Does love exist?

The definition of love varies among different thinkers and philosophical currents, but a widely accepted approach involves considering love as a complex phenomenon that encompasses various emotional, psychological, and interpersonal dimensions.

Love involves the existence of an emotional bond between individuals. It is a profound feeling of connection that can manifest in various ways, from romantic love to friendship as fraternal love.

Taking care of the well-being of others implies a desire to protect, support, and promote the personal and emotional development of the person close to us. Empathy and understanding of the emotions, thoughts, and experiences of others are crucial to nurturing a meaningful connection. The genuine willingness to sacrifice part of one’s own interests for the happiness of the other seeks a healthy balance, not necessarily self-denial.

A healthy relationship often assumes reciprocity, sharing feelings and affections between the parties involved. Emotional intimacy and deep connection provide an environment where individuals feel comfortable being authentic and vulnerable.

Expressing affection, appreciation, and dedication to others often occurs through words, actions, and gestures. The potential to promote personal growth and transformation lies in the ability to adapt, compromise, and evolve within the context of the relationship.

The definition of love can be approached differently by various philosophers and theorists, and nuances may vary depending on cultural and historical contexts. So, despite common elements in the philosophical definition of love, there is also room for interpretations and distinct approaches.

Genuine love transcends barriers of distance, physical appearance, financial circumstances, and health status. In a world that often imposes strict criteria, it is noteworthy that, even under these conditions, narratives of authentic loving connections emerge. The rarity of these cases only highlights the complexity of love, challenging the notion that it can be reduced to mere calculations of interest.

Looking at these exceptions, it becomes clear that love is a force that goes beyond current science. It takes root in an emotional space that escapes the bounds of reason. People are capable of nurturing deep feelings even for those who, at first glance, may not seem deserving of such affections. This illustrates the unexplored depth of the human heart, capable of intertwining with the humanity of others to create bonds that withstand the most rigorous tests.

The true nature of love is unveiled when we contemplate these unlikely love stories. They remind us that the beauty of love lies in its unpredictability, in its ability to flourish where least expected. In a world driven by the logic of self-interest, love stands as a beacon of mystery, challenging any simplistic explanation.

The renowned Friedrich Nietzsche, in his work, had more than a concept about love; in general, he took a critical approach to the traditional idea of romantic love. He viewed love as a desire influenced by individual needs and social forces, often masking the pursuit of power and personal satisfaction.

Today, one of the most popular interpretations among nihilistic adolescents is that love does not exist. To defend this interpretation, they use quotes such as this one: “No one has ever done anything entirely for others. All love is self-love. Think of those you love: dig deep and you will see that you do not love them; you love the pleasant sensations that this love produces in you! You love the desire, not the desired.” — Friedrich Nietzsche.

P1 — Love does not exist;

P2 — You love the desire and not the desired;

C — Therefore, love does not exist.

Note that P2 contradicts P1, as the existence of love is a necessary condition for loving the desire. Thus, the conclusion of these premises does not follow logic. Therefore, it is not reasonable to assume that love does not exist.

So, how is it possible to love the desire if love is the absence of the ideally loved object that represents the completeness of what one loves? In other words, how can one love a desire if love itself is a desire? Do you desire the desire? But how is this possible since we desire only what we do not have, and we all have desires? What we do not have is the being or the desired object. And our love is for the other, the desire that the other is happy.

Misinterpretations of science have led to questioning the existence of love. Some try to use science to deny that love is a legitimate feeling and cannot be easily decomposed into other elements. George Robert Price was a physicist, chemist, and biologist known for his mathematical explanation of the genetic basis of altruistic behavior in nature.

The life of George R. Price, a man marked by the relentless pursuit of answers in the entanglement of science and existence, was a journey filled with fascination and tragedy. Born in 1922, Price forged a unique intellectual path, leaving an indelible mark not only on genetic theories but also on the emotional fabric of human history.

His most notable contribution was the Price Equation, an achievement that reverberated in scientific and philosophical circles. By formulating a way to quantify altruism and cooperation among living beings, Price delved into the depths of evolutionary theory, questioning the origin and purpose of social behaviors. His revolutionary equation led him to a disquieting epiphany: even the seemingly altruistic gestures could ultimately be driven by a selfish desire for genetic preservation.

