of home, a place where you’re understood and accepted.

Research suggests that feelings of love  reduce stress and provide various health benefits, including lower blood pressure, better sleep, and more .

Healthy communication

Communication with “the one” often feels natural and effortless. Even in disagreements, you find ways to understand each other and reach compromises. Your conversations are meaningful, and you’re not afraid to discuss your feelings, fears, or dreams. If you are not seeing eye-to-eye, you want to make an effort to reach a mutual understanding while remaining respectful during the conversation.

Same goals and dreams

You and “the one” likely have aligned life goals and a vision for the future. Whether it’s career paths, family planning, or personal growth, you work together towards these goals, supporting each other along the way.

You overcome challenges together

Life is not without its challenges, but with “the one,” you face them together. Instead of tearing you apart, hardships tend to strengthen your bond. You become a team that can weather any storm, learning and growing from each experience.

Mutual admiration and inspiration

You admire each other’s qualities and find inspiration in each other’s strengths. There’s usually mutual respect and encouragement that pushes both of you to be better individuals.

Intuition and gut feeling

Sometimes, knowing you’ve found “the one” is an intuitive feeling, a deep inner knowing that this person is right for you. It’s a connection that feels different, more profound than other relationships.

Your happiness is their happiness

You find joy in each other’s happiness and strive to make each other’s lives more fulfilling. Your partner’s successes feel like your own, and you celebrate them together.

They make you want to be a better person

Being with “the one” encourages you to grow and improve yourself. You feel motivated to be the best version of yourself, not out of pressure but because of their positive influence on you.

You think long-term

When envisioning your future, your partner is an integral part of it. You make plans together, considering each other’s needs and desires, and see a lasting future together.

How can you tell if you’ve found your true love? Navigate relationships with therapy

The difference between infatuation and true love.

Love is a complex and multifaceted emotion that can take various forms. Two of the most commonly confused types are infatuation and true love. While they might seem similar at first glance, especially during the early stages of a relationship, they are fundamentally different in many ways. 

When determining whether you are experiencing infatuation or true love, keep a lookout for these differences. 

Characteristics of infatuation:

• Duration - Infatuation is often a short-lived, intense emotion. It can feel overwhelming and all-consuming but typically fades over time.
• Focus - The focus of infatuation is often more on the self and how the other person makes you feel. It’s about the pleasure, excitement, and gratification the relationship brings you.
• Idealization - Infatuation often involves placing the other person on a pedestal, ignoring their flaws, and creating an idealized image of them. This can lead to unrealistic expectations.
• Emotional Roller Coaster - Infatuation can bring intense highs but also significant lows. The mood of the relationship can change dramatically and unpredictably.
• Physical Attraction - Infatuation often centers around physical attraction and desire. While these elements can be present in true love, they are typically more pronounced and prioritized in infatuation.

Characteristics of true love:

• Duration - True love grows over time, deepening and becoming more profound. It’s a lasting connection that continues to thrive as you grow together.
• Focus - The focus of true love extends beyond self-gratification. It’s about mutual growth, support, respect, and understanding. Both partners are invested in each other’s happiness and well-being.
• Acceptance - True love means accepting each other’s imperfections and loving the whole person, flaws and all. It’s a more grounded and realistic view of each other.
• Stability - True love brings stability and consistency to the relationship. While there may be ups and downs, they are typically navigated with mutual respect and communication, avoiding extreme emotional swings.
• Emotional and Intellectual Connection - True love involves a deep emotional and intellectual connection that goes beyond physical attraction. It’s about common values, goals, and a genuine understanding of each other.

Nurturing true love in your relationship

Even if you consider your partner your true love, keeping a relationship takes time, effort, and commitment. Making sure you keep communicating with regular, open, and honest communication can be important to understanding each other’s needs as you grow together.

Spending quality time together can also help foster closeness in a relationship over time. You can do this by engaging in the same activities and hobbies or simply enjoying each other’s company.

In addition to this, regularly expressing gratitude and appreciation can help keep the love fresh and vibrant and each partner feeling valued in the relationship.

As you progress in your relationship, therapists or relationship coaches can offer professional insights and guidance tailored to your unique relationship.

Benefits of online therapy in relationships

Online therapy for relationships offers increased availability and flexibility for individuals and couples, allowing you to seek professional guidance regardless of location and schedule. The convenience of being in your own home can create a relaxed environment conducive to open communication while also potentially reducing costs. Online platforms, like Betterhelp and Regain, often provide additional tools and resources to supplement therapy sessions.

The benefits extend to long-distance relationships, providing joint sessions and ongoing support even when partners are in different locations. From addressing daily challenges to deeper relationship concerns, online therapy’s location independence, affordability, comfort, and specialized help make it a valuable resource in the modern, connected world. It breaks down barriers to entry and ensures that more individuals and couples have the therapeutic support they need.

The efficacy of online therapy has been an area of growing interest and study in mental health care, particularly as technology continues to advance. Research suggests that online therapy, also known as teletherapy, can be just as effective as traditional in-person therapy for relationship counseling .

Efficacy of online therapy

“As someone who had sought counseling/therapy for the first time, I had serious doubts about the effectiveness of online therapy, but my first meeting with Susan took out those doubts immediately. Over the last six months, Susan has not only given me tools to help me establish boundaries but has given me a new perspective on relationships and life in general. After a few sessions, I was able to turn a corner and have a new outlook on my interactions with others. I wholeheartedly recommend Susan and hope to work with her again in the future.”

“I am so happy I got paired with Ruthie Brooks. My sessions with her have been a positive and insightful experience.  As a result, I can see my relationships improving and I have a better understanding of myself. She is very professional, kind, and great at what she does.”

What are the signs of true love?

True love is felt differently from person to person. Research suggests that a person’s culture, upbringing, and personal beliefs can significantly influence what they consider to be signs of love. However, evidence suggests some common themes regarding how love is perceived. Most people consider receiving compliments, feeling appreciated, receiving a gift, or being granted an act of kindness as signs of love. Depending on who is witnessing them, many other loving acts may also be perceived as signs of true love. 

How rare is true love?

It is likely not possible to quantify how often true love happens in the world. The definition of “true love” is highly subjective, varying considerably from person to person. Some might equate love with preservation, feeling most loved when their partner provides safety. Others might consider love to mean acceptance, feeling the strongest connection to those who understand and accept them as they are. Regardless of how true love is defined, it is likely possible, even if its rarity is uncertain. 

How do you tell if a man loves you?

Ultimately, the best way to know if a man loves you is to have a conversation about how both of you feel. While there are certain signs that a man may be into you , like wanting to spend more time with you, trying to make you smile, and being vulnerable, there is no way to be sure of his feelings without an honest discussion. If you feel like you are his priority and that communicating with him is easy, it is more likely that he has feelings for you. You may wish to consider inquiring about his feelings as long as you are ready to express yours. 

How do you tell if a girl loves you?

Arguably, the best way to tell if a girl loves you is to discuss your feelings openly and inquire about hers. There may be signs, like if she tries to support you, allows you to be vulnerable, and seeks time with you, but likely the only way to be certain is with an honest conversation. Don’t be afraid to broach the subject if you think she might have strong feelings for you. If you don’t want the relationship to continue, it’s important to address her feelings respectfully and kindly. On the other hand, if you hope she has feelings for you, discussing your thoughts might bring renewed relief and understanding to you both. 

What kind of love is real love?

“Real love” is likely different for everybody, but for most healthy adults with secure attachment styles , love often has the following components:

• Long-lasting. True love, which is separate from infatuation or a “crush,” tends to grow over time as partners get to know each other's positive and negative qualities. 
• Focus. True love tends to be focused on both partners’ mutual growth rather than what one person can get from the other. 
• Acceptance. Real love tends to be based on acceptance, wherein both partners know, understand, and accept each other, flaws and all. 
• Stability. Up and downs occur in every relationship, but healthy relationships based on true love have downs that are navigated with respect, empathy, and kindness. 
• Deep Connection. Real love likely involves a deep emotional and intellectual connection based on more than physical attraction. Mutual core values, goals, and mutual understanding are all a part of true love. 

What makes you fall in love with someone?

Love is a complex neurochemical process that involves several biological and psychological factors. Lust, or infatuation, tends to be mediated by the sex hormones testosterone and estrogen before moving on to more stable attraction, which is promoted through dopamine and norepinephrine. Long-term attachment is often attributed to hormones like oxytocin and vasopressin. 

Although love is chemically mediated, psychological and personality factors also play a role. In addition, social factors like proximity, or how much time two people spend together, are likely also important. Researchers are still determining the exact formula for love, but two people with similar interests who spend a lot of time together are potential candidates. 

• For The Girl That You Love: Lyrics And Songs To Send Her Medically reviewed by Karen Foster , LPC
• What Does Unconditional Love Mean? Medically reviewed by Dr. April Brewer , DBH, LPC
• Relationships and Relations

True Love: What Love Is and What It Is Not

Let’s start by defining what true love really is:

What is True Love?

Dr. Lisa Firestone , co-author of Sex and Love in Intimate Relationships , often says that the best way to think of love is as a verb. Love is dynamic and requires action to thrive. As Dr. Firestone wrote, “Often, we spend our time worrying about what our partner feels toward us or how the relationship looks from the outside. Even though it feels good to be loved by someone else, each one of us can only really feel our loving feelings for another person and not that person’s feelings for us. In order to connect with and sustain those loving feelings within us, we have to take actions that are loving. Otherwise, we may be living in fantasy.”

At times it may feel frustrating, but it’s actually pretty empowering to accept the fact that the only person we have any true control over in a relationship is ourselves. We are in charge of our half of the dynamic. Therefore, we can choose whether to engage in behaviors that are destructive to intimacy or whether to take actions that express feelings of love, compassion, affection, respect, and kindness. In order to consciously and consistently choose the latter, it’s valuable to look at the characteristics that in more than 30 years of studying couples, Dr. Robert and Lisa Firestone found to be vital to maintaining truly loving.

The father and daughter research team created what they call the “Couples Interactions Chart,” which compares the characteristics of an ideal relationship to those of what Dr. Robert Firestone termed a “ fantasy bond .” The fantasy bond is an “illusion of connection and closeness [that allows couples] to maintain an imagination of  love and loving while preserving emotional distance.” A fantasy bond forms when couples substitute real love and closeness for the form of being in a relationship. This bond diminishes the feelings of liveliness and attraction between individuals.

Characteristics of True Love vs. a Fantasy Bond

1. Non-defensiveness and openness vs. angry reactions to feedback

2. Open to trying something new vs. closed to new experiences

A relationship thrives when both people are in touch with a lively, open, and vulnerable side to themselves that welcomes new experiences. We don’t have to love and participate in everything our partner enjoys, but sharing new activities, visiting new places, and breaking routines often breathes new life into a relationship that feels invigorating to both people.

3. Honesty and integrity vs. deception and duplicity

To tell the truth is one of the first lessons most of us are taught as kids. Yet, as adults, there can be a lot of deception in our closest relationships. When we are dishonest with our partner, we do them, the relationship, and ourselves a great disservice. In order to feel vulnerable with our partner, we must trust them, and this can only be achieved through honesty.

4. Respect for the other’s boundaries, priorities and goals vs. overstepping boundaries

To avoid a fantasy bond, we have to see the other person as separate from us. That means respecting them as a unique, autonomous individual. Often, couples tend to take on roles or play into power dynamics. We may tell each other what to do or how to act. Or we may speak for and about each other in ways that are limiting or defining. Essentially, we treat them as extensions of ourselves rather than separate human beings.  As a result, we actually limit our own attraction to them. As Dr. Lisa Firestone says, “We treat the other person like our right arm. Then we are no more attracted to them than we are to our right arm.”

5. Physical affection and personal sexuality vs. lack of affection and inadequate, impersonal, or routine sexuality

6. Understanding vs. misunderstanding

It’s easy to project onto our partner or to misunderstand things they’re saying, either using them to feel hurt or attacked in old, familiar ways that resonate with us. It’s also easy to get stuck in our own point of view without seeing things from the other person’s perspective. We are always going to be two different people with two sovereign minds, so we won’t always see eye to eye. However, it’s important to really try to understand our partner from a clear point of view. When our partner feels seen and understood, they are much more likely to soften and see our perspective as well.

7. Noncontrolling, nonmanipulative and nonthreatening behaviors vs. manipulations of dominance and submission

Learn more about the Fantasy Bond in PsychAlive’s eCourse, The Fantasy Bond: The Key to Understanding Ourselves and Our Relationships

How to Create a Truly Loving Relationship

Now that we know the characteristics of real love, how can we take steps in ourselves to create a more loving relationship? First off, it’s important to acknowledge that despite these clear-sounding discrepancies between real love and fantasy, many people mistake one for the other. They may even prefer fantasy to reality, because it’s less painful to appear connected to someone than to actually feel connected to them.

Many of us become caught up in the fairy tale, the superficial elements, or the form of the relationship (i.e. how it looks as opposed to how it feels). We may fall in love with the illusion of connection or security of the situation offers, but we don’t let ourselves get too close to the other person. That is because, while most of us think we want love, we often actually take actions to push it away. That is why the first step to being more loving is to get to know and challenge our own defenses.

1. Challenging the defenses that limit true love

Many people have fears of intimacy of which they aren’t even aware. We may be tolerant of realizing our dreams of falling in love in fantasy, but very often we are intolerant of having that dream fulfilled in reality. Dr. Robert Firestone describes how being loved by someone threatens our defenses and reawakens emotional pain and anxiety from childhood. He’s posited that both giving and receiving love tend to disrupt the negative, yet familiar, ways we think about ourselves. “On an unconscious level, we may sense that if we did not push love away, the whole world as we have experienced it would be shattered and we would not know who we are.”

For these reasons, the biggest obstacle to finding and maintaining a loving relationship is often us. We have to get to know what defenses we bring to the table that ward off love. For example, if we grew up feeling rejected, we may feel anxious about getting too close to another person. We may not feel we can really trust or rely on a partner, so we either cling to that person or ward him or her off, both which lead to the same result of creating distance.

If we felt criticized or resented in our childhood, we may have trouble feeling confident or worthwhile in our relationships. We may seek out partners who put us down in ways that feel familiar, or we may never fully accept our partners loving feelings for us, because they threaten this early self-perception.

If we felt intruded on in our early lives or if we had an “emotionally hungry” parent, we may avoid intimacy altogether and feel pseudoindependent, or we may subconsciously seek out people who depend on us to meet all their needs and more. Again, both of these extremes can lead to relationships that lack real closeness and intimacy.

The good news is we can start to break these destructive relationship patterns by better knowing ourselves and our defenses. Why do we choose the partners we do? What are the qualities we’re drawn to – good and bad? Are there ways we distort or provoke our partner to act in ways that fit with our defenses? How do we create distance? What behaviors do we engage in that may feel self-protective but actually push love away.

Learn more about the Fear of Intimacy

2. Differentiation from the past influences that no longer serve you in the present

Dr. Robert Firestone has further developed an approach to challenging old, engrained patterns and defenses, a process he refers to as differentiation. This process involves four steps:

• Differentiate from critical, punishing, and destructive attitudes that you internalized in your early lives
• Differentiate from undesirable traits in your parents that you see in yourself
• Challenge the defensive reactions you had (as a child self) that no longer serve you in the present
• Formulating and learning to live by your own values – who do you want to be?

