Okay not totally quiet; daughter phoned and had the first Skype from Joe for a week - glad to know he is tired but otherwise fine. Can't view my blogs though - the Great Firewall of China. Getting on with sprucing up my next lecture on Biological theories of personality...
However, something Lilly said to me on the phone stuck in my mind: referring to her dog, Snoopy; "how can anyone say only humans can experience love?" Whilst sorting the dirty washing I thought I'd put my mind to the topic, albeit briefly. So here we go. In the style of a true researcher this will require some investigation to accompany my thoughts.
'What is love' was apparently the most searched for phrase on Google in the year 2012. Well according to Google anyway. So love is a conundrum which has surpassed even the meaning of life!
Definitions:
Noun
| ||||
Verb
| ||||
Synonyms
|
Too simplistic.
"love is unconditional affection with no limits or conditions: completely loving someone. It's when you trust the other with your life and when you would do anything for each other".
So what do the online 'experts' have to say?
1) The Physicist: Love is Chemistry. "in true love, or attachment and bonding, the brain can release a whole set of chemicals: pheromones, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin and vasopressin.." Love is a survival mechanism to promote long-term relationships, defence and protection, safety and security.
2) The Psychotherapist: Love has many Guises. Just like a therapist. Goes on to explain the latin names for love - e.g. eros, agape, philia, philautia, pragma and ludus (a playful fooling around or flirting - hmm, wouldn't call that love).
3) The Philosopher: Love is passionate commitment.
4) The Romantic Novelist: Love drives all great stories - with it is euphoria, without it is desolation and obsession.
5) The Benedictine Nun: Love is more easily experienced than defined. It is in what it causes us to do that we can understand love. "Love is the one thing that can never hurt anyone, though it can cost dearly."
Okay, so humans can 'do' all of these. What about other species? What about your dog, or your cat?
1) Yes, animals can form a true and irrevocable, unconditional bond with humans, and with each other. You can also see in the dilation of pupils and purring that contact with the beloved (stroking, for example) is highly pleasurable.
2) With the exception of eros and agape I reckon you could equate these to the bonds domestic pets are capable of making with humans and with each other.
3) Well yes, anyone try to tell my daughter her dog isn't passionately committed to her... and, well there have just been numerous examples of selfless devotion.
4) Just compare the happy mutt to the tragedy of temporary abandonment...
5) True love is in the doing, not in the saying... Well we all know stories of extreme self-sacrifice of animals for their owners, their offspring and for each other. Yes it's nature but how is that different from self-sacrifice in humans?
As I'm typing this my precious Sophie, aka Cuddle-Bucket, aka Fluffy Bee (she fluffies herself up like a stripey black and white bee with her tail in the air when happy that you're coming somewhere too) is sleeping beside me. She has been my companion all day. Where I go, she will follow - crying if she didn't notice I'd moved straight away.
At one point I dozed off on the sofa. I awoke to find Fluffy Bee sleeping beside me - purring happily in her sleep on her beloved blue blankie, tummy exposed trustingly, little paws in the air twitching with her dreams. Faithful, relaxed, unconditionally adoring.
Right now she's in a similar pose on a mini blankie in front of the PC and next to the keyboard. She likes the little light above, it's warming. Every now and then she'll wake and initiate some stroking with nuzzling and little 'kisses'. The big liquid green eyes look into yours (unusual in a cat - direct eye contact is generally seen as threatening) - unwavering, trusting, just happy to be with you. Could it be love???
Higher mammals have the same pathways in the brain we do; they have and rely on well-developed emotional systems. Whereas our cortex is vastly more developed (so we are able to reason with, rationalise, obfuscate and channel our feelings), in other mammals with a lesser dependance on the cortex emotions are primary drivers. Just because a creature cannot rationalise it's emotional experience this does not invalidate it, surely? Are we really so arrogant as a species that we believe that what we ourselves name 'love' is only a human capacity?
No comments:
Post a Comment