Price suggested that apparent altruism, where an individual sacrifices their own interests for the benefit of others, could be explained by kin selection. This means that by helping close relatives, shared genes would be preserved and passed on to future generations. Therefore, the seemingly altruistic act would actually have a selfish basis, aiming at genetic preservation. “The most our nature can offer is second-hand generosity, an altruism that is not altruistic at all but rather selfish,” said George R. Price.

This challenging perspective raised questions about the true nature of love and generosity. By suggesting that even seemingly altruistic acts have a selfish motivation behind them, Price’s theory cast a shadow over the traditional idea of pure and selfless love. This does not necessarily mean that love itself is invalid, but rather that there may be deeper complexities at play. It is important to note that Price’s theory is not a definitive and complete view of human love. It provides a lens through which we can examine certain aspects of human behavior, but it does not address the full range of emotions, motivations, and experiences involving love. Human nature is complex and multifaceted, and love remains a deeply felt and experienced phenomenon, regardless of evolutionary interpretations.

George Price was supposedly an atheist before deriving his equation, but he later concluded, from everyday experiences, that there is a deity, and among the thousands of religions, Christianity was for him the true religion. He turned to religion fanatically and tried to prove through his life example that his theory was wrong. Initially, this fanaticism took the form of increasingly intense Bible studies, notably including a quest to discover the “true” date of Easter, which he thought most churches had gotten wrong. Believing that the deity would help him, he stopped taking his medications. He then began randomly helping people to show that true kindness exists without any self-interest and started donating all his material possessions until he himself became homeless.

The same brilliant mind that unraveled the secrets of Darwinian evolution was haunted by his own internal contradictions. Price’s relentless quest for understanding and truth led him into a battle with his own emotional demons. His personal journey was tumultuous, and he found himself struggling to reconcile his search for meaning with the ups and downs of his own life.

On January 6, 1975, a significant event occurred. In the landscapes of North London, a young Israeli immigrant turned the doorknob of an abandoned building, only to be met with a distressing scene: the lifeless body of a homeless man. In this sad episode, it was revealed that the man was George Price, whose fate led to a tragic end. Through the fatal act of cutting his own carotid artery with a modest nail scissors, Price concluded his earthly journey. His suicide shocked those who knew him and left a mark of sorrow in the scientific community. The one who had explored the complexity of life through equations and theories ended up being consumed by his own inner complexities. At his funeral, only 10 people attended, seven of whom were homeless individuals who knew and had been helped by George Robert Price.

When I came across this story, I was genuinely moved, and as I read, a tear trickled down my face. I learned three important lessons from George Robert Price. Firstly, in nature, altruism is generally a selfish way of passing on genes. Secondly, religions like Christianity can drive anyone, even someone extremely intelligent, to madness. Thirdly, true altruism exists, and unknown individuals whom you’ve helped without expecting anything in return will remember you and attend your funeral.

The story of this brilliant scientist is a poignant reminder that behind the formulas and experiments are human beings with aspirations, struggles, and profound existential questions. His story reminds us of the interconnection between the quest for knowledge and the emotional journey of each individual. Price not only provided us with an equation to decipher but also left us with a lasting lesson about the importance of understanding and caring for those who seek to unravel the mysteries of the world around us and, simultaneously, the mysteries within ourselves.

Beyond Price’s equation, a distorted and simplistic version of materialism attempts to explain human feelings and behaviors by reducing everything to chemicals. However, this is false; depression, joy, or love are deep mental states that go beyond mere deficiencies or excesses of brain substances.

Love, the emotion that uplifts, connects, and transcends, is a complex phenomenon that defies simplistic explanations. While oxytocin, often dubbed the “love hormone,” has been associated with feelings of affection and bonding, reducing love to a single brain substance would be a colossal oversimplification that ignores the complexity of human emotions and feelings.

Our brain is a marvelous symphony of neural activities, where various regions interact harmoniously to give rise to our emotional experience. When it comes to love, a variety of neurotransmitters, brain circuits, and hormonal systems intertwine to create the emotional tapestry we feel.

Oxytocin, along with other hormones such as dopamine, vasopressin, norepinephrine, and serotonin, plays a crucial role in the formation of social and emotional bonds, such as the bond between mother and child. However, asserting that only these substances completely explain the entire spectrum of human love is overly limiting. After all, love is multifaceted: from romantic affection to altruistic compassion, passing through filial and platonic love, each expression of love seems to emerge from an incredibly complex neural mosaic.