Taking these steps of differentiation allows us to live in a less defended state in which we go after what we really want in life.

Learn more about Differentiation

How to Make True Love Last

Many answers to why love fades can be found in understanding how and why we form a fantasy bond.  The fantasy bond is the ultimate defense against love. Even after we’ve dropped our guard and allowed ourselves to fall in love, as soon as we get scared, be it of losing our partner or differentiating from our old, familiar identity, we may turn to a fantasy bond to allow us to maintain an illusion that we are not alone, while preserving emotional distance from our partner. To avoid a fantasy bond, we should avoid the characteristics listed above but also take the following actions.

Actions to break a fantasy bond and become more loving:

• Slow down and be present.  Make time to really talk and listen to your partner.
• Make eye contact.  It sounds simple, but we often forget to just look at our partner.
• Try something old. Make time and don’t stop doing the activities you loved to do together.
• Try something new.  Don’t just fall into routine. Keep suggesting new activities and be open to ones your partner suggests.
• Break routine.  If doing the same thing is deadening your excitement, be open to breaking the habit and making space for spontaneity.
• Avoid passivity and control.  Strive for an equal exchange of ideas. Take responsibility for your own actions and don’t try to control your partner.
• Talk as an “I” instead of a “we”.  Remember you will always be two separate people and not to overstep boundaries which diminishes attraction.
• Be aware of your critical inner voice.  We all have an inner enemy that criticizes ourselves and our partner and undermines our closest relationships
• Do something independently.  Just because you’re a couple doesn’t mean you have to do everything together. Don’t give up friendships and activities you enjoy on your own and don’t aask you partner to either
• Communicate what you feel.  Don’t expect your partner to read your mind. Saying what you want and feel directly helps you avoid passive-aggressive or nasty ways of relating. It also encourages your partner to do the same.
• Avoid the “tit for tat” mentality.  Love is an action each of us must choose for ourselves. When we start measuring what we do for each other, we create expectations and breed resentment instead of staying in touch with how good it feels to be loving toward someone else.
• Support the things that light your partner up.   Never stop supporting and encouraging your partner to be the most alive and to do the things that make your partner feel the most like him/herself… even when those things aren’t what matter most to you.
• Take actions your partner would perceive as loving.  Make sure the things you do are things that matter specifically to your partner. You may love getting flowers, but is that something that would make your partner feel loved?
• Don’t become closed off.  It’s much too easy to shut down whenever we feel embarrassed, anxious, disappointed, or triggered by our partner, but we have to fight to not be closed off and push away the love that comes toward us.

About the Author

Related Articles

116 Comments

Be careful. Some of these do not apply to high functioning autism spectrum/ASD yet love and connection is very present in action in these relationships with these individuals. Often without eye contact, less affection due to sensory differences and little to no verbal affirmations.

The recommendations on how to feel and act towards your partner is not really possible for ASD people. It is because of doing exactly what is written in this article NOT to do that the relationship with my previous ASD husband could not work out. It only left me as an emotional wreck and him moving on to the same disfunctional relationship with the next victim. ASD’s are not really capable of true love and the wide support for these people is destroying normal peoples’ lives.

You are making a huge generalization when you say that people with ASD aren’t capable of experiencing or expressing true love. You are very wrong. Their experience may be atypical in how their love is shown or perceived, but that does NOT mean they are incapable of truly being in love. The way you speak about the acceptance of “these people” is shameful. “Those people” happen to be loved by a growing segment of the population because others have realized that those on the spectrum, in fact, are valued members of society who are worthy of love and are worthy of being treated with kindness, compassion, and respect.

You are absolutely wrong and also very ableist by stating that autists cannot experience love. We may have to work very hard and long to recognize it, and work on mitigating emotional pitfalls like RSD, but it’s DEFINITELY possible, and quite a few of us tend to love harder than neurotypicals, especially if that relationship is with another ND person. Honestly. What you’re saying is completely ill informed and anecdotal.

True love often has to go through bad phases n challenges in life.If you truly love that person n desire to spend the rest of ur life with them…Then every couple should endure the challenges that life throws at them….Please don’t give up on your partner even if it’s seems impossible to be with eachother..

That is what true love does. If it doesn’t do that, its not true love. There is no middle ground on that. It is or it isn’t

Real true love really existed in the past when the real good old fashioned ladies were around which today it is a very different story altogether unfortunately.

Love is not about the submission of a woman to a man, or vice versa. It is an emotion, and a choice, that affects our lives daily. If what you want is a perfect woman, you will never find it. I suggest strongly that you look within yourself and discover who you really are before you make haughty expectations for others. If you aren’t willing to wait on your partner, why should she wait on you? If you’re disillusioned to women, how will you ever fall in love freely with one? If you’re very sexually experienced, do you really expect to marry a virgin?

Love is not an emotion.

True. It states right there in the article that love is a verb. It’s something you do, not something you feel.

actually its more of a noun than a verb, and one can indeed feel love, the feeling of when you’re in love release all those little happy chemicals in your head. it makes you feel all warm and happy, whether its infatuation or real. the difference is the infatuated kind won’t last you long.

Love, as a noun, is not an emotion per se, but an attraction, acceptance and affection towards someone or something. Hate is a type of repulsion and rejection. The elements of love require some attraction, agreement at some level and communication. The intensity of love can vary based on the level of attraction, agreement and communication. The more you communicate things both partners find positive and agreeable, beneficial and of interest, the more the relationship will flourish. One way love can exist (as in unrequited love) but true love requires mutual communication, mutual attraction and shared interests with some commonality in how each view reality.

Love as a verb is the action of expressing or being in love (as a noun) as we love each other.

True love cannot be known with your eyes but with your heart

Love is indeed an emotion because I can feel it. I doubt you have really experienced to be in love. It is a feeling and an action that is from the feeling itself. You can act without a feeling, and that is not true love. But you can’t feel it if you don’t really have a love for someone.

You described it perfectly.

It may be an emotion and a feeling, heck also a non and I challenge the statement of an action unable to create loving feeling only the feeling being able to create the action… I daily perform actions of love that then fill me with love and loving feelings, in my own relationships, with family, my kiddos, and also my fellow humans I cross paths with… I am a lover and giver and giver and lover they most definitely flow abundantly in either and both directions and I absolutely experience true love consistantly💕

Yes I love and miss so much A

It is a feeling in the core of your being, and if you are lucky enough with love, you wake up every morning with the knowledge that you have done enough for validity of oneself sharing love to the ones who complete them. Carpe diem. ❤️

Pierce, women back in the old days made love very easy to find compared to today. Now most women have their very high unrealistic expectations and standards. May they grow very old all alone with their Cats.

Women in the past had real class compared to the very horrible ones that are everywhere these days. Today feminism is cancer.

I am impressantly involved in a long-distance relationship I am a very attentive person it has been two years a month and a week I am 100% Puerto Rican and she is from Eataly but she lives in Santiago de Chile it is obviously a long distance relationship for now I just turned 44 years old and I am not a child anymore I want to feel truly love that’s why I have not lied to her I tell her pretty much everything and I describe everything just so she would know, pretty much I am trying my best not only because I want true love not like when I was in high school in college I didn’t know anything yes I was hurt and I hurt two women in which I did talk to them and I asked for their forgiveness. In the year 2000 I was involved in a motorcycle accident after graduating from college and teaching nutrition for Cornell University are used to live in Rochester New York in high school and college One thing that I totally dislike is that in Facebook she or some of her pictures she never shows her face only her hair or her hair in her face or her covering half of her face and showing her gray eyes she sent me a couple of pictures through WhatsApp but all of them they do not show her face and I and I always tell her I’m like I don’t like you not showing your face to me I already saw your heart which is the most important thing even though she is a very proud person she says many bad words Innoway I do understand because I thought she told me her ex husband which has only been one treated her you the website Mike call me stupid might say she’s playing with me but I am just going to give it until we meet personally and if she keeps being the way she is and I’ll say goodbye I am a man of my word and a gentleman I change after my accident happened because I was giving a second chance in life and I said I am going to do things right from now on which I have been doing. We both are children of God in which makes me upset because I tell her all of your post on Facebook or your Facebook sorry are we have to do with Christ that’s something that’s another thing they cut my attention but when we speak through WhatsApp she is totally opposite person not the child of God that she makes herself look in Facebook and when she goes out either to that guys house or with her friends or her son she turns the phone off I cannot speak to her she has not introduced me to her friends and she says it’s because she is a very reserved person She also says she is a total woman I Siri you are not acting as a total wine you should show me your honest side just like you showed me your heart even though you hide it many times so I think I know what you believe At least I can say to myself if that ends up happening that I did thanks the right way just like I asked the Lord I love this website there are many things that the website talks about that are happening in my relationship and finally I think I talk too much ever since I became blind eye to that just because sometimes I think that since I am blind I want to describe everything thinking that my girlfriend or the website they are blind also guys I honestly truly love this woman is what do you guys think thank you very much Gabriel angel R working out and singing they are one of my favorite things I still have to get vocational rehabilitation so I could have a degree or paper that says Gabriel angel it’s totally an independent person and knows as if I had self himself I lived for a couple years after my accident by myself in an apartment in Rochester but I still do not have that certificate that says that I am totally independent also vocational rehabilitation would help me and train me for my career thank you !!!

Well my husband and I did marry as virgins. I would honestly have to admit now that in our experience to do this was a mistake. It takes the love and respect and chemistry. Getting to feel that both of you. True love actually hurts sometimes when you are away from each other.

Couldn’t have said it better myself!

This is a classic epistle I have read about love and its meaning. A detailed study of the above, one will find out that there are many who think that they are in love why they are not. For instance, a young man whose parents were opposing the lady he wanted to marry. The young man screamed at his parent, ” if I can’t marry her I will die” In less than six months of their marriage, the same young man again screamed at his parent, “if she doesn’t leave this house, I will kill her” Can one say that the young man and his woman were in love in the first place?

One thing i knew about love is that those who say they are in love, they must be ready and willing to sacrifice for each other and as well as do things that will make the love to grow.

And your comment tells the whole truth right there.

Enjoyed the info. Very informative and eye opening. Best advice I’ve read thus far. I still believe that we are capable of loving Someone for a lifetime. I believe that whatever characteristics and behavior you had when u met, u should consider growing along the same during your lifetime. Yes we change, when we truly love, our moral compass should be pointed in a common direction. Most enlightening thing I learned from this read was to remain an individual.

What I know about true is that love that shares good times together but most importantly when it has the power to over come all the misunderstandings between the two of you only that power can lead to everlasting love. Cause we all break up because we feel we can’t take it anymore and can’t even fight the misunderstandings between us. But true love exists just that it is rare

What you say is true, I am divorcing my husband because I know he is not ready to be in a relationship. He does not understand how a relationship should be. I am the parent and he is the child. And the only routine that he has with me is sex when he comes from work. He does not speak to me, he always runs away when we need to talk about important things about our relationship, even when he has sex with me, when he is finished having sex with me he does not say one word to me, he just goes on Facebook and speak to his friends. I know a lot about love, especially true love, and I give so much to my husband, just to make him happy and feel better, but he never does anything for me. He does not even say hello to me when he comes home from work. Please tell me, do you call that true love, or is he just using me for sex? Because I feel he doesn’t truly love me. That is why I decided to go for a divorce with my husband, and leave him.

It’s so unfortunate to hear that you are heading into a marriage beak out with your husband. However, giving him another chance and involving his friends to discuss matters of his behaviour will also have a positive change. He may admit his mistake and may change. Otherwise, I have learnt that you can match with me if given consideration.

Real true love happened in the past.

My rational and scientific mind read and agreed with a lot of what was said in this article. However, I am one of those hopeless romantics (as stated) who yearns for more than what life is currently giving. Just today I finished a story which was one of those “love at first sight” kind of romances. I’m currently at a point where I’m close to miserable, not just with my relationship but also the rest of my life in general, and I’m sure that my relationship plays a major role why I feel the way I do.

I have been told so many things in my life and never really had good examples of a “healthy” relationship. Which is probably why I cling to this Hollywood idea of “love at first sight” and undying love for another. I was once told that a relationship should come naturally. Yes you have a few disagreements, but for the most part, it should flow without major issues or effort. Then, there is everyone else saying that relationships take work and nothing comes easy. But how do we know which is true? Are there really relationships out there were the couple have this ultimate connection and never truly have to work too much to keep it flowing? Do we just think that isnt the case because so many have never found that and have just excepted that relationships do truly take a lot of time and effort? Which is real?

That is the question I want to answer. I’m still young and I don’t want to waste my time being miserable or working so very hard to keep up a relationship that in the end, will not work.

Can anyone tell me the truth?

It ebs and flows. At times it will fell effortless and other times it takes effort. The key is to hang in there during the times it’s a bit harder, know it will pass, and truly relish the ride when it’s easy.

Although there are ebbs and flow In a relationship , if a relationship is more effort and work then it is mutually loving and easy going then, I would consider that the partnership might not compatible. Every relationship comes with its issues, baggage and work , but if the good outweighs the bad then the partnership is worth the effort and keeping.

In my experience, love feels easy and joyful most of the time. We have problems that come up, especially when one or both of us are under stress. Those are the times when we work at our relationship, but it doesn’t feel like “hard work” or forcing it, because both of us are trying equally hard. We’re both trying to fix the issues as a team. And the good far outweighs the bad overall. Sending you my best wishes to figure out what’s right for you in your relationship

Love is so uncertain. I married what I though the love of my life. There were great times but a lot of bad times. Be strong this of only yourself be you own person and don’t settle for just love. But honesty,if anyone is ever really honest, . Just love yourself and you don’t need anyone to make you happy just you. I have learned this at age 75. Don’t wait!!

Listen to your heart it will tell u the truth

Love was very easy to find many years ago since women were a lot different back then. Today they have really changed for the worst of all unfortunately.

In what way in your opinion were women like then and aren’t now?

Well women in the past were very old fashioned and accepted their men for who they were back then, and money was never an issue like most women want today. The great majority of women these days want a man with money, and have very high unrealistic expectations now more than ever. So it is really the women today that have really changed unfortunately, and most women back in the past weren’t like today at all as you can see in case you haven’t noticed. Very easy for a man to find love in the old days, since many of us single men really can’t find love today even when we try. That is why our family members were very lucky back then when they met one another.

Actually, marrying a man for money was more common back in the older ages. Women did not make as much money as the men, and they had to marry to support their family and themselves. Thats not love, cuz they did not have much of a choice. Feminism is what made women more independent. That way they could find someone they love instead.You are the problem, not the women.

You are friendship with me

There is no room for hatred in love!

Most women in the past made love very easy to find. Very different women many years ago, compared to today.

Women just will not take bad behavior any more

Most women back in the past had much better manners and a very good personality, something they don’t have today at all unfortunately.

I agree with you, Linda!

True love could be a way of expression or act of giving yourself to someone who understands you with all of you

True love is real but rare. I fell madly in love with my friend’s sister 35 years ago. Both of us have raised children, had unsuccessful marriages. I thought she had a perfect life and I had nothing to offer. Instead she moved from abusive man to abusive man, and lived a poor, tragic life. I married an immigrant woman and raised her to prominence in the community, and she treated me like garbage once she had the things she desired. Now after living 30 years without contact, my true love and I reconnected and we can still complete each other’s sentences. She loved me as well, but thought she wasn’t good enough for me! We’re empathic and everything just flows with us. There are no misunderstandings. We know each other so intimately yet every day each of us finds something new in the other. And these discoveries, whether joyous or painful, bring us closer and reaffirm our love. We really are two halves of a whole. Each of us completes the other. Every day is new and amazing.

