I am not even going to try to attempt to define or explain "love". For the purpose of this post, I will focus on the notion of "romantic love".
Renee Descartes has been quoted as saying, "I think, therefore, I am".
Well, I'm quite certain my dog Chloe, didn't think. Does that mean "she wasn't"?
or since she couldn't think, she didn't Exist?
I suppose, for humans, thinking is somehow linked to being. In one of my psych texts, there are 22 listings for cognition (the fancy word for thought or thinking). It's one of the things in psychology that has been heavily researched. Don't get me wrong. That doesn't mean they know didly squat, but they are at least working at understanding it.
In the text book, PSYCHOLOGY making connections, by Feist & Rosenberg, defines cognition as:
Mental processes involved in acquiring, processing and storing knowledge.
It defines feelings as: not listed. Instead, I went to emotions. Wow. There were 43 sub-topics here. Does that mean they know more about emotion than cognition? Beats me.
Back to a definition: Brief, acute changes in conscious experience and physiology that occur, in a personally meaningful situation.
It also states the psychological use of the term affect refers to a variety of emotional phenomena, including, emotions, mood, and affective traits.
Moods are, transient fluctuations and tend to last longer than most emotions. Huh?
Affective traits are stable, predispositions toward certain types of emotional responses, such as anger. Would that make love an affective trait? Again. Don't know.
An aside. I used to know this stuff. Not by heart, but I knew it. Looking at it now give me pause. Why does everything have to be so damned complicated?
Although, if I think of love as an emotion, it's no surprise, given the definition of emotion, why there is so much drama surrounding it. It's acute and brief. It's related to moods.
My current definition of romantic love is an acute, unstable mood that affects you consciously and physiologically in a meaningful situation.
Is that okay with you? It makes as much sense as the rest of this stuff. I'm okay with it until they bring in the part about a meaningful situation. Where does that fit in? But, I shall go on.
THINKING YOU'RE IN LOVE:
According to our definition, this means you are experiencing a mental process involved in acquiring, processing and storing knowledge.
Meaning? Your thoughts are processing what you believe you know about the person you are, .... what? Thinking about loving? Or, maybe that brief, emotional change in your conscious experience about a particular person, has triggered a thought process about the person so you will be knowledgeable about him or her.
So, would you react differently to someone saying, "I think I love you" or to saying, "I love you". That's about as close as I can get to showing there is a difference. The psychobabble was not helpful.
This was certainly not what I had in mind when I thought of this topic.
To me, thinking is a calculated process that involves decision making and is supposed to be devoid of emotion. It it's not an emotional response, my question really was, more like, could you think you loved someone, base on facts rather than emotions?
I'VE A FEELING, I'M FALLING IN LOVE:
At least on one thing, I'm clear. Thoughts don't involve emotions. It seemed to say that, but I'm confused. And if I'm confused, and I'm the expert, oh boy!
I'm going to go out on a limb, and say that everyone who reads this has been in love. Or thought they were in love? How did you figure out the difference?
I'm guessing it's in hindsight. While you are in love, you are feeling in love.
If it goes south, as it often can, when looking back, you may say you only "thought" you were in love. Or, you may have a very broken heart and be feeling bereft.
I can't go with the definitions here. True, it is a physiological experience. Your heart palpitates. You may feel flushed. If there's lust involved, which if it's romantic, for your sake, I hope there is, you will feel tingles in your sexual regions. Which, are actually all over your body. Another topic.
You can't stop "thinking" about the person. Or should that be feeling? I can't say.
BIG PSYCOLOGICAL QUESTION!
WHAT COMES FIRST? THOUGHT OR EMOTION?
I remember when I was teaching psychology, only four years ago, there was, at least in the text book I was using, no definitive answer. I recall the three possibilities that at the time were hypothesized.
The last edition I have of that book was 2010. I remembered one of the names and was able to find the page. It's in Introduction to Psychology: GATEWAYS TO MIND AND BEHAVIOR by Coon & Mitterer.
I believed they all happen at the same time. I think of a situation. A tiger charging at you.
IMAGINE: You're minding your own business and out of nowhere, a huge tiger is yards away, staring you in the face.
The response your body/mind has is:
1. Your arousal system says, oh crap. Fear. Tiger. Run.
2. Your Thalamus kicks your nervous system arousal in gear, you run because you're feeling fear.
3. Your arousal system says, oh "there's a tiger. I should be afraid." Your behavior says, run.
4. You shit your pants and the Tiger leaves because your behavior disgusted him.
See. I told you before that humor is very important.
my hypothesis:
You cannot separate thoughts and feelings. Or cognitions and emotions. Or egg whites, but that just may be me.
CONCLUSION:
It doesn't matter if you think you love someone, or you feel you love someone or know you love someone. In either case, your life may be enhanced or possibly wrecked. Love will affect you regardless of how it is labeled or comes about.
Lastly, to quote Milton, who it was, I believe, said,
" 'tis better to have loved and lost then never to have loved at all."
And I bet we all have the scars to prove it. Have a beloved day.
No comments:
Post a Comment