Love is not merely a feeling or isolated emotion but a result of countless interactions between different areas of the brain, such as the prefrontal cortex associated with decision-making and empathy, and the limbic system related to memories. Contextual factors, past experiences, and cultural influences shape our understanding and expression of love, making it even more multifactorial and profound.

Attempting to reduce love to a single substance disregards the richness of this human experience. Just as a work of art is not only the mixture of its individual colors but rather how they all harmonize, love is the result of many brain process that goes far beyond a single substance. Therefore, to truly understand love in its entirety, it is essential to embrace a perspective that recognizes the complexity and interconnection of various parts of the brain and emotional systems. Only then can we approach a more complete understanding of the beauty and depth of this array of feelings, beliefs, and experiences that is love, moving humanity.

A complete materialistic explanation of love likely requires a full explanation of human consciousness as well. Unfortunately, science is centuries away from such an explanation. In the realm of science fiction, an intriguing speculation arises: if love were susceptible to a materialistic explanation, it might open up the possibility of manipulating the complex intricacies of human emotion. The premise suggests that, through brain interventions or chemical influences, the memory of intense love could be erased. This provocative approach has been deeply explored in the acclaimed movie “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” where actor Jim Carrey portrays a protagonist who undergoes a daring experiment: consciously erasing memories of a romantic relationship, which his former companion had already forgotten through the same procedure.

In this fictional context, a series of unsettling questions unfold. The ability to manipulate emotions as profound as love challenges our understanding of identity, free will, and the very nature of human emotions. The quest to eliminate painful or traumatic memories may seem like a tempting way out, but it raises the question of what we are willing to sacrifice in our pursuit of happiness. The plot also sheds light on the interconnection between memory and affection. Watching the protagonists reconnect and fall in love again without being aware of their shared past confronts us with the idea that love is not confined to conscious memory alone. This raises intriguing considerations about the role of memory in shaping our emotions and relationships.

However, science fiction often reminds us that reality is more complex than any plot. Love is deeply rooted in the complexity of the human experience, shaped by biological, psychological, social, and cultural elements. The possibility of manipulating love through brain interventions raises ethical and moral dilemmas, forcing us to consider the extent to which we can and should control our emotions and memories. Thus, this cinematic narrative not only captivates our minds with its bold imagination but also prompts us to reflect on the intricate tangle of emotions that makes us human and the limits we should establish in our quest for understanding and self-transformation.

I enjoy explaining the world and trying to find answers to everything. One critique I often make is not directly aimed at the concept of love but rather at the idea of “self-love.”

I believe that true love finds its greatest expression in the connection with another human being, going beyond the narrow limits of individualism. The excessive emphasis on the pursuit of power and self-preservation often leads to narcissism and selfishness, distancing us from the true essence of what it means to love.

By placing the primary focus on ourselves, we run the risk of becoming blind to the needs, desires, and feelings of those around us. The capitalist society, addicted to competition and prone to atomizing people, has created the illusion called “self-love.” This concept is a linguistic flaw and can be broken down into concepts such as self-esteem, self-preservation, selfishness, narcissism — feelings that, in excess, can lead us to seek personal satisfaction above all else, ignoring the impact our actions may have on others. This creates an environment of isolation and individualism, where empathy and true human connection are stifled.

On the other hand, true love flourishes when we open ourselves to the experience of sharing our lives with others. It is in relation to others that we learn the art of empathy, understanding, and commitment. Loving someone challenges us to step out of our comfort zone, face challenges, and grow as individuals. This shared journey enriches us in ways that self-love could never achieve.

Love as a relationship with others also reminds us of the importance of reciprocity and giving and receiving. It is a constant reminder that our actions have consequences beyond ourselves. The pursuit of mutual well-being motivates us to be better people, commit to personal growth, and face difficulties with courage.

Exalting love as a relationship with others is a call to transcend our inherent selfishness and embrace the beauty of human interconnection. It is a call to overcome the narrow limits of self-love and embrace generosity, compassion, and the true joy that comes from sharing life with those we love.

In general, when a person likes to emphasize “self-love” as the most important, I often imagine that such a person is lonely and is trying not to show the suffering caused by loneliness. In other cases, I think it is an “egocentric” person ready to discard all relationships as if they were disposable. In both cases, these are types of people I tend to avoid.