You very much lucked out.

Good for you

True love is when you see everything you have ever wanted in someone, and also some things that you didn’t even think you can settle for, but you ended up settling for it, true love is when you know you have many options out there, that can be better for everyone around you, but you chose to be with that specific person, true love is willing to grow with that person and work on your flaws together, give them your hand to be the best version of themselves, and don’t give up, you might have a lot of hard times, relationships are not always rainbows and butterflies, love will show in your actions, how you are dealing with those hard times, and are you willing to give up on that person to satisfy your ego? Or are you willing to accept him and grow with him and help him work on him self to get over his insecurities and traumas? Love talks louder in actions and situation than it does talk in words. Stay blessed

I am literally crying while replying to let u no that if this is what love really is I will pray everyday to have this because I have never ever ever experienced this kinda of love before just pain just pain just pain.

Pain comes with real love sometimes, it’s all good cause it simply love pain, I guess you sometimes have to pay that tiny wonderful pain in order to achieve that great love you are after, nothing in life comes easy, at least not for me, so I tell myself, never give up the ship, just keep on trucking in hopes of arriving at your final destination, true ❤️

I totally agree!!! Love is respect, communication,understanding someone even if you don’t agree, but mostly putting a persons’ needs before your own!!! It’s making a decision daily to act & be that way for that person & not making a choice to leave when things get tough because life is an adventure & it’s not always pleasant, but it’s that person you know you can count on during adventure!!! Just reunited with the LOVE OF MY LIFE after 30 yrs apart & proir to that had began dating at me-16yrs old & him19 yrs old…he had broken my heart, I had broken his later but the connection had ALWAYS been there& now almost 40+ years later we are both elated & understand what love is really about!!! Women be good to men & vice versa! Peace out!

My boyfriend likes and looks forward to doing everything together and consistent intimacy 24/7. I like it too, but if this were to be the case for the rest of our lives, would it be damaging in any way to our relationship?

Yes!!! That sounds controlling. Not a healthy relationship. Be careful and wise.

I love you❤

Love you ❤❤❤❤

True love is eternal. It cannot be stolen. True love is responsive,transparent,faithful. It is really difficult to find true low these days. Love is choosing someone again and again. Too busy is a myth, people make time for important things and for what they love.

True Love is knowing when there is so much you don’t know. A gut feeling deep within you that nobody can take away, destiny. True Love always finds a way, it’s not what everyone hopes for it to be.

True Love is knowing when there is so much you don’t know. A gut feeling deep within you that nobody can take away, destiny. True Love always finds a way, it’s

True love is a choice. Like I choose to wait for my man to come home from deployment with trust, patience and faith in him. Even if you have doubts you still choose to trust him because you want your relationship to work and spend a whole life for him.

It depends from person to person,it’s a bond felt by the person,It’s just not something called pure, there is more to it,It depends how strong you care and feel for the person more than the person’s feelings for you. It’s something motherly which you can sacrifice or care selflessly, that’s why very less people can experience love,it also depends on how close and open to each other and how close you are as a partner, so it’s like friendship on deeper levels and you can do everything you want together or at least the person should be on your friend circle or closer and they both fall into same category not different so most importantly it’s not something you will do with your friends and sacrificing your love, because if you really close together you don’t Need to leave your love to do it with your friends

Everything in this article is true – but I don’t know that it is possible to move beyond barriers to love until experience peels back the layers of conditioning. I am with the same man I have – for a better half of a decade- been in an on and off relationship which was formed in a fantasy bond, maintained on a trauma bond. We finally separated for a year and during that time I formed a fantasy bond with another man who, in his willingness to pretend to be my fantasy while secretly degrading me in ways no other has. Seeing who he was and how my fantasy enabled me to participate in such a fake, gross, abomination of love forced me to see that on a deeper level I never loved any man in my almost 40 years… it has always been about me and my fantasies. My partner had his own maturing experiences during our time apart. We reconnected ready to love each other and while we’ve had to practice and notice the old patterns – we’ve peeled them away through healthy interaction. We now love each other with compassion and empathy and protect our bond knowing it requires commitment and effort on both our parts to be self aware, not project and take responsibility for our own moods, habit etc. Love doesn’t fix your life, but you can’t have it until you know that much like a garden, you have to work to dow seeds and weed it for it to bear food.

I really thank you for the valuable info on this great subject and look forward to more great posts. Thanks a lot for enjoying this beauty article with me. I am appreciating it very much! Looking forward to another great article. Good luck to the author! All the best!

It is the great blog post .It is the helfpul and informative blog .I am always read your blog . I like it thanks for sharing this information with us .

When the real good old fashioned women were around many years ago which made love so very easy to find in those days. Men never had a problem back then, and today it is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

Men did not have a problem finding a woman “back then”, because men had all the power. Women did not have much of a choice. To the men, they were property, and that is NOT love. And if you think that, you need to see a therapist.

It is the great blog post.It is the helfpul and informative blog .I am always read your blog . I like it thanks for sharing this information with us .

I can’t control my feelings. You a lot to do with why I fell in love with you. I will always love you. I have no choice but to accept that you want something and someone better than me in life. U deserve everything and I hope u find what you are looking for.

Well, as a women, I don’t think that you are fully wrong, but partially yes. It is not only women who have changed, the whole society and its perspective has changed. If you are talking about money, then I must say that yes, there are women who are after money, but there are men as well who are behind women’s money. Just saying that women changed is much hypocrite of you. Then, just think once, if you were back if the last two centuries, when divorce was not taken as a good approach, and your better half was an abuser, would you really want to live with them. Just a simple advice, stop generalizing how people are, there are different types of men, kids, women and LGBT community people. Also to me arranged marriage is something which I don’t really accept because if I never met a person how will I know what they are like. So, sorry to say this, along with women, men have also changed to worse, many men have become abusers to their wives and children.

Then there are many of us good single men that really do know how to treat a good woman with a lot of love, respect, and commitment. And it is very unfortunate that many of us men just can’t meet a good woman, no matter how hard we try.

Do you think that you cannot find a good woman because good women don’t exist anymore? Isn’t that a little weird that there are so many good men but no good women? Or do you think it is possible that your standards for a what good women is, is a bit unrealistic. Men are calling us bad women because we want to be equal, we want to be treated with respect as people, not as objects. We want to be independent and we want to choose what we do with our bodies. Those are not traits of a bad person, those are just traits of a person who does not want to be controlled by others anymore. If you think that makes women bad, then you might have to look in the mirror and wonder why you want to control women and why you get upset when they want to be treated the same way you want to be treated.

Preach Hanzo!

I hope you found your love

The real good old fashioned women were the very best years ago compared to today, which most of them really were at that time. What in the world happened to these women today? Oh i really know, Feminism.

Oh, I’m sorry, does it bother you that women now have the opportunity to vote? To voice their opinions? To have equal rights to men in terms of opportunities and wealth? By definition, feminism is the equality between sexes. Do not blame your relationship issues on women wanting equal rights.

Why don’t you go and get yourself a bunch of cats for pets, sounds like you will need them for company.

What happened is that we don’t want to be treated like we are your property anymore. Because you might not want to believe this, but we are not. Of course the good old days were better for men but have you ever considered that the women back then were not happy? You want us to stay in the previous century while you can go on and excel and prosper? Don’t you think that is a bit unfair? We are not your possessions or your children or your servants or your concubines. We are your equals and you will have to deal with that or go your own way.

The lessons taught in this article is very rich and quite enough to teach anyone in finding a true relationship; but from my perspective, accept this is accompanied by the leading of the most high God, we can never easily find that true love in our dispensation. Thanks to the author a lot.

Real love really happened many years ago when our family members met one another back then since women were very much old fashioned, and it wasn’t about money at all back then either. Both men and women in those days didn’t have much at all, and had to work real hard on top of it all. Women today now have very high expectations and are very spoiled, greedy, and very selfish, since they just want everything they can get. This is why love is very difficult to find for so many of us men nowadays because of this.

Our family members are real proof when they met one another back then, since now women are the very complete opposite from the past making love not so easy to find for so many of us single guys now unfortunately.

Why does it hurt when you’ve fallen for someone? I’ve been stuck on this beautiful British woman for quite some time:

Of course I’m nowhere near her league and she’ll NEVER give me the time of the day. I’ve tried talking to her but she ignores me so I’ve no choice but to walk away but occasionally view her social media but… it hurts. I know I’m not crazy nor am I stalker. I’m just so attracted to her beauty, talent and that magnificent voice of hers. I know it’s not magic because the first time I laid my eyes on her I was so mesmerized and been stuck on her ever since. I have talked with her a couple of times but that was it.

Because I left her name and url perhaps someday she’ll read this comment and know that somebody is always thinking about her. I haven’t been in a relationship for quite some time and talk to women all the time so it’s not as if I’m desperate. Just that I’m deeply attracted to her so much but… it’s quite the opposite for her.

With this being said. I like to get some feedback from the author regarding this situation I’m in.

Thank you and I look forward to your response.

thank you for making this, very helpful.

Since most women were very old fashioned and real ladies back many years ago, that made love very easy to find in those days.

it appears from the commentary that a lot of people want to live in the past instead of concentrating on the present

The reason my marriage developed a fantasy bond and failed was more or less because my spouse refused to do their own work. I appreciate the content on PsychAlive, but I find that it puts a tremendous amount of responsibility on the reader in a way that comes across as shaming. I put in so much work for years, and I ate up everything on this site at the end of that relationship, desperately trying to reach the promised land PA describes. Re-reading it now is cringeworthy at how much pressure is put on the party who happens to be reading this. Newsflash: if your relationship has gotten this bad, you have to stop trying to fix the relationship by reading internet articles and actually look at who each of you are. Simple question: is this the treatment you would tolerate in a friendship? That question helped me leave my horrible marriage, and it keeps me from leaving relationships that are in a tough patch but are healthy and good for me.

I really loved reading your blog. It was very well authored and easy to understand. Unlike other blogs I have read which are really not that good.Thanks alot!

Hi! I’m deaf. I would know how can I show my true love to someone? 🥲

Take careful against COVID-19!

I’ve been married 50 years. Our marriage has been tumultuous. He was controlling. I stayed because of my only child. Now, we basically live like roommates. No intimacy, nothing. I’m not leaving at this point in my life. I wish I had the same love we shared before, but we just go through the motions. It changed when my health took a turn for the worse!

Love is just an illusion. Most couples get divorced which leads to a lot of hatred. Stay in the real world and stay single

Think about how much you love your child. What do you think is the best representation of that love? When you truly and I mean truly love someone, don’t you want them to be happy no matter how bad it makes you feel. For instance, would you want your child to be miserable just because you do not believe in gay relationships. So your child goes through life living a lie, hiding his truth because you now have taught him love is earned. Love is not something you can earn by doing something for someone to make them love you. True love comes naturally. True love can be painful just as much as it can be blissful. True love is when you are not thinking about how it will make you feel, but how it will make the other person feel. When you love someone or something such as a pet, you cannot stand to see it hurt. The only thing you want when you truly love someone is to see them happy. You are willing to sacrifice your pain for their happiness. If your willing to have them endure pain to make you happy you do not love them. How could you love something that you porposly made then endure pain so you could feel happiness. The perfect example of true love is this: your partner has met someone she feels she truly loves, comes to you and breaks down and tells you she no longer feels love for you, she doesn’t know why, she can’t explain how it happened and you tell her to end it with that person right now. She ends that relationship because she doesn’t want to hurt you. One year later she is severely depressed and has been distant, unloving but still sticks by your side. 5 years go by and she is still by your side miserable. But you are happy as can be this entire time. What would it take for you to let this person go no matter how much pain you will suffer. The answer is “Love”. You will love her in her happiness, you will support her in her happiness, you will not do anything that will cause her pain. Man or women love conquers your selfishness. If that person needs to leave your relationship because she believes she loves this other person, you must let her go with all your blessings. If you were willing to do this, if every man or women could do this I can almost guarantee there would be a high percentage of those we blessed with happiness to return to the partners they left as their eyes were opened to how unbelievably beautiful you are. Would you be able to continue to help that person who left you? Would you be able to keep being positive to that person that left you? What if she left you and she had no means to find a home to live in, could you help her find a house or room to get started in. Could you help her knowing she believes she loves this other person? This is the test of true love!

i need true love

I would Know what True Love Is The Kind of Love I’m feeling isn’t True Love it’s not True Love at all. True Love from Frozen remember.

The debate about love being a feeling or a choice is difficult to answer. I was recently presented by my soon to be ex-wife that she lost the feeling. I decided to do more to make life easier on her and it didn’t seem to make a difference. I felt that she needed to make a choice to accept that after almost 10 years of marriage to be happy by making the other person happy. It usually comes with compromise and in our case we could not figure that out when it came to physical intimacy. We have 2 school age children. We both had our moments of infedility 2 years ago. I thought we recovered well but I believe the damage was still tough on her heart as I was willing to forgive. So forgiveness is my definition of love as long as it doesn’t have to be over the same thing again and again. The choice to forgive is love!

Trueeee loveeeee….. What is it? Love is patient Love is kind It does not envy or boast…

Real loves takes time. It grows into something with deep roots because you watered it with honesty, kindness, complete removal of your societal mask and you have pure motives. Your heart is open to that person and you are vulnerable.

Real love is takes patience to wait for the right one.

Trust. Mutual love. Mutual respect.

Hopefully you will find it. Seek and ye shall find.

The Gottman Institute and other research show that using “we” language makes for HEALTHIER, more secure relationships, so I’d like to see a citation on that particular piece of advice.

Real true love is being very caring, loving, committed, compatible, and really being there for one another as well. And being very faithful to one another too.

Hi there, This is Harsh from India. I’m in a relationship and it’s been 2 years but long-distance makes it so hard to keep it refreshed and excited, We both did a few things that should have been avoided and now there are issues that she feels that I don’t even love her but I do actually. Please help me with this how I can change it and make my bond happier and last long. Thank you and will be looking for a reply. Hope

hello. you don’t know me but I just wanna say that loving someone is easy but cherishing them and loving them the correct way is hard but to take the time and spend time with them in whatever communication, physically being there to spend time or to be there for them, through technology, or some sort of communication, do things that she likes, spend time with her as much possible time you have, do things together like baking, reading books, maybe even video games, or watching a movie doing these things to solely focus on her alone, to desire her and have a mutual respect, love and affection for her. Hopefully this helps or if you already have it figured out then I’m happy for you continue to love her equally as much as she loves you

I am dating a guy he doesn’t know any my family member and my mom call me to spend the vacation with her so i ask the guy this is the opportunity to see her and tell her that I’m with you but the guy said he can’t go unless next time so i want to ask does this mean love or what please help me

Help PLEASE,,

Dating girlfriend for 3 years.

