More Yes than No
Kierkegaard suggests that certain concepts deemed "abstract" are not really as they seem at first blush. Take for example the notion of "love." The popular 20th century brush off of "love" is that it is some sort of vestigial construct like "marriage" that was only necessary as a way of perpetuating society.
The jaded believe that love doesn't exist. Others believe it is indescribable. How many poets have pondered rhetorically on the elusive nature of love, the fickle nature of love, the temporary nature of love? Meanwhile, we mostly agree that it should be unconditional and that it is worth having, if only to lose.
If you allow for "love" or better yet, have felt it, you might go as far as saying it is essential.
Certainly, people say they "love" when they mean they enjoyed something, and unfortunately we are all too familiar with people saying they "love" without really "meaning it." These things are distractions to the real matter of love. Very often lovers will exchange vows under ripe conditions only to retract their oaths after they have digested. This phenomenon is closer to the truth than anything else so far. Love can be lost, and once lost it is so much easier to disavow its existence.
So, is love an abstract concept?
My interpretation of Kierkegaard’s model of love is of a continuum. These phrases "being in love", "falling in love" are indicators of this idea. I propose that we have so much trouble with the notion of love because we want to bring down to earth and pin it to the ground. But, like a butterfly in box you miss the effect of wings fluttering in sunlight when you strive to measure its span. Love is measurable like the ocean, and while you can swallow a mouthful of water this taste is only a modicum of all those million gallons.
We do "love" a disservice to call her indescribable. She is just unique.
Think not of love as an absolute. When one says they fell in love at first sight, they only mean they were predisposed. Think not of love as an absolute state like crossing a border. It’s more like a series of small choices, which you answer most often without even trying. When you realize you answer was "yes" more often than "no" than you are more likely to be in love than not.
- ▼ August (10)