From: CBURMAN@finabo.abo.fi ()
Subject: Re: WHAT IS LOVE?
Organization: The Clam of Reason Ltd.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 18:20:31 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20


In article <something.something> Peter Cash writes:
>>In article <403@thunder.LakeheadU.Ca> skataria@thunder.LakeheadU.Ca
>>(skataria) writes:
>
>> WHAT IS LOVE?
>> Can somebody give me a convincing answer?
>
>What kind of love? As any classical scholar knows, the ancients had several
>different words that are today regrettably subsumed under the same English
>word. For example, "eros" was quite different from "caritas"--only in
>modern times does one use the same word for teenagers who are smitten by
>one another and for Mother Theresa's regard for humanity: we call both
>"love". No wonder we're confused, and puzzle about the meaning of "love".

They don't make languages like they used to, eh?

You think we are confused and puzzled about the meaning of 'love'?
Always, or only sometimes? And it's because the word for eros, and the
word for caritas are spelled the same in English?

I claim (humbly, ever humbly) that ordinarily we have no problems with the 
meaning of 'love'? You do love your children, don't you? You do love your
wife? You know God loves you, right? You love your friends? Wouldn't
you (sometimes) even say that you love your roses? Where is the mystery?

It seems to me that the problem is the question ('What is...'), which
is a bit fuzzy around the edges. What is the worry? How did the
question arise? What would count as a good answer? (Would it have been
easier to answer if it had been more 'precise', 'What is eros', or
'What is caritas'?)  (Peter, didn't you recently write something about the
difficulty of understanding outside contexts? Isn't this connected?)

>"Romantic" love, incidentally, is a modern invention. It wasn't around
>before...oh, the 1200s. (C.S. Lewis wrote a scholarly work about this; I'll
>track down the reference if anyone is interested.)

CSL has a pamphlet called The Four Loves in which he discusses
affection, friendship, eros and charity.


In <1992Aug21.150633.1750@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com writes:
> In article <1992Aug21.000152.10763@reed.edu> bcushman@lust.reed.edu (Ben Cushman) writes:
> 
> >......I believe that the conflation of  
> >teenage infatuation and saintly faith captures a real unity to the  
> >passions that the ancients negelected in their treatment of love in its  
> >varieties.  In fact, from our modern perspective, we are uniquely  
> >empowered in our use and treatment of love as a concept.  If we want to be  
> >precise, and deal only with (for instance) sexual or romantic love, we can  
> >use the word "eros."  Further, when we want to deal with love in its  
> >multiform unity, we can use the word "love".  This turn is language is far  
> >from regrettable, it is empowering.
> 
> "Empowering?" [Ah, is there no limit to the uses of this fatuous word?]
> Mind telling me how erasing the distinction between a lust-crazed teenager
> and Mother Theresa is in any way illuminating or [swallow gorge]
> _empowering_?

I'm a bit puzzled by this conflation of meanings/erasing the 
distinction-business. I mean, a word has many uses, right? Think of 
'passion'. Or 'heaven'. Or 'bread' ('I am the bread from heaven'), etc. 

I think I lean towards Mr Cushman's view. At least this much: I think it is 
important that we use the same word for so different things. It was a long 
time since I read CS Lewis on the four loves, but I think one of his points 
was that there are important connections between eros, caritas, friendship 
and affection. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these connections were 
lost if we stopped using the word 'love' in all the ways we currently do.
 
Sorry, I don't make much sense today.

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>              |      Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist.     |
> Peter Cash   |       (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein)      |cash@convex.com
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Chris Burman, cburman@abo.fi
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.meta