-she lied about not being in relationship the past 6 years before we met. – lied about having no sex the lay 3 years before we met. – few months in I saw texts between a couple of men and her which she then deleted and blamed it that her phone glitched and deleted those text and others (to make it believable) – have always avoided talking about past relationships. – the ex she dated 3 years before me was apparently such a terrible boyfriend that it traumatized her, that’s why she didn’t want to tell me. – then found picture of them two on her phone. – also found Instagram direct messages she had with him throughout an entire day while she was at work. I found out and she says it meant nothing. That she felt bad. While he takes about kissing her and you know the rest. She did not stop him whatsoever from talking to her as a matter of fact she conversed with him that entire day. I confronted her at the end of her work day. She apologized said would never happen again. Said she deleted because it meant nothing and she doesn’t want something that has no meaning on her phone. But that same night, around bed time, he again texted her asking “wyd” she replied yet! “Going to bed” Fast forward she always plays what happened down to seem like these things meant nothing, that they’re meaningless!! To me that’s down right disrespectful!! She does still have strong feelings for her ex. And her ex still randomly seeks her out, prank calls, left roses on her car. She knows all this but denies it’s him. We recently broke up for two weeks. While broken up she changed her Instagram caption to “don’t ever look back. True love never dies.” And still has that up even now that we’ve been back together for months.

To me this caption is geared to her ex.

Am I wrong?

This is highly informatics, crisp and clear. I think that everything has been described in systematic manner so that reader could get maximum information and learn many things.

True love to me feels as easy as breathing. You don’t have to force it and you can’t fight it. When you think you’re not ready—bam it will hit you because love knows no boundaries. I wonder how many loves you get in this life and if only one remains true. You either have one shot or infinite opportunities. True love is a sacrifice in many ways—whether that’s your freedom, or the ability to put their needs above your own, and even when you’re angry you still adore them and have their best interest at heart. As the bible states, love is not boastful. It does not envy. True love motivates and marvels to see you shine. It doesn’t strive for perfection, love meets you in imperfection. Love is a mystery, described as a feeling to some and a choice to most. Love can’t be put in a box. True love is what keeps humanity hopeful. We all seek true love and I hope everyone has the chance to at least experience it once, if not multiple times in numerous ways. Always remember that love comes and love goes, but the greatest love you should always have is with yourself.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Understanding and Preventing Teen Suicide: CAMS-4Teens™ as an Effective Treatment Approach

Making Sense of Your Life

Popular posts.

• Homework Help
• Essay Examples
• Citation Generator
• Writing Guides
• Essay Title Generator
• Essay Topic Generator
• Essay Outline Generator
• Flashcard Generator
• Plagiarism Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Conclusion Generator
• Thesis Statement Generator
• Introduction Generator
• Literature Review Generator
• Hypothesis Generator
• Personal Issues
• True Love Essays

True Love Essays (Examples)

1000+ documents containing “true love” .

Filter by Keywords:(add comma between each)

True love the existence of true love.

True Love The existence of true love has been a debate among writers, authors, and philanthropists for years. There are many things in this world that we as people share together, but nothing else can bare, mend, or even heal like love. Every place we go and everything we see has in some point in time been touched by some form of love. It is through stories and poems that we indeed do find the existence of true love. I believe that stories and poems provide us with the necessary evidence to prove that true love does exist and we will analyze these poems and stories in the following work to indeed provide evidence of its existence. We find that true love does exist and it is real, when we analyze the writings of those who are most known for acknowledging it. In our world today, society explains love as being….

Absence of True Love in Our Society

Love Modern America lacks a true love ethic. riters like M. Scott Peck and Bell Hooks argue that our confusion about love stems from an inability to see love as an action rather than a noun, and the confusion of romance and sex with love. Instead, they argue that true love is based on choice and the desire to nurture the self or another spiritually. Hooks specifically argues that much of our confusion about love stems from our paternalistic culture that teaches men that to love is to be weak and inferior. As such, love has become associated with what is feminine and weak in our culture. In their works, June Jordan and Sonia Sanchez describe the gamut of what is considered love in our culture, from the sensual and romantic, to the understanding that love of humanity can help create a more meaningful and functional relationship with ourselves, others, and the….

Works Cited

Jordan, June. 2003. Some of Us Did Not Die: New and Selected Essays. BasicCivitas Books

Hooks, Bell. 2001. All About Love: New Visions. Perennial.

Peck, M. Scott. 2003. The Road Less Traveled, 25th Anniversary Edition: A New Psychology of Love, Traditional Values and Spiritual Growth. Touchstone Books.

Sanchez, Sonia. 1999. Like the Singing Coming Off the Drums. Beacno Press.

True Love Is Analyzed

Love Actually is a course that teaches students to understand and appreciate the various facets of love from a variety of different perspectives. The course is stratified according to the different weeks it runs, with each week presenting a different theme related to the notion of love. In this way, students can get a more comprehensive understanding of love from a variety of approaches that can collectively influence their regard for this force in the world today. The focus of the first week of this class is an overview of the very notion of love itself. It is critically to denote that love actually implies a degree of intimacy with others, which is demonstrable via the "bond" of romantic mating 1. Of course, there are numerous degrees of intimacy with which one can have with others -- which means that there are numerous varieties or shades of love. Perhaps a better….

Bibliography

Lehmiller, Justin. The Psychology of Human Sexuality. New York: Wiley Blackwell, 2014.

Ryan, Christopher, and Jetha, Cacilda. Sex at Dawn. New York: Harper Collins Publishing, 2010.

Slater, Lauren. "Love." National Geographic Magazine, February, 2006.

1. Daniel Mendelsohn, "But Enough about Me," New Yorker, January 25, 2010, 68.

Wuthering Read Greatest Depiction Perfect True Love

uthering read greatest depiction perfect, true love. It read a critique sort love. Explain sides debate. Include direct quotations. Paraphrase everuthing, quotations unparaphraseable . Impossible love in "uthering Heights" Emily Bronte's 1847 novel "uthering Heights" speaks about love as seen from the perspectives of several individuals. hile some might be inclined to consider that the book is meant to emphasize the importance of true love, others are probable to consider that the story is actually intended to have people acknowledge that love can be particularly devastating and that it is dangerous for people to try and search for perfect love. Compromise is everything when regarding this book and if its characters would have attempted to try and settle with what they had it is very probable that they would have experienced fewer hardships. The novel concentrates between the impossible love affair between Heathcliff, the central character, and his lover Catherine. Throughout the….

Works cited:

Bronte, Emily, "Wuthering heights: a novel," (Harper & Brothers, publishers, Franklin square, 1858)

Nature of True Love in Plato's Symposium

nature of true love in Plato's "Symposium" Rather famously, the ancient Greeks had multiple words for different aspects of the emotion we English-speaking moderns now term "love." In Plato's dialogue "The Symposium," defining the exact nature of love during a drinking party grips the philosophical imagination of Socrates and numerous other revelers at the house of a man named Agathon. The drinking party includes many individuals exposing their different ideas about the true nature of love. However, only Socrates offers a view of love that encompasses not simply the relationship between earthly individuals. Instead, Socrates suggests an individualistic pursuit of love by the soul, where it cleaves to the good in a non-sexual, and what came to be known as a 'Platonic' form of affection, is the ultimate goal of exercising in physical and spiritual love in the world. For Socrates, all aspects of earthly love are merely simulacra, or….

Plato. "The Symposium." From Complete Works. Edited by John Copper. Indianapolis: Hackett 1997, 488-505.

Love and Mythology

Mythology Tales of love begin with the creation of humans, and continue to the graphic media driven "reality TV" shows that televise the private lives of the bachelor and bachelorette and all the people competing for their love. Love is a feeling everyone can relate to, but it is unlikely most people would claim to understand love. ithin almost every literary genre there are myths about love that fuel ideals that are rarely if ever realized. There is no place where this is truer than in the stories of mythology. The perpetual love myths that exist in classical mythology demonstrate ideals that are confronted even today by individuals searching for love today. The ideals of love that will be explored in this work are: love at first sight, the myth of one true love and the human phenomenon of over idealizing unobtainable love. The stories of classical mythology charter the lives….

Love Triangle Story Lines of Lancelot Arthur

Love Triangle Story Lines of Lancelot, Arthur and Guenivere to Tristram, King Mark and Isolde from Malory's Morte Darthur hen Melanie McGarrahan Gibson says of the "Tale of Sir Gareth" in Sir Thomas Malory's Morte Darthur that "in the happiest ending of all of Morlay's tales, love and marriage triumph" (Gibson 220), she is touching on more than just the wholesome and happy nature of the tale. Though unique in its existence as the "happiest of all of Malory's tales," it is reprehensive of a larger problem within Malory's narrative scheme. The tale itself is one of the steady progresses. After overcoming all obstacles, love and marriage win in the end. This is a romantic sentiment and perhaps it is true to some extent. The purpose of current research paper is to analysis the two dominant love triangle storylines in Morte Darthur i.e. between Lancelot-Queen Guinevere- Arthur and love triangle tale….

Archibald, E. "Lancelot of the Laik: Sources, Genre, Reception, the Scots and Medieval Arthurian Legend Ed. R. Purdie and N. Royan." Cambridge: Brewer, 2005. 71-82.

Dobbin M.W. "The Women of Malory's -- Morte Darthur -- ," Ph. D. Diss., Athens, University of Georgia. 1987

Duby, G. The Courtly Model, in C. Klapisch-Zuber, ed., "A History of Women. Silence of the Middle Ages," Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University, 1992 pp. 250 -- 266.

Greenwood, M.K., "Women in Love, or Three Courtly Heroines in Chaucer and Malory: Elaine, Criseyde and Guinevere," in A Wyf There Was. Essays in Honour of Paule Mertens-Fonck, ed. J. Dor, Liege, Liege Language and Literature, 1992 pp. 167-177.

Love and Falling in Love From the

love" and "falling in love." From the time that we are infants, we are fed with stories about falling in love, lovers triumphing against all odds, and then living happily ever after. In fact, the same theme is repeated right through the growing up years of childhood and adolescence in all forms of media, be it film, television, music, or books of fiction. As a result, both young men and women alike are almost brainwashed into visualizing an idealized image of the ultimate "falling in love" experience and the woman or man of her or his dreams. True, there is the usual curiosity, which leads to experimentation and the process of sexual discovery but these sexual skirmishes do not really interfere with the typical hopes cherished about living the ultimate romantic dream. Indeed, adolescence is characterized by most teenagers in love with the idea of falling in love. Unfortunately, this dream….

Love Poem John Frederick Nims Info Authors

Love Poem" John Frederick Nims info authors life included literary criticism poem. essay a strong consistent thesis statement, written 3rd person John Frederick Nims' poem "Love Poem" makes it possible for readers to understand that a love poem does not necessarily need to incorporate traditional concepts in order for it to be successful in sending the right messages. Nims' understanding of love appears to be much more complex in comparison to typical love-related feelings present in most poems. The poet wishes to surprise by putting across his strongest feelings and it is very likely that he wants readers to understand that loving words are not always enough to put across one's love. The lover that this poem is dedicated to is human and in spite of the fact that some might consider this to be a flaw, the poet intends to raise people's awareness regarding the perfection related to being….

Bibliography:

Nims, John Frederick, "Love Poem"

Love Despite Being the Frequent

For instance, in Descartes' The Passions of the Soul, his "moral concerns lead him to describe the passion of love as altruistic and involving self-sacrifice [but] his general account of passions, however, suggests that all passions (including love) spring from and promote self-interest," leading to a seeming contradiction and debate that ultimately only serves to reinforce outdated notions of love (Frierson 314). This kind of debate around love has allowed different groups, with religions foremost among them, to use love as a means of controlling the populace and their interpersonal lives. By suggesting that love requires self-sacrifice, one may use another's love in order to get them to do things that they would normally reject outright, and by simultaneously claiming that love stems from some sort of nearly-uncontrollable passion, one may use love as a means of shaming individuals. By describing love solely as the emotions felt and the chemical….

Frierson, Patrick. "Learning to Love: From Egoism to Generosity in Descartes." Journal of the History of Philosophy. 40.3 (2002): 313-338. Print.

Gottschall, Jonathan, and Marcus NordlandLast. "Romantic Love: A Literary Universal? ."

Philosophy and Literature. 30.2 (2006): 450-470. Print.

Schaefer, Naomi. "I Do…for Now." Nation Review. 2002: 1-4.

Love in Symposium

Plato's Symposium In order to answer the question of what 'love' means to Plato/Socrates in the Symposium, the most important aspect is to explain how the other participants define it before Socrates weighs in with his more philosophical and spiritual explanation. All of these participants are wealthy, privileged young men from the aristocratic class, except of course for Socrates who comes from the artisan class. They are arrogant, shallow, and narcissistic, and mainly in love with themselves, and also define love as Eros or erotic, physical and sexual experiences, and of course love of money, fame and physical beauty. Sometimes they also realize that philos or friendship can also be a form of love, with which Socrates certainly agrees, although he then carries it to the higher level of agape or universal and God-like benevolence, understanding and virtue. Instead of democracy, they would prefer Athens to be governed by an….

WORKS CITED

Gil, Christopher. Plato: The Symposium. Penguin Classics, 1999.

Love and Logics Question Essay

controversy with regard to love, as its complexity can make individuals have completely different perspectives on the concept. Love versus intimacy addresses the idea of feelings being owed primarily to two people liking the thought of being together as a result of the physical attraction between them. To a certain degree this type of love can be considered in a context involving instinct -- the two individuals are fueled by their sexual thinking and believe that it would be in their best interest to be together. Behavioral and physical elements of attraction play an important role at this point, as the connection between two individuals occurs instantaneously.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Rilke, R. M. "Letters to a Young Poet." p. 64.] hen considering love versus attachment, this type of association can be stronger, as the two individuals experience an emotional connection at this moment. One can regard this as a classical form of….

Fischer, H. "Anatomy of Love." "

Fromm. E. "The Art of Loving." (Open Road Media, 26 Feb 2013)

MacLean. P. "The Triune Brain in Evolution: Role in Paleocerebral Functions." (Springer Science & Business Media, 31 Jan 1990)

Mitchell, S. A. "Can Love Last?: The Fate of Romance over Time." (W. W. Norton, 17 Feb 2003)

Love and Duty in Lear and Screwtape

Screwtape and Lear: hat Both Say About Duty and Christian Love The underlying perspective that both King Lear and The Screwtape Letters share may be called a Christian perspective, in which duty, humility and sacrifice are indirectly valued as the best ideals, though, of course, Screwtape also notes that "duty comes before pleasure" (Lewis 21). hile Cordelia represents Christ in Lear, the ordeals of ormwood's patient resemble the crisis of identity that Lear suffers. The relationship between sanity and goodness is established in both works, and that relationship serves to underscore the main theme which is the greatness of Christian living and the tragedy and violence that results from unchristian living. The texts thus serve to complement one another and both agree on man's place in society (which is that he should subordinate himself to God rather than to Self or appetite or Satanic pride, etc.). So while the material is….

White, David Allen. "Shakespeare." MN: St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, 1996. Print.

Lewis, C.S. The Screwtape Letters. Bartleby. Web. 29 Apr 2015.

Lincoln, Abraham. "First Inaugural Address." Bartleby. Web. 29 Apr 2015.

