From: cash@convex.com (Peter Cash)
Subject: Re: WHAT IS LOVE?
Summary: I think I'm getting a little clearer about this stuff.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:13:32 GMT
Organization: The Instrumentality
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <1992Sep2.065707.27640@abo.fi> CBURMAN@finabo.abo.fi () writes:
>In <1992Sep1.230233.3132@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com writes:

>> I'm more than a little mystified by this. I'm not just confused about what
...
...and other whining to make Chris talk to me..

>Well, one thing: someone introduced the expression "emotions are feelings", 
>and that seems to me to be a very UNhelpful thing to say. But then I 
>thought that what was really meant by the expression was "love, hate, etc. 
>are feelings", so I restated the position I was leaning towards, namely 
>that when we talk of love, we are not merely talking of how we feel. But 
>that's not quite right either, is it? I seem to have thought of feelings as 
>some kind of a state of mind, or as some certain inner sensations, or 
>whatever. 

I agree--on thinking about it, the question "what is a feeling?" has come
to look peculiar to me--just as peculiar as "what is love?".  Thus, I'm now
suspicious even of saying that "Love is not a feeling"; I'm not clear about
what I would be saying if I said this. Certainly, I can say, "The word
'love' does not have the same meaning as either 'feeling' or 'emotion' " --
But that is not quite the same thing. Is it?

>(I do have a little problem with the words 'feeling', 
>'experience', 'sensation', 'emotion'. My ear doesn't always tell me which 
>is the correct one, and my dictionaries are only entertaining.) 

I am a little fuzzy about the relative roles of "feeling" and "emotion",
but I don't have nearly as much trouble with differentiating among these
three words ("experience," "sensation," and "emotion") as I do between
"feelings" and "emotions". Consider:

	 "He began to recount his experiences as a regimental sergeant
	major in the service of the East India Company" cannot be
	transposed to "He began to recount his sensations..." nor into "He
	began to recount his emotions..."

	 "When I drank the cobra venom, I experienced the strangest
	sensation in the soles of my feet" cannot be rendered as "When I
	drank the cobra venom, I had the strangest experience in..." nor as
	"When...I had the strangest emotion in...".

	 "When I read the telegram informing me that she had died, I could
	not control my emotions" does not find its equivalent in "When I
	read...died, I could not control my sensations", nor in
	"When...could not control my experiences".

But what are differences and the connections between "feelings" and
"emotions"? 

Clearly, there is some divergence between these two words: I can say that
"I have a strange feeling in my hand--sort of a tingling."  --And here
"sensation" would do just as well, while "emotion" will not do at all. The
same is true for, "I have the feeling that I've been here before." I have
more difficulty thinking of a case where "emotion" cannot be replaced by
"feeling," so I will provisionally suggest that "emotion" is narrower than
"feeling." Perhaps "emotion" is a special case of feeling? 

[Perhaps--though that makes it sound altogether too neat. I don't think that
words have the clean crisp boundaries that would permit us to construct
Venn diagrams of their domains.]

So, how should I understand the question, "Is love an emotion?" Previously,
the question had seemed quite clear to me, and the answer seemed to be
"no". 

As I said in an earlier posting, a clearest counter-example to the
assertion that love is an emotion seems to come from cases where love is a
commandment: "Love one another as I have loved you," for example, or "Love
your wife as Christ has loved the church." Our emotions are usually
conceded as being not quite in our control; thus if love is an emotion, how
can we be commanded to love?  ("Thou shalt have warm fuzzy feelings for one
another...") Therefore, love must not be the same as emotion.

Also, though a lover might strong emotions toward the beloved, there are
times when the lover does not feel emotions that could be considered
consonant with love--for example, when he's angry at the beloved, or--for
that matter--when he's asleep. (If someone asks, "Does Joe love Susan?", we
don't check to see if Joe is awake.)

But if I'm relatively infirm about such a seemingly simple matter as
"emotions" and "feelings", how can I speak so authoritatively on "love"? If
I'm not clear about "emotion", how can I be sure love is never one? I
can't, really.

I've been victimized by a philosophical question of course--I didn't think
that "What is love?" could be as tricky as "What is mind?"; but I was
wrong. The two questions are isomorphic in that they both ask about an
entity that one is tempted--almost compelled--to think _must_ exist
precisely because one knows how to use the word. 

And of course we do know how to use the word--we know how to talk about
love. Does that mean there's not mystery about love, no questions to be
asked? No, just that it's not the kind of mystery that can be cleared up by
answering the question, "What is love?"

The right answer to such a question is to ask another (and then another):
"Why do you ask about love?  What is troubling you? Do you wonder if you
truly love someone, or if you are loved? Do you wonder if you love Him
enough? Have you been disappointed by love?"


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