The Forgotten Art of Love. Armin A. Zadeh

of these characteristics in a person may trigger the genetically determined response of what we perceive as love: a strong feeling of affection and the desire to care for this person. Neuroscientists believe the perception of beauty stems from the physical proximity of the brain areas responsible for processing concepts of love and beauty.²⁰ The recognition of this goodness also affects how the unique characteristics of a person, such as personality and appearance, are viewed. We love the individual person with his or her idiosyncrasies, even though true love itself may be universal.

      A broader interpretation of the ideal lover’s recognition of beauty in the beloved — and likely closer to Plato’s idea — is that it brings awareness of the wonder of life itself and, with that, awe for its creator. In loving, the lover perceives the uniqueness of the beloved and, by extension, the uniqueness of all life. We perceive uniqueness as closely related to preciousness and beauty, and, intuitively, we feel the urge to protect what we perceive as treasured. It also becomes intuitive why philosophers and spiritual leaders argue that ideal love extends to all life. Fromm believed that a person who does not hold love for all people is not capable of loving any person. The connection between ideal love and spirituality is also easy to understand in this context. If we indeed recognize the beauty in one person as a reflection of the beauty of all life, we are only a short step from applying concepts found in religion, such as the precept to love everybody. Like spiritual and religious practices, the practice of ideal love requires discipline, devotion, and focus, which explains why it is not commonly achieved.

      The recognition of beauty is linked to the perception of rarity or uniqueness, but in order to perceive and value someone’s distinctive qualities, we generally need to appreciate that person’s nature. This explains why we may find it easy to dislike people on the basis of a superficial acquaintance but grow to appreciate them when we spend time together. Fusing our appreciation for somebody’s goodness and uniqueness likely increases our perception of beauty in that person.

      Ideal love depends on the ability of the lover to perceive the beauty in another person. One person may recognize beauty and uniqueness in somebody, while another may not. Again, it is easier to recognize the unique goodness in people when we know them well. This may be one reason why parental love is so strong. As parents, we typically know our children better than anybody else does, and we see goodness in them while others may not. Remarkably, we can focus on this goodness even if our children have obvious character flaws or when they misbehave. Mothers of murderers may still love their children, regardless of their crimes.

      Conversely, a person ceases to love if he or she becomes unable to discern any sign of goodness or beauty in somebody. This, too, is a matter of perception — or, rather, of our inability to recognize goodness. Spiritual figures such as the Buddha and Jesus recognized the goodness in all people, which, to them, never ceased to exist. To such masters of love, whether they are religious or secular in their views, the very existence of a person is sufficient to warrant love: they see and value the individuality, the uniqueness, in each person. Thus, their love is eternal for all individuals, even those with many flaws. Very few of us are capable of this ideal form of love: we are distracted by people’s faults and imperfections. As a result, we tend to restrict our love to only a small number of people — which touches the roots of a fundamental human problem.

      Since recognizing goodness and unique beauty in a person depends on our perceptive abilities, individuals come to different conclusions as to who is worthy of love. Typically, someone who displays hostility and aggression will not be perceived as lovable unless a person sees beyond these attributes and recognizes other qualities. Because discerning hostility appeals to the strong impulse of self-preservation, it can be a difficult habit to overcome. To love our enemies, as Jesus taught, may elevate us to a transcendent state entirely free of doubts and struggles, but it is a practice that is difficult to sustain in contemporary society. Ironically, extremely selfless people tend to be marginalized in Western societies because they often resist conforming to society’s norms and pressures. Unless we are willing to live a shorter (albeit potentially happier) life or are willing to tolerate marginalization, we will not feel love toward people who seem to be trying to harm us.

      The challenge for most of us is finding the balance between extending love to others and identifying individuals who would take advantage of our love. Ideally, we extend our love as far as we can while still being able to successfully navigate our lives. Success, of course, is subject to wide interpretation, and to some it may simply mean not dying prematurely. Limiting our love may help with a career in a power-driven society, but it is also likely to prevent us from experiencing true, lasting contentment. Spending too much time in the pursuit of material wealth is known to be linked to lower levels of happiness.²¹

      Although we readily recognize a focus on money or power as selfish, it is possible to see loving as selfish, too. Those who reject the idea of selfless love like to point out that there are obvious rewards for focusing on love. Indeed, the constellation of motives for loving is interesting. Devoting ourselves to the art of loving with the intent of advancing our own happiness is arguably self-serving. However, as soon as we engage in loving — in its true sense, without seeking reciprocity — we are behaving selflessly. If we don’t behave selflessly, we are not truly loving. Therefore, while our initial intention to love may be motivated by the pursuit of our own happiness, the act of loving, by definition, has to be a selfless act. It is a (positive) Catch-22. Even if people initially engage in loving for their own benefit, they benefit only if they act in a truly loving manner (and then — ironically — pay no attention to the rewards). Thus the argument of “psychological egoism” is insufficient to explain or describe ideal love.

      Despite the prevalence of the idea of mutual romantic love, reciprocity can never be a condition of love itself. The loving person loves the beauty and goodness in people without asking or needing to be loved in return. Reciprocity is important for relationships, but not for the existence of love as an independent phenomenon. Love does, however, benefit both the lover and those who are loved.

      In practice, these contemplations are of only semantic relevance. When we love, we don’t have the option of being selfish. We don’t love in order to attain happiness: instead, we attain happiness as the result of freeing ourselves from jealousy, greed, and selfishness. We love because we recognize goodness and beauty in an individual, and, through that person, the goodness and beauty in all of humanity — and indeed in any life. We also love ourselves, not because we are powerful or smart but because we are part of the same goodness and beauty.

      Can we speak of love when referring to our affection for animals or other living things? In English we use the word love liberally to express a range of emotions and attachments — but are these the same as our love for people? Following the definition of love in this book — the urge and continuous effort for the happiness and well-being of somebody or something — we can speak of loving our pets and other animals if we experience the desire and determination to see them joyful and healthy. It may be difficult to accept somebody’s affection for a dog as love when the human is merely providing food. On the other hand, somebody who spends hours a day with a dog — going beyond regular care to provide the mental and physical nourishment for the optimal development of a pet — shows persuasive signs of love. As in human relationships, we gain delight from experiencing the happiness and well-being of animals. Consistent with the general principle of love, we recognize goodness and uniqueness in them that we seek to nurture and protect. A similar case can be made for strong, dedicated affection for any life.

       3. Love as an Art

      An art is a skillful human activity undertaken to express a person’s perceptions and emotions. Can love be considered an art? To address this question, we first need to explore the mechanism of loving. How do we generate love in ourselves?

      Love can be seen simply as a biological impulse that is unique among our drives because of its significance for human survival. Drives like hunger or thirst are activated in response to internal or external triggers: for example, low blood sugar levels elicit the feeling of hunger. A drive that prompts us to eat is obviously vital to sustaining the functioning of the individual.