New Testament. BibleHub. Web. 29 Apr 2015.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Love

Love is a word that is often overused and sometimes underappreciated. And despite the confusion some people have in separating romantic love from sensual pleasure, or real love from friendship -- love is among the most powerful ideas in the world. Given all the tension and hatefulness in the world, it is the opinion of this paper that any love is good love, no matter how bizarre or byzantine it may appear to society. The widely diverse and dissimilar kinds of love that writer Raymond Carver alludes to in his short story simply reflect the vast chasm between one personality and the next. It may seem blatantly obvious to say this, but individual approaches to love -- and reflections on love -- are of course based on each person's life experiences. Bob Dylan wrote a song -- "Love is Just a Four-Letter ord" -- that has an ironic twist to it,….

Carver, Raymond. What We Talk About When We Talk About Love. New York: Random

House, 2009.

Common Themes of Humanities Love

Love is a universal theme, and can be found in multiple art forms including painting, poetry, and music. One of the most common romantic expressions and symbols of love is the kiss. In 1907, Gustav Klimt painted "The Kiss," perhaps his most famous painting characterized not only by its subject of a man kissing a woman but also its use of gold paint and Art Nouveau style. In 1939, poet Stephen Dunn published "The Kiss," which conveys a similar type of eroticism as Klimt's painting. Finally, in 1986, Prince produced one of his most famous songs and videos, "Kiss." All three of these kiss themed works of art convey the theme of erotic and sensual love, which is a common theme in the humanities. The earliest of these three works of art is Gustav Klimt's painting "The Kiss." This painting is unique because it almost appears like a collage, the way….

Share your best advice on writing a compelling My Daughter, My Wife, Our Robot and The Quest for Immortality thesis statement!

Writing a Compelling Thesis Statement for "My Daughter, My Wife, Our Robot, and The Quest for Immortality" Introduction: "My Daughter, My Wife, Our Robot, and The Quest for Immortality" by Peter Høeg is a complex and thought-provoking novel that delves into the intricate relationships between family, love, loss, and the human obsession with immortality. To write a compelling thesis statement for this work, it is crucial to carefully consider the novel's central themes and arguments. Thesis Statement: Through exploring the complex interactions between family, love, and the pursuit of immortality, "My Daughter, My Wife, Our Robot, and The Quest for Immortality" argues that the....

True Love The existence of true love has been a debate among writers, authors, and philanthropists for years. There are many things in this world that we as people share…

Women's Issues - Sexuality

Love Modern America lacks a true love ethic. riters like M. Scott Peck and Bell Hooks argue that our confusion about love stems from an inability to see love as…

Love Actually is a course that teaches students to understand and appreciate the various facets of love from a variety of different perspectives. The course is stratified according to…

uthering read greatest depiction perfect, true love. It read a critique sort love. Explain sides debate. Include direct quotations. Paraphrase everuthing, quotations unparaphraseable . Impossible love in "uthering Heights" Emily…

Black Studies - Philosophy

nature of true love in Plato's "Symposium" Rather famously, the ancient Greeks had multiple words for different aspects of the emotion we English-speaking moderns now term "love." In Plato's…

Mythology Tales of love begin with the creation of humans, and continue to the graphic media driven "reality TV" shows that televise the private lives of the bachelor and…

Research Paper

Love Triangle Story Lines of Lancelot, Arthur and Guenivere to Tristram, King Mark and Isolde from Malory's Morte Darthur hen Melanie McGarrahan Gibson says of the "Tale of Sir…

love" and "falling in love." From the time that we are infants, we are fed with stories about falling in love, lovers triumphing against all odds, and then living…

Love Poem" John Frederick Nims info authors life included literary criticism poem. essay a strong consistent thesis statement, written 3rd person John Frederick Nims' poem "Love Poem" makes it…

Family and Marriage

For instance, in Descartes' The Passions of the Soul, his "moral concerns lead him to describe the passion of love as altruistic and involving self-sacrifice [but] his general…

Plato's Symposium In order to answer the question of what 'love' means to Plato/Socrates in the Symposium, the most important aspect is to explain how the other participants define…

controversy with regard to love, as its complexity can make individuals have completely different perspectives on the concept. Love versus intimacy addresses the idea of feelings being owed…

Mythology - Religion

Screwtape and Lear: hat Both Say About Duty and Christian Love The underlying perspective that both King Lear and The Screwtape Letters share may be called a Christian perspective, in…

Love is a word that is often overused and sometimes underappreciated. And despite the confusion some people have in separating romantic love from sensual pleasure, or real love from…

Love is a universal theme, and can be found in multiple art forms including painting, poetry, and music. One of the most common romantic expressions and symbols of love…

Essays About Love and Relationships: Top 5 Examples

Love, romance, and relationships are just as complicated and messy as they are fascinating. Read our guide on essays about love and relationships.

We, as humans, are social beings. Humanity is inclined towards living with others of our kind and forming relationships with them. Love, whether in a romantic context or otherwise, is essential to a strong relationship with someone. It can be used to describe familial, friendly, or romantic relationships; however, it most commonly refers to romantic partners. 

Love and relationships are difficult to understand, but with effort, devotion, and good intentions, they can blossom into something beautiful that will stay with you for life. This is why it is important to be able to discern wisely when choosing a potential partner.

5 Essay Examples

1. love and marriage by kannamma shanmugasundaram, 2. what my short-term relationships taught me about love and life by aaron zhu, 3. true love waits by christine barrett, 4. choosing the right relationship by robert solley, 5. masters of love by emily esfahani smith, 1. what is a healthy romantic relationship, 2. a favorite love story, 3. relationship experiences, 4. lessons relationships can teach you, 5. love and relationships in the 21st century, 6. is marriage necessary for true love.

“In successful love marriages, couples have to learn to look past these imperfections and remember the reasons why they married each other in the first place. They must be able to accept the fact that neither one of them is perfect. Successful love marriages need to set aside these superior, seemingly impossible expectations and be willing to compromise, settling for some good and some bad.”

Shanmugasundaram’s essay looks at marriage in Eastern Cultures, such as her Indian traditions, in which women have less freedom and are often forced into arranged marriages. Shanmugasundaram discusses her differing views with her parents over marriage; they prefer to stick to tradition while she, influenced by Western values, wants to choose for herself. Ultimately, she has compromised with her parents: they will have a say in who she marries, but it will be up to her to make the final decision. She will only marry who she loves. 

“There is no forever, I’ve been promised forever by so many exes that it’s as meaningless to me as a homeless person promising me a pot of gold. From here on out, I’m no longer looking for promises of forever, what I want is the promise that you’ll try your best and you’ll be worth it. Don’t promise me forever, promise me that there will be no regrets.”

In Zhu’s essay, he reflects on his lessons regarding love and relationships. His experiences with past partners have taught him many things, including self-worth and the inability to change others. Most interestingly, however, he believes that “forever” does not exist and that going into a relationship, they should commit to as long as possible, not “forever.” Furthermore, they should commit to making the relationship worthwhile without regret. 

“For life is a constant change, love is the greatest surprise, friendship is your best defense, maturity comes with responsibility and death is just around the corner, so, expect little, assume nothing, learn from your mistakes, never fail to have faith that true love waits, take care of your friends, treasure your family, moderate your pride and throw up all hatred for God opens millions of flowers without forcing the buds, reminding us not to force our way but to wait for true love to happen perfectly in His time.”

Barrett writes about how teenagers often feel the need to be in a relationship or feel “love” as soon as possible. But unfortunately, our brains are not fully matured in our teenage years, so we are more likely to make mistakes. Barrett discourages teenagers from dating so early; she believes that they should let life take its course and enjoy life at the moment. Her message is that they shouldn’t be in a rush to grow up, for true love will come to those who are patient. You might also be interested in these essays about commitment and essays about girlfriends .

“A paucity of common interests gets blamed when relationships go south, but they are rarely the central problem. Nonetheless, it is good to have some — mostly in terms of having enough in common that there are things that you enjoy spending time doing together. The more important domains to consider are personality and values, and when it comes to personality, the key question is how does your potential partner handle stress.”

Solley, from a more psychological perspective, gives tips on how one can choose the ideal person to be in a relationship with. Love is a lifetime commitment, so much thought should be put into it. One should look at culture, values regarding spending money, and common interests. Solley believes that you should not always look for someone with the same interests, for what makes a relationship interesting is the partners’ differences and how they look past them. 

“There are two ways to think about kindness. You can think about it as a fixed trait: Either you have it or you don’t. Or you could think of kindness as a muscle. In some people, that muscle is naturally stronger than in others, but it can grow stronger in everyone with exercise. Masters tend to think about kindness as a muscle. They know that they have to exercise it to keep it in shape. They know, in other words, that a good relationship requires sustained hard work.”

Smith discusses research conducted over many years that explains the different aspects of a relationship, including intimacy, emotional strength, and kindness. She discusses kindness in-depth, saying that a relationship can test your kindness, but you must be willing to work to be kind if you love your partner. You might also be interested in these essays about divorce .

6 Writing Prompts On Essays About Love and Relationships

Everyone has a different idea of what makes a great relationship. For example, some prioritize assertiveness in their partner, while others prefer a calmer demeanor. You can write about different qualities and habits that a healthy, respectful relationship needs, such as quality time and patience. If you have personal experience, reflect on this as well; however, if you don’t, write about what you would hope from your future partner. 

Love and relationships have been an essential element in almost every literary work, movie, and television show; an example of each would be Romeo and Juliet , The Fault in Our Stars , and Grey’s Anatomy . Even seemingly unrelated movies, such as the Star Wars and Lord of the Rings franchises, have a romantic component. Describe a love story of your choice; explain its plot, characters, and, most importantly, how the theme of love and relationships is present. 

If you have been in a romantic relationship before, or if you are in one currently, reflect on your experience. Why did you pursue this relationship? Explore your relationship’s positive and negative sides and, if applicable, how it ended. If not, write about how you will try and prevent the relationship from ending.

All our experiences in life form us, relationships included. In your essay, reflect on ways romantic relationships can teach you new things and make you better; consider values such as self-worth, patience, and positivity. Then, as with the other prompts, use your personal experiences for a more interesting essay. Hou might find our guide on how to write a vow helpful.

How love, romance, and relationships are perceived has changed dramatically in recent years; from the nuclear family, we have seen greater acceptance of same-sex relationships, blended families, and relationships with more than two partners—research on how the notion of romantic relationships has changed and discuss this in your essay. 

More and more people in relationships are deciding not to get married. For a strong argumentative essay, discuss whether you agree with the idea that true love does not require marriage, so it is fine not to get married in the first place. Research the arguments of both sides, then make your claim. 

Check out our guide packed full of transition words for essays . If you’re still stuck, check out our general resource of essay writing topics .

Martin is an avid writer specializing in editing and proofreading. He also enjoys literary analysis and writing about food and travel.

View all posts

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• School Education /

Essay on Love:- Sample Essays for Students in 100, 200 and 300 words

• Updated on  
• Feb 2, 2024

Can a person live without love? Is it the essence of survival? Why do we fall for someone? What is the meaning of love?  Love is one of the most important feelings in human life. Humans are social animals and we have lived for centuries with this way of life where we take confidence in asking another person how our clothes fit us, or how we look. Those who love us, give us the most honest opinions and make our happiness paramount which means love is found in joy, fulfilment and a sense of purpose.

Also Read: 99+ Psychology Facts About Human Behaviour You Would Find Interesting

Table of Contents

• 1 Essay on Love in 100 words
• 2 Essay on Love in 200 words
• 3 Essay on Love in 300 words

Essay on Love in 100 words

Love is the very essence of the human life. Without love, the world would become cold and bleak. God has gifted us different kinds of emotions and love is one the most beautiful of them all. It is an emotion that each of us has experienced at some point in our lives. When someone shows us their love, it makes us feel complete and special. It is like a divine energy that nourishes us throughout our lives. Love has a lot of positive aspects. It provides a foundation on which an individual builds, relishes, and nurtures. Furthermore, this intense feeling shows us how to deepen our emotions. We can say that giving love is a way of worshipping God.

Also Read:- Heart-Touching Mother’s Day 2023 Quotes

Essay on Love in 200 words

Love is a feeling of strong affection and bonding towards an individual. The very concept of love might become an unimaginable thing and also it may happen to each person in a particular way. 

Love comprises feelings, attitudes, and emotions. The feeling is more than just a physical attraction, emotional connection, and a soulful bond. The very basic meaning of love is to feel more than just liking someone. Expressing the same is a wonderful experience. Love is one of the most basic human needs. Everyone wants to feel loved. It is something that completes an individual and brings peace to them.

Love is important for the mind as well as for the body. The more connected you are, the healthier you will be especially emotionally. It is true that love even eradicates depression. It is that much powerful. It is one of the best antidepressants. Life without love would be unimaginable.

Love is something that ends conflicts, brings light into one’s life, gives hope, and makes life worth living. It brings warmth that is needed to nurture life and an individual too. Without love, the world would become a cold and bleak place for everyone. Love builds and heals.

Also Read:-   Speech on Love is More Powerful Than Hate

Essay on Love in 300 words

Love consists of a set of emotions, behaviors, and beliefs with strong feelings of affection. A person might say that they love their dog. The very concept of love is different for each individual as it may happen to each person in a particular way. We can say that it is more than just liking someone, it is an emotional attachment. 

Though love is important in every way still, let us have a look how this intense feeling relates to our bodies as well as to our relations:

1. Hormone of Love

Love helps our body to produce oxytocin, the feel-good hormone and is probably one of the best antidepressants. It makes any individual healthier especially emotionally.

2. Basic Necessity

Love is one of the most basic human needs. Expressing it to others benefits both, the person who delivers it as well as the recipient. One of the ways it can be shown to close ones is as contact comfort. Several experiments show that the babies who were not given contact comfort, especially during the first six months, grow up to be psychologically damaged. 

3. Makes Relations Healthy

In a relationship, Love is the binding element that keeps it strong and makes it grow. The individuals in love, are much more emotionally connected making them connected on a soulful level. The comfort in that is unparalleled. 

Love is the very essence of existence. Life without love is not worthy of being lived. Before we are even aware, love is showered on us each day by our mothers, fathers, siblings, etc. It is a unique gift that helps us shape our lives. Without it, the society would perish. Love motivates us in the darkest times, helps us to overcome negativity and gives us purpose in our lives with new perspectives. It is greater than anything else in life.

Also Read: Speech on Mother Daughter Relationship for School Students

Love is the very essence of the human life. Without love, the world would become cold and bleak. God has gifted us several different kinds of emotions and love is one the most beautiful of them all. It is one such emotion that each of us has experienced at some point in our lives. When someone shows us their love, it makes us feel complete, it makes us feel special. Like a divine energy, love nourishes us throughout our lives. It has a lot of positive aspects such as it provides a foundation on which an individual builds, relishes, nurtures, and heals, it shows us how to deepen our emotions. We can say that giving love is a way of worshipping god.

Love is a feeling of strong affection and bonding towards an individual. The very concept of love might become an unimaginable thing and also it may happen to each person in a particular way.

Love is the very essence of existence. Life without love is not worthy to be lived. Before we are even aware, love is showered on us each day by our mothers, fathers, siblings, etc. It is a unique gift that helps us shape our lives. Without it, the society would perish. Love gives us the motivation we need even in the darkest of times, it helps us overcome negativity and gives us purpose in our life and new perspectives. It is greater than anything else in life.

Related Blogs

This brings us to the end of our blog on Essay on Love. Hope you find this information useful. For more information on such informative topics for your school, visit our essay writing and follow Leverage Edu.

Deepansh Gautam

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today.

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

Feb 20, 2023

250-500 Word Example Essays About Love and Romance

Got an Essay assignment about Love and Romance? Let us help you out with these inspiring Examples!

Love, an emotion that has captivated the hearts and minds of poets, authors, and artists throughout history, remains a profound and multi-faceted subject. While the depth and complexity of this emotion can make it a daunting topic to explore in an essay, the right resources can turn this challenge into a rewarding endeavor. For those looking to capture the essence of love and romance in their writing, our essay writer can be a beacon of inspiration and assistance. This tool, powered by Jenni.ai, offers a seamless journey through the essay-writing process, from brainstorming ideas to refining the final draft. 

Whether you're delving into argumentative, persuasive , or reflective essays about love, Jenni.ai ensures clarity, coherence, and a touch of elegance in your prose. It's a trusted companion for students, educators, and seasoned writers alike, simplifying the writing journey every step of the way.

1. The Evolution of Love: A Study of the Changing Nature of Romance throughout History

Introduction.

Love is one of humanity's most complicated and mysterious emotions. People have strived to comprehend and define Love throughout history, resulting in many works of literature, art, and music dedicated to the subject. Despite its universal appeal, the nature of Love has evolved significantly throughout time, reflecting evolving cultural, social, and economic situations. In this essay, we will look at the evolution of Love, from ancient times to the present.

Ancient Love

A. Greek and Roman Love

Love was viewed as a complex and varied feeling in ancient Greece and Rome, comprising characteristics of desire, friendship, and awe. Love was frequently represented as a tremendous force in ancient civilizations, capable of both propelling individuals to high heights of success and bringing them down into the depths of sorrow. This was especially true of romantic Love, which was glorified in epic poems like the Iliad and Odyssey , as well as works of art and literature depicting the hardships and sufferings of star-crossed lovers.

B. Medieval Love

A chivalric code known as courtly Love emerged in medieval Europe. Its core tenants were the importance of Love, honour, and devotion. During this time, romantic Love was typically portrayed as an unrequited emotion, with the lover pining for the affections of a faraway and unreachable beloved. Medieval poets and troubadours mirrored this romanticised picture of Love in their works by singing and writing about the highs and lows of passionate Love.

Modern Love

A. The Renaissance

The idealized picture of Love that had ruled for centuries was called into question by artists and intellectuals during the Renaissance, marking a turning point in the development of romantic relationships. During this time, romantic Love was portrayed as more tactile and visceral. Shakespeare, for instance, reflected the shifting beliefs of his day by exploring the nuanced and often tragic nature of Love in his works.

B. The Enlightenment

The concepts of reason and individuality began to gain root during the Enlightenment, and with that came a shift in how people saw Love. Political marriages and alliances were often formed based on Love, which was now considered a more sensible and practical feeling. Thinkers from the Enlightenment period, including Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, shared this perspective on Love as a tool for bettering society and the individual.

C. The Modern Era

Today, the word "love" is most often used to describe a feeling one has when they are in a committed relationship or when one has achieved their own goals. Love has become a consumable good thanks to the spread of consumerism and the worship of the individual. The media and arts reflect this conception of Love by depicting it as a means to one's fulfillment and contentment.

The changing cultural, social, and economic conditions of each historical epoch are reflected in the history of Love. The essence of Love has changed dramatically throughout the years, from its idealised image in ancient Greece and Rome to its depiction as a spiritual tie in mediaeval Europe to its current identification with romantic relationships and personal fulfilment. Despite these changes, Love remains a strong and enduring force in human existence, inspiring numerous works of art, literature, and music and affecting how we live and interact with one another.

2. The Power of Love: Examining the Impact of Love on Our Lives and Relationships

Love is a strong feeling that may dramatically alter our life and the bonds we form with others. love, whether romantic, familial, or platonic, can unite us and improve our lives in countless ways., the benefits of love.

A. Improved Physical Health

Love has been demonstrated to improve physical health by decreasing stress, lowering blood pressure, and increasing immunity. The hormone oxytocin, which is released in response to social bonding and has been demonstrated to reduce physiological responses to stress, is thought to be at play here.

B. Enhanced Mental Health

In addition to its physical benefits, Love has been shown to have a beneficial effect on our mental health, lowering stress and anxiety levels and boosting our general sense of happiness. The protective powers of Love against the negative consequences of stress and other difficulties in life are well accepted.

C. Strengthened Relationships

A stronger tie may be formed between two people via the power of Love. Relationships of all kinds, whether romantic, familial, or platonic, may benefit from the strengthening effects of Love by increasing their levels of closeness, trust, and mutual understanding.

The Challenges of Love

A. Love can be painful

Sometimes Love hurts, as when a relationship ends or when we can't find the one we're looking for. One of life's most trying events is losing someone we care about, which may leave us feeling isolated, discouraged, and empty.

The Power of Love to Overcome Challenges

Despite these difficulties, Love may help us overcome them and grow closer to one another. The strength of Love is that it may help us learn and grow, both as people and as a community, via its many forms, such as forgiveness, compromise, and the willingness to persevere through adversity.

Finally, Love is a strong and transformational force that may profoundly influence our lives and relationships. Love may provide us joy, comfort, and a feeling of purpose, whether between friends, family, or romantic partners. Despite its numerous advantages, Love may also bring with it difficulties such as heartbreak and strife. Nonetheless, never underestimate the power of Love. 

It has the potential to draw people together and form deep, long-lasting bonds. Love has the power to make the world a better place, whether through acts of kindness, selflessness, or simply being there for one another. So, let us embrace Love in all of its manifestations and harness its potential to improve our lives and the lives of those around us.

3. The Science of Love: Understanding the Biology and Psychology Behind Love and Attraction

For millennia, people have been drawn and intrigued by the intricate and intriguing feeling of Love. Despite its enormous global significance, the science of Love is now being thoroughly investigated. This paper will investigate the biology and psychology of Love and attraction, delving into the different elements that impact these powerful emotions and how they form our relationships.

The Biology of Love

A. Hormone Function

Love is a biological process controlled by chemicals such as dopamine, serotonin, and oxytocin. These hormones influence our sensations of attraction, enthusiasm, and enjoyment and boost sentiments of trust and closeness.

B. The Influence of Genetics

Genetics also has an impact on Love and attraction, with some personality qualities and physical characteristics that are considered to be appealing to potential spouses being handed down from generation to generation. This suggests that particular preferences for specific sorts of people are hardwired into our genetics, influencing our romantic and sexual attraction patterns.

The Psychology of Love

A. The Role of Attachment Styles

Our attachment types, which we acquire from our early connections with our caretakers, also affect our Love. These attachment types can significantly influence our later relationships, influencing how we build and keep deep attachments with others.

B. The Impact of Social Norms and Values

Cultural Values

Social conventions and cultural ideas also impact Love and attraction, with societal expectations and values impacting our romantic and sexual impulses. These social conventions and cultural ideas influence everything from who we are attracted to and how we approach and pursue relationships.

The Meeting of Biology and

Love Psychology

The biology and psychology of Love are inextricably linked and interdependent, with one having a complicated and subtle impact on the other. This suggests that, while biology influences our sentiments of attraction and Love, our psychological experiences and beliefs may equally shape these emotions.

To summarise, love science is a complicated and intriguing discipline that encompasses the biology and psychology of this strong and transformational emotion. By investigating the elements that impact Love and attraction, we may gain a deeper understanding of the systems that underpin these feelings and how they shape our lives and relationships. The study of Love is a vital and beneficial effort, whether we seek Love, attempt to preserve Love, or wonder about the science underlying this feeling.

4. The Fine Line Between Love and Obsession: Exploring the Dark Side of Love

Love is a powerful and transformative emotion that can bring immense joy and fulfilment to our lives. But Love can also turn dark and dangerous when it crosses the line into obsession. This essay will examine the fine line between Love and obsession, exploring how Love can become unhealthy and dangerous.

The Characteristics of Obsessive Love

A. Unhealthy Attachment

Obsessive Love is characterized by an unhealthy attachment to another person, with the obsessed person becoming overly dependent on their partner for emotional fulfilment. This can lead to feelings of possessiveness and jealousy, as well as a need for constant attention and validation.

B. Control and Manipulation

Obsessive Love can also involve control and manipulation, with the obsessed person trying to control every aspect of their partner's life and behaviour. This can range from minor acts of manipulation, such as trying to dictate what their partner wears or who they spend time with, to more serious forms of control, such as physical abuse or stalking.

The Dark Side of Love

A. Stalking and Harassment

The dark side of Love can take many forms, with stalking and harassment being among the most extreme and dangerous forms of obsessive behaviour. Stalking and harassment can have serious and long-lasting consequences for the victim, causing fear, stress, and trauma that can impact their mental and physical well-being.

B. Domestic Violence

Domestic violence is another form of the dark side of Love, with physical, sexual, and psychological abuse being used as a means of control and domination. Domestic violence can have devastating consequences for the victim, often leading to serious injury or even death.

The Roots of Obsessive Love

A. Psychological Issues

Obsessive Love can have its roots in psychological issues, including depression, anxiety, and borderline personality disorder. These conditions can lead to feelings of insecurity and low self-esteem, making it difficult for individuals to form healthy relationships.

B. Cultural and Social Factors

Cultural and social factors can also play a role in the development of obsessive Love, with certain societal beliefs and norms promoting possessiveness and control in relationships. This can include gender roles, expectations, and cultural beliefs about Love and relationships.

In conclusion, the fine line between Love and obsession is delicate and dangerous, with Love crossing over into unhealthy and dangerous territory when it becomes obsessive. By understanding the characteristics of obsessive Love and how it can take dark and dangerous forms, we can better protect ourselves and our loved ones from the negative consequences of this powerful emotion.

5. The Concept of Unconditional Love: An Analysis of the Ideal of Selfless Love

All kinds of different things count as Love since it's such a complicated and diverse feeling. Unconditional Love is frequently depicted as altruistic, all-encompassing, and unshakable, making it one of the most romanticized types. In this essay, I'd discuss the idea of unconditional Love, defining it and contrasting it with other types of affection.

An Explanation of Selfless Love

A. Selfless Love

The term "unconditional love" is commonly used to describe a type of Love that puts the other person's needs before its own. In this kind of Love, one person cares for another without any thought of return or compensation.

B. Love that encompasses everything

Many people use the term "all-encompassing" to express how unconditional Love embraces a person regardless of who they are or what they've done in their lives. A love like this doesn't depend on the other person changing or improving in any way; rather, it's an unconditional embrace of the person as they are.

The Ideal of Unconditional Love

A. Love Without Conditions

Unconditional Love is a romantic ideal in which the lover places no restrictions on the object of his affection. Since it involves so much giving of oneself, this kind of Love is typically held up as the pinnacle of romantic relationships.

B. Putting the Feeling into Action

However, since we are all flawed human beings, practising unconditional Love can be challenging in daily life. Although this may be the case, the ideal of unconditional Love is still significant since it motivates us to improve our Love and compassion towards others.

The Advantages of Unconditional Love

A. Stronger Connections

Unconditional Love has the potential to improve our connections with others, leading to deeper and more meaningful bonds. This kind of Love creates a non-judgmental and welcoming attitude towards people, which can assist to lessen conflict and improve understanding.

B. More Joy and Satisfaction

As a result of the more profound relationships it fosters, unconditional Love may also increase a person's sense of well-being and contentment. Finding Love like this may give our life new meaning and make us feel whole.

In conclusion, many of us hold unconditional Love as a relationship goal. Even if it's not always possible, the ideal of unconditional Love is worthwhile since it motivates us to increase our Love and compassion. The concept of unconditional Love may lead us to a more meaningful and happy lifestyle, whether our goal is to better our relationships or to find more pleasure and contentment in general.

6. The Importance of Communication in Love Relationships: A Study of the Role of Communication in Maintaining Love

Love relationships, like all others, benefit greatly from open lines of communication between partners. Connecting with one another on a regular basis, whether it's to chat about the day, express emotions, or problem-solve, is crucial to keeping the Love alive between you. This essay will discuss the significance of communication in romantic relationships, specifically how it helps couples stay together and grow closer over time.

Advantages of good communication

Increased Compatibility and Mutual Understanding

Love partnerships benefit significantly from open lines of communication that facilitate mutual understanding and closeness. Sharing our innermost ideas, emotions, and experiences with our partners via direct and honest communication strengthens our bonds with them.

Reduced Conflict

As we can better address difficulties and find positive solutions to differences when communicating effectively, we experience less conflict in our relationships. Relationships may be stronger and more loving by talking through differences and finding common ground.

The Difficulties in Expressing Your Feelings in a Romantic Relationship

A. Confusing Messages and Confused Intents

Good communication can sometimes be difficult, especially in romantic partnerships, despite its many advantages. Conflict, anger and a lack of trust may all result from poor communication and misunderstandings in relationships.

B. Vulnerability and Emotional Safety

Likewise, it takes courage and trust to open up and talk about your feelings with the person you love. It may be nerve-wracking to communicate our innermost thoughts and feelings with a partner because of the risk of being judged harshly or rejected.

The Importance of Active Listening

What is Active Listening?

Maintaining positive connections with others requires not just good talkers but also good listeners. Paying close attention to the other person as they speak and making an effort to get their viewpoint and requirements is an essential component of active listening.

The Benefits of Active Listening

The ability to listen attentively and process information can have a significant influence on interpersonal bonds. You may show your spouse how much you value their opinion and the commitment you have to the relationship by listening attentively to what they have to say.

Finally, it's important to note that communication is a cornerstone of successful, loving partnerships. Communication is crucial for developing and maintaining healthy relationships , whether it is via problem-solving, venting, or just listening. Your relationship may grow stronger and become more rewarding and loving if you put an emphasis on communicating well with one another.

Final Words

Love is a complicated and varied theme that has inspired numerous works of art, literature, and music. Whether it is the science of Love, the power of Love, or the development of Love, there is a great deal to learn and comprehend about this universal feeling. 

Students now have access to a potent tool that may assist them in writing essays about Love with ease and assurance thanks to Jenni.ai. From giving ideas and recommendations to leading you through the writing process, Jenni.ai is the ideal option for anyone who wants to write about Love and relationships. Why then wait? Sign up for a free trial of Jenni.ai today and explore its numerous writing perks!

Try Jenni for free today

Create your first piece of content with Jenni today and never look back

True Love in the Great Gatsby Essay

True Love in The Great Gatsby True love is an emotion that every human being should have the privilege of experiencing once in their life. There is no one correct definition for this feeling, it is definitely different for everyone, but in the end love should make your life better not more difficult. These days the concept of true love has become cliché and people are letting outside factors dictate their emotions. This problem, while it is very prominent today, is not a new thing. In F. Scott Fitzgerald ’s novel, The Great Gatsby , the idea of mistaken true love fills the pages. All the characters have different ideas of what love really is and its worth. Fitzgerald uses his characters Tom, Daisy, and Gatsby to show three different yet …show more content…

Love is not something you easily throw away or put aside as Tom does when he so freely goes to Myrtle Wilson to have his affair. If Tom claims to love Daisy, which he does, he would not have the desire to go out with other women at all especially not have a full relationship with another woman in another town. Tom is not secretive at all of his relations. On one trip to New York City he insisted Nick meet her, “I went up to New York with Tom on the train one afternoon and when we stopped by the ashheaps he jumped to his feet and, taking hold of my elbow, literally forced me from the car. ‘We’re getting off,’ he insisted ‘I want you to meet my girl.’”(Fitzgerald 24). The fact that Tom is so willing to share with everyone, even Nick, Daisy’s cousin, means he has no shame and doesn’t care that he is stomping all over Daisy’s heart. True love is not a chore and should never be looked at in that light. Daisy also has her problems with the definition of True Love. Daisy thinks she is in love with Gatsby, but in actuality she is far from being truly in love with him. They knew each other when they were younger, but Daisy, although she had strong feelings for him, let her family’s expectations keep them apart. Because Gatsby did not come from money and was merely an enlisted soldier he was not fit for Daisy who came from an upper class family. This cannot be true love because true love comes naturally and above all other things and nothing should ever

Gatsby 's Intense Journey For Love

Gatsby exemplifies an individual who can not always get what he or she yearns for. He possesses more than millions of people have combined, yet is still not satisfied. There is only one thing that Gatsby is destined to have, and that is Daisy Buchanan’s unconditional love. Hence by the name, she is married to another man: Tom Buchanan. The madness begins before Daisy gets married when she shares a kiss of a lifetime with James Gatz. Gatsby allows himself to fall in love with her, and from that moment on, all of his life decisions and daily problems are stimulated by Daisy, and framed around her life. Some may consider Gatsby to be an extreme stalker or nutcase, but in reality Gatsby simply has faith in

The Great Gatsby - Love or Obsession

All in all, as presented through this work, Gatsby was indeed in love with Daisy for the most part, in the beginning of their relationship, but it all change when Gatsby lost Daisy and so he let himself believed that his past was the one to blame for this circumstances. It is after this, that Gatsby became rather obsessed with the idea of Daisy and having a lovely future with her, because having her meant having it all: stability, confidence, love, happiness and so on. Also, it meant that he had succeeded in life as a whole. “Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther. . . And then one fine morning— So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.” (Chapter 9) All his life, Gatsby intended to escape

The Great Gatsby is No Love Story Essay

• 3 Works Cited

These criteria for a great love story, however, are simply not filled by Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, for several reasons. Gatsby makes sacrifices in his life while in pursuit of Daisy, but he is not simply giving up parts of his life for her - he changes who he was, and his inner personality, becoming a member of higher society so that he feels worthy of Daisy's love. This story also refuses to illustrate a complete whirlwind of incessant love, such as we should be finding if the novel were a true "great" love story. Although Daisy does claim to love Gatsby, she also refuses to admit that he is the only man she loves (140), and it is difficult to accept this as true love if it is not exclusive. They allow the want for money and power to drive them apart for years, and while Gatsby constantly thinks of means to finally raise enough money that they can live happily, this is foiled. Gatsby and Daisy do feel a love for one another, but it is not always out of pure motivations, and it is not strong enough to keep them together. A "great American love story" requires a commitment and a passion that is not apparent in Gatsby or Daisy, and therefore it is not such a story.

The Great Gatsby Idealised Love

A significantly powerful emotion, love, possessing the ability to transform a live to the greatest but also destroy. The concepts of idealised love have been expressed in texts throughout history, and each is relevant to their specific periods and specific value systems. This can be seen in both, Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s (EBB) poetry ‘Sonnets from the Portuguese’, 1845 and F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel ‘The Great Gatsby’, 1925 which explore in depth the similar perspectives of ideal love, although the context that surrounds each text reshapes the composer’s viewpoint. Barrett Browning explores a romantic vision of love and enhances our perception of this interpersonal human emotion through a rebellion of the unbending principles of the Victorian

Examples Of Pursuit Of Love In The Great Gatsby

Regarding Gatsby, it is his lack of emotional satisfaction that shapes his obsession and greed toward Daisy. Gatsby’s goal is to regain his former romantic relationship he shares with Daisy, as he truly believes that it is possible to repeat the past (Fitzgerald 110). In fact, during the last five years, he builds himself a facade through illegal means to impress Daisy. Nevertheless, his greed for the exclusivity of Daisy backfires. Daisy says that “ ‘[he] [wants] too much!’... ‘[she] [loves] [him] now--- isn’t that enough?’ ” (132). When Gatsby asks Daisy to affirm that she only loves him, she could not confirm the statement truthfully, thus reducing Gatsby’s efforts throughout the years to naught. Gatsby’s commitment for Daisy’s affection is the very cause of Daisy’s rejection.

Love, Lust and Obsession in the Great Gatsby Essay

There is a fine line between love and lust. If love is only a will to possess, it is not love. To love someone is to hold them dear to one's heart. In The Great Gatsby, the characters, Jay Gatsby and Daisy Buchanan are said to be in love, but in reality, this seems to be a misconception. In The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald portrays the themes of love, lust and obsession, through the character of Jay Gatsby, who confuses lust and obsession with love. By the end of the novel however, Jay Gatsby is denied his "love" and suffers an untimely death. The author interconnects the relationships of the various prominent characters to support these ideas.

Gatsby’s Quest For True Love Essay

• 4 Works Cited

Have you ever been in a situation where you have almost met your goal, but something in the way is preventing you from fully accomplishing it? Jay Gatsby, one of the protagonists in the novel The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald, loses the love of his life, Daisy, due to years of separation and is trying to win her back. Daisy’s husband, Tom, however, won’t let her go that easy. Gatsby fights his way to get back the lover he waits so many years for. Preceding Gatsby’s risky quest, his main goal in life is to obtain a great wealth in order to impress the beautiful Daisy. He only thinks about Daisy and their life together. He will do anything to be reunited, no matter the consequences. Jay’s shadow side is revealed and anima is present

Marriage And Love In The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby does not depict marriage and love in the traditional sense. Characters in this novel are married to the money and love the power it gives them. Love is caring for each other, supporting one another through tough times, always being by your partner’s side no matter what happens in life; good and bad. In this story the American dream of being wealthy gets in the way of true love. In most of these relationships love is missing, marriage had become a game; it was ok to go behind one another’s back to achieve their dark goal, abusiveness acceptable. For example on page 12 it says “Tom Buchanan broke her nose (Myrtle) with his open hand.” Take Jay Gatsby for example a man in love with a rich, young and beautiful woman named Daisy. He knew the only way for her to even notice him would be if he was rich. He lived in the illusion that money equaled happiness and that followed him till the day he died. Nothing made him happy he always wanted more and more. Sure his love for money made him wealthy but whether he had nothing or all the money in the world he could still not buy true love.

Courtly Love in The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald Essay

Courtly love—an expression of passion, a token of intimacy, and a vibrant theme which permeates the spirit of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. Energetic and enterprising, young James Gatz ascends the social ladder to become a grossly successful and affluent businessman, all driven by a single purpose: to win the beautiful Daisy’s heart. Gatsby plays his role as Daisy’s courtly lover by his ambitions to satisfy his sincere, undying ardor and to prove his commitment to Daisy’s wellbeing.

Essay about The False Reality of the American Dream in the Great Gatsby

• 1 Works Cited

Gatsby wanted more and more of Daisy and he will not rest until she tells Tom that she never loved him. Gatsby goes as far as to plan a dinner party so that Daisy can tell Tom in front of everyone and this dinner party ends up being his down bringing. At the party even Daisy goes as far as to say ““Oh, you want too much!"-"I love you now – isn't that enough? I can't help what's past."-"I did love him once – but I loved you too."” (Fitzgerald 261). Gatsby’s greed and obsession with wanting more and more sees to it that Gatsby will never fully achieve his dream. Fitzgerald also uses his character Tom, the husband of Daisy, to show that the American Dream cannot be achieved. Tom seems to have everything, a big house, a beautiful wife, lots of money from a successful sports career, and the freedom to spend it as he pleases. However, he too wants more, “[Tom] nodded sagely. “And what's more, I love Daisy too. Once in a while I go off on a spree and make a fool of myself, but I always come back, and in my heart I love her all the time."” (Fitzgerald 251). Tom knows that what he is doing is wrong but he makes excuses for his affair and acts as if what he did was justified. Even though he has a beautiful wife he still wants more and this drives him to having an affair with Myrtle. Fitzgerald uses these characters to show the false reality that is the

How Does The Green Light At The End Of The Great Gatsby

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Perception and reality do not always align. Is true love really true love, or is it a farce, a self-created mythical re-interpretation of the thing we hold so dear? In The Great Gatsby, is Gatsby really in love with Daisy, or his vision of her? Does she feel the same way for him, or does she truly love him? And what does the green light at the end of Daisy’s dock mean to Gatsby?

The Consequences Of Love In The Great Gatsby

While most people chase love, few know that it is foolish. One should not chase after love, but allow it to find them naturally. Obviously, Gatsby was none the wiser about that bit of advice. In the story, we see Gatsby chase after his supposedly long lost love, but is she truly his love? With how little time they spent together, how much they’ve grown throughout the years, and all that has happened in both of their lives, does Gatsby truly love Daisy, a married mother of one? Their star-crossed story is the perfect example of a hold on the past destroying a future. This essay will explore their strange and twisted romance while supporting one simple fact. Jay Gatsby was not in love with Daisy.

Themes of Love and Money in Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby Essay

Fitzgerald finds that perfect love is impossible to achieve through his foiled relationships. Gatsby’s relationship with Daisy is based off money and desire to live in the past. Daisy falls in love with Gatsby when he acquires wealth. When she finds out his money is not legit she leaves him.

Essay on The Great Gatsby and the Power of Love

• 2 Works Cited

    "It was an extraordinary gift for hope, a romantic readiness such as I have never found in any other person and which is not likely I shall ever find again." (2). The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott Fitzgerald, is a novel that takes place in the Roaring 20's. It's about a man who changes everything he is for the inaccessible woman of his dreams. After losing her before the war because of his financial status, he finally tries to win her heart back through his newly attained money. She is faced with a cheating husband and a man who wants to repeat the past. In the end, she has blood on her hands. After all his effort, he loses her in a heated argument and he loses his life to a

Essay on Love vs. Materialism in the Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby does not offer a definition of love, or a contrast between love and romance. Rather it suggests that what people believe to be love is normally only a dream. America in the 1920s was a country where moral values were slowly crumbling and Americans soon only had one dream and objective to achieve, success. Distorted love is one theme in the novel The Great Gatsby, present among all of the characters relationships; Daisy and Tom, Tom and Myrtle, Daisy and Gatsby, and Wilson and Myrtle, though Myrtle does not return the love. This distortion illustrates that it is not love that leads several characters to death, but lust and the materialistic possessions that really drive the characters to their lonely

Related Topics

• F. Scott Fitzgerald
• The Great Gatsby

18 True Romantic Stories That Are More Heartwarming Than Any Rom-Com

Warning: You will need tissues. And maybe chocolate.

Our editors handpick the products that we feature. We may earn commission from the links on this page.

Bob Harvey and Annette Adkins

Bob Harvey first met Annette Adkins during study hall in 1955—and was immediately smitten. "I couldn’t take my eyes off her," Harvey told the New York Times . "She had auburn hair and a stunningly beautiful face and her eyes were just, wow." The two teens ended up going to prom together, but as many young relationships go, they lost touch after high school and married other people. Harvey never forgot about Adkins, though. In 2017, after his wife died, he searched for Adkins on Google and discovered she had also become widowed. He sent her a card with his phone number and after chatting for a bit, Harvey drove 500 miles to visit her, stopping only for gas and a bouquet of carnations. "I handed her the flowers, and then I cupped her face in my hand and said, 'Whether you like it or not, I’m going to kiss you,'" he recalled. In October, the high school sweethearts married at a '50s-style diner and danced to Johnny Mathis—just like they did at prom 63 years earlier.

Matthew Pomeroy and Natasha Lamb

Talk about an encore! On December 27, Matthew Pomeroy, who plays the title character in a British production of Aladdin , proposed to his girlfriend, Natasha Lamb, who plays Jasmine, just after taking their final bows. "For the last four years, you have changed my life," he told Lamb before pulling out a shining, shimmering, splendid ring. "I love you with all my heart. You're my best friend, and if you'd let me, I want to be your husband."

Elan Gale and Molly C. Quinn

What do you get when you cross an American actress with a former producer of ABC’s The Bachelor ? A made-for-TV marriage proposal. During a weekend getaway to Seattle, Elan Gale and his then-girlfriend of eight months, Molly C. Quinn, stopped by a jewelry store where she fell in love with a vintage emerald ring. "If you ever do propose to me, try to find something to kind of look like this," said Quinn. The next day, Gale returned to the store, bought the ring, and placed it in a box under their bed—for the next three years. "That’s where the ring has been hiding for the last 40 months," he recalled in an Instagram post . "Three feet away from where Molly sleeps every night." In December 2019, while on a ski trip in Japan, Gale finally popped the question.

Liz and Scott Shoesmith

Most wedding-planning checklists include picking a dress, finding a venue, and booking a photographer. Liz Shoesmith's also included learning how to sign the lyrics to one of her favorite songs. Instead of the traditional walk down the aisle, the Australian bride surprised her husband, who is deaf, by signing the words to Christina Perri's hit song, "A Thousand Years" as she walked towards him. "Every time I had practiced it leading up to the day I would make mistakes or go blank," she told Inside Edition . "But when I was left at the top of the aisle and locked eyes with Scott, I didn’t look away. It honestly felt like we were the only ones in the room."

Jessica Share and Aaron Long

More than a decade after using an anonymous sperm donor to start a family, Jessica Share met her daughter's biological father—and fell in love with him. In 2016, Share's daughter, Alice Mikell, asked her grandmother for a 23andMe kit to look into her genealogy. When the results came back eight weeks later, Aaron Long was listed as a 50 percent parental match. Mikell and Share connected with Long, and eventually, the two parents decided to meet. "When we met in person, the attraction seemed harder for either of us to deny," Long told Good Morning America . Share, though, had reservations: "This was not my relationship or my journey to jump into and mess up forever," she said in the same interview. Now, two and a half years later, Share, Long, and Mikell live together in Seattle, along with Long's 22-year-old daughter Madi, who he also had through sperm donation. "A few people have called us some sort of new Brady Bunch ," Share told People . "I think [Mikell] thinks it’s kind of funny that everybody thinks it’s a big deal."

Sunette Thompson and Lisa Wyatt

In July 2018, Sunette Thompson and her then fiancée, Lisa Wyatt, traveled to New Orleans for a few fun-filled days at Essence Festival. But unbeknownst to Wyatt, there was a much bigger event on that weekend's agenda: their wedding. On the morning of July 8, 2018—which was also the couple's 10th anniversary—Wyatt served Thompson breakfast in bed and told her to change into the tux hanging in the closet. Once Wyatt was dressed, she was blindfolded and taken down to the hotel's courtyard, where more than 100 of the couples' friends and families had gathered. "Needless to say, I was completely overwhelmed!" Wyatt told Essence Magazine . "As I surveyed the audience, I cried profusely…the ugly cry!"

K.T. Robbins and Jeannine Pierson

If there's a story that proves true love stands the test of time, it's this one. In 1944, 24-year-old K.T. Robbins met 18-year-old Jeanine Ganaye while he was stationed in Briely, France, and over the next three months, the two fell in love. But their courtship came to a crashing halt when Robbins was transferred to fight on the Eastern Front during World War II. After the war, Robbins went home to Memphis and got married to another woman. Back in France, Gayane, now Pierson, also moved on with her life. Fast forward to 2019 when Robbins returned to France for the 75th anniversary of D-Day and was interviewed by journalists from the television station France 2 about his World War II experience. The reporters helped Robbins track down Pierson, and the two long lost lovers, both 92, reunited in the French nursing home where Pierson lives. "I always loved you," Robbins told her as they embraced. "You never got out of my heart." After spending a couple of hours together, the two had to say goodbye—but they vowed to meet again soon.

Jillian Hanson and Max Allegretti

Two and a half years ago, Jillian Hanson was diagnosed with stage 2 breast cancer. Knowing she would face a tough battle ahead, she offered her boyfriend, Max Allegretti, an "out" before things got too intense. But Allegretti didn't flinch, and instead stayed by her side during two years of aggressive treatment. "They tell you how sick you get during treatment, but no one can really prepare you for any of this," Hanson wrote in a personal essay . "He took care of me everyday and reminded me how beautiful I was." On her last day of chemo, Allegretti knew exactly how he wanted to celebrate: By asking Hanson to marry him. "I wasn't expecting it," she told Good Morning America . "That was the ultimate high—getting engaged brought great light to me after a really dark spot."

Lee Loechler and Sthuthi David

After a magical proposal, Lee Loechler and Sthuthi David are destined to live happily ever after. When Loechler took David to a packed theater to see her favorite movie, Sleeping Beauty, she thought it was just a typical date night—but it was actually a cinematic event six months in the making. Loechler, a filmmaker, had spent half a year altering the animation of the film's iconic kissing scene, changing both the characters (so they more closely represented the real-life couple) and the storyline (so it set up the big question). She said yes, and now the fairytale continues.

Camre and Steve Curto

When Camre Curto gave birth to her son, Gavin, she suffered a stroke and a seizure, which caused her to be placed in a medically induced coma. When she awoke, both her long-term and short-term memory were gone, and she did not know who she or her family was. A few months later, she still didn't remember her husband, Steve. "We were sitting on the couch and she told me, 'I don't who you are but I know I love you,'" he recalled to People . Those words inspired Steve to write a book—called But I Know I Love You —that would help Camre remember their 10-year love story, recounting everything from their very first date to their wedding to the birth of their son. It's working, and today, Camre knows and remembers Gavin and Steve.

Terry Farley and Steve Downey

More than three decades after they first dated, two high school sweethearts reconnected—thanks to LinkedIn. In the fall of 2012, Terry Farley—who had gotten divorced a couple years earlier—happened upon the profile of her first boyfriend, Steve Downey. She clicked on it, but was hesitant to message him. She told NPR , "I was not going to be the old girlfriend that popped out of nowhere and said 'Remember me?'" But a month later, when Downey was looking at his LinkedIn page, he noticed Farley's name in the section that tells you who has been looking at your profile. Downey wrote her a quick message, which turned into phone calls, which turned into an invitation to visit Farley at her home in Tallahassee, Florida. "I didn't see anything except my first love, my first crush," she told Today . "It felt like we were picking up where we left off." Eventually, Downey moved to Tallahassee, and in 2015, they tied the knot.

Tori Monaco and Berkley Cade

What are the chances of two people planning a proposal on the same day, at the same time, and without the other knowing? Probably pretty small—but that's precisely what happened for Tori Monaco and Berkley Cade.

In February 2018, the pair was playing a game of Pictionary at Cade's parents' house in Seattle, and as Cade tried to draw the phrase "Will you marry me?" on the board, Monaco got down on one knee and asked her that exact question. Stunned, Cade reached behind the couch and pulled out a ring box herself. The mastermind behind the simultaneous proposal? Cade's mom, Kristy, who separately suggested to both women that they propose during a game of Pictionary when they visited Washington.

Barbara and Robert Shackleford

This Christmas was Barbara Shackleford's first one without her high school sweetheart, Robert, who passed away in May after 59 years of marriage. But she still felt his warmth, thanks to a special surprise from her family: the love letters she and Robert exchanged in 1962 while in college. "She had no idea he kept the letters and it really brought back a lot of memories of her early years loving him," Shackleford's granddaughter told Today . "She said it was the best gift she could have asked for."

Anne and Bill Duncan

Anne and Bill Duncan are in the honeymoon phase of their relationship. But unlike most couples going through this new and exciting stage, the Duncans are married—and have been for 12 years. After living with dementia for nearly a decade, Bill started having trouble recognizing and remembering Anne. When he asked her to marry him (again), Anne said yes. Two days later, the happy couple celebrated their second wedding surrounded by friends and family. "It was wonderful," Anne posted on Facebook. "And what's even more amazing is two weeks later, Bill still thinks he's just married his new girlfriend and it makes him very happy."

Dominic Spence and Nick Gilyard

Need proof that true love is worth the wait? Dominic Spence and Nick Gilyard met while they were teenagers in high school, but lost touch when they headed in different directions for college: Spence attended the University of Central Florida in Orlando, while Gilyard went to college in Kentucky. They reconnected, though, when Gilyard helped a friend move into her dorm in Orlando and asked Dominic to dinner. "That night we talked for 4 hours and shut down the restaurant," Gilyard said in an Instagram post . They started dating long-distance—for the next seven years. In 2015, Spence and Gilyard got engaged during a trip to London and nearly two years later, they were married. "Dominic and I feel lucky to have found love at such a young age. However, falling in love with another black man was scary in ways neither of us could have ever imagined. It forced us to face the very real resistance from society for being not only homosexuals but black men as well," Gilyard said in the same Instagram post. "We hope to encourage other black and brown men and boys everywhere to be true to who they are. And when they find love in each other's eyes, to know that their love is just as strong and beautiful as anyone else's."

Brad Davis and Jodi Stanowick

As a young girl, Ana Stanowick's mom, Jodi, would often bring home a new coffee mug to add to her collection—despite her then-husband's angry protests. When the couple divorced five years ago, Jodi and her massive collection were ready to find a new man. Enter Brad Davis, who pulled off the ultimate public display of affection when he built Jodi a custom, ceiling-high shelf for her beloved coffee cups, just before moving in together. "I wanted to do this for Jodi so that she could enjoy all of the mugs every day instead of just drinking out of one each day," Davis told Today . We'll raise a glass mug to that!

Sidd Sinha and Melanie Diaz

Wedding proposal in aisle three! Last year, Sidd Sinha proposed to his girlfriend, Melanie Diaz at the Trader Joe's in New York City's Upper West Side. Sinha concocted the elaborate plan, which included a made-up "millennial grocery tour" featuring special signs that were symbolic of their relationship. "She's made it perfectly clear that Trader Joe's is her favorite grocery store, so I knew if I went that route I had to do it there," Sinha told Good Morning America . The final stop on the tour? The sample station, where an employee was passing out chocolate-covered almonds. Inside Diaz's cup, though, was an engagement ring. A dream come true, indeed!

Judy and Will Webb

Judy and Will Webb were together until the very end— really . The couple, who spent almost every day together during their 56 years of marriage, died just hours apart on March 6, while—wait for it—holding hands.

For more ways to live your best life plus all things Oprah, sign up for our newsletter!

Melissa is a former editor at Oprah Daily. 

Valentine's Day 2024

30 Greatest-Ever Romance Novels

The 18 Sweetest Valentine’s Day Pajamas for Women

57 Creative Valentine’s Day Gifts for Him

16 Valentine’s Day Makeup Looks Inspired by Celebs

Valentine's Day Gifts for Long-Distance Lovers

20 Valentine’s Day Gifts for Coworkers

Valentine’s Day Lingerie for Real Women

Great Last-Minute Valentine’s Day Gift Ideas

20 Wearable Nail Art Ideas for Valentine’s Day

Stylish Valentine’s Gifts Guaranteed to Delight

Valentine’s Day Outfit Ideas

According to Stephen King, This Is Why We Crave Horror Movies

The horror king breaks down our obsession with the macabre.

Stephen King and horror are synonymous. Are you really able to call yourself a fan of horror if one of his novels or film adaptations isn't among your top favorites? The Maine-born writer is hands down the most successful horror writer and one of the most beloved and prolific writers ever whose legacy spans generations. Without King, we might not be as terrified of clowns and or think twice about bullying the shy girl in school. One could say that King has earned the moniker, "the King of Horror." In addition to all he's written, King has also had over 60 adaptations of his work for television and the big screen and has written, produced, and starred in films and shows as well. He has fully immersed himself in the genre of horror from all sides, and it's unlikely that we will ever have anyone else like Stephen King. But did you know that King wrote an essay that was published in Playboy magazine about horror movies?

In 1981, King's essay titled " Why We Crave Horror Movies " was published in Playboy magazine as a variation of the chapter " The Horror Movie As Junk Food" in Danse Macabre . Danse Macabre was published in 1981 and is one of the non-fiction books in which that wrote about horror in media and how our fears and anxieties have been influencing the horror genre. The full article that was published is no longer online, but there is a shortened four-page version of it that can be found.

RELATED: The Iconic Horror Movie You Won't Believe Premiered at Cannes

Stephen King Believes We Are All Mentally Ill

The essay starts out guns blazing, the first line reading "I think that we're all mentally ill; those of us outside the asylums only hide it a little bit better." From here, he describes the general behaviors of people we know and how mannerisms and irrational fears are not different between the public and those in asylums. He points out that we pay money to sit in a theater and be scared to prove a point that we can and to show that we do not shy away from fear. Some of us, he states, even go watch horror movies for fun, which closes the gap between normalcy and insanity. A patron can go to the movies, and watch someone get mutilated and killed, and it's considered normal, everyday behavior. This, as a horror lover, feels very targeted. I absolutely watch horror movies for fun and I will do so with my bucket of heart-attack-buttered popcorn and sip on my Coke Zero. The most insane thing about all of that? The massive debt accumulated from one simple movie date.

Watching Horror Movies Allows Us to Release Our Insanity

King states that we use horror movies as a catharsis to act out our nightmares and the worst parts of us. Getting to watch the insanity and depravity on the movie screen allows us to release our inner insanity, which in turn, keeps us sane. He writes that watching horror movies allows us to let our emotions have little to no rein at all, and that is something that we don't always get to do in everyday life. Society has a set of parameters that we must follow with regard to expressing ourselves to maintain the air of normalcy and not be seen as a weirdo. When watching horror movies, we see incredibly visceral reactions in the most extreme of situations. This can cause the viewer to reflect on how they would react or respond to being in the same type of situation. Do we identify more with the victim or the villain? This poses an interesting thought for horror lovers because sometimes the villain is justified. Are we wrong for empathizing with them instead?

Let's take a look at one of the more popular horror movies of recent years. Mandy is about a woman who is murdered by a crazed cult because she is the object of the leader's obsession. This causes Red ( Nicolas Cage ) to ride off seeking revenge for the love of his life being murdered. There are also movies like I Spit On Your Grave and The Last House On The Left where the protagonist becomes the murderer in these instances because of the trauma they experienced from sexual assault. Their revenge makes audiences a little more willing to side with the murderer because they took back their power and those they killed got what was deserved. This is where that Lucille Bluth meme that says "good for her" is used. I'll die on the hill that those characters were justified and if that makes me mentally ill then King might be right!

What Does Stephen King Mean When He Tells Us to "Keep the Gators" Fed?

At the end of the essay, King mentions he likes to watch the most extreme horror movies because it releases a trap door where he can feed the alligators. The alligators he is referring to are a metaphor for the worst in all humans and the morbid fantasies that lie within each of us. The essay concludes with "It was Lennon and McCartney who said that all you need is love, and I would agree with that. As long as you keep the gators fed." From this, we can deduce that King feels we all have the ability to be institutionalized, but those of us that watch horror movies are less likely because the sick fantasies can be released from our brains.

With that release, we can walk down the street normally without the bat of an eye from walkers-by. Perhaps this is why the premise for movies like The Purge came to fruition. A movie where for 24 hours all crime, including murder, is decriminalized couldn't have been made by someone who doesn't get road rage or scream into the void. It was absolutely made by someone who waited at the DMV for too long or has had experience working in retail around Black Friday. With what King is saying, The Purge is a direct reflection of that catharsis. Not only are you getting to watch a crazy horror movie where everyone is shooting everyone and everything is on fire, but it's likely something you've had a thought or two about. You can consider those gators fed for sure.

Do Horror Movies Offer Us True Catharsis or Persuasive Perspective?

Catharsis as a concept was coined by the philosopher Aristotle . He explained that the performing arts are a way to purge negative types of emotions from our subconscious, so we don't have to hold onto them anymore. This viewpoint further perpetuates what King is trying to explain. With that cathartic relief, the urgency to act on negative emotion is less likely to happen because there is no build-up of negativity circling the drain from our subconscious to our reality. However, some who read the essay felt like King was just being persuasive and using fancy imagery rather than identifying an actual reason why horror is popular. Some claim the shock and awe factor of his words and his influence on horror would cause some readers to believe they are mentally ill deep down. I have to say, as a millennial who rummages through the ends of social media multiple times a day, everyone on the internet thinks they're mentally ill, and we all have the memes to prove it. It is exciting and fascinating to watch a horror movie after working a 9-5 job where the excitement is low. Watching Ghostface stalk Sidney Prescott ( Neve Campbell ) in Scream isn't everyone's idea of winding down, but for the last 20-something years, it has been my comfort movie when I'm feeling sad or down. The nostalgia of Scream is what makes it feel cathartic to me and that's free therapy!

What is the Science Behind Loving Horror Movies?

Psychology studies will tell us that individuals who crave and love horror are interested in it because they have a higher sensation-seeking trait . This means they have a higher penchant for wanting to experience thrilling and exciting situations. Those with a lower level of empathy are also more likely to enjoy horror movies as they will have a less innate response to a traumatic scene on screen. According to the DSM-V , a severe lack of empathy could potentially be a sign of a more serious psychological issue, however, the degree of severity will vary. I do love rollercoasters, but I also cry when I see a dog that is just too cute, so horror lovers aren't necessarily the unsympathetic robots that studies want us to be. Watching horror films can also trigger a fight-or-flight sensation , which will boost adrenaline and release endorphins and dopamine in the brain. Those chemicals being released make the viewers feel accomplished and positive, relating back to the idea that watching horror movies is cathartic for viewers.

Anyone who reads and studies research knows that correlation does not imply causation, but whether King's perspective is influenced by his position in the horror genre or not, psychology and science can back up the real reasons why audiences love horror movies. As a longtime horror lover and a pretty above-average horror trivia nerd, I have to wonder if saying we are mentally ill is an overstatement and could maybe be identified more as horror lovers seeking extreme stimulus. Granted, this essay was written over 40 years ago, so back then liking horror wasn't as widely accepted as it is today. It's possible that King felt more out of place for his horror love back then and the alienation of a fringe niche made him feel mentally ill. Is King onto something by assuming that everyone has mental illness deep down, or is this a gross overestimation of the human psyche? The answer likely falls somewhere in between, but those that love horror will continue to release that catharsis through the terrifying and the unknown because it's a scream, baby!