We do know love. Every generation has had its poets and singers to praise it, its cynics and misanthropes to attack it, and its psychologists and philosophers to explain it. No one denies that love is. We argue only about what love is. For there are as many definitions of love as there are lovers.
Why then, if love is so well known, is there such complete disagreement concerning its nature? Does love reveal itself in different garb to each observer? Does it vary with the age or the culture in which a man lives? Or does it perhaps change with the sex, age, or amorous experience of the lover? (Or, for that matter, of the interpreter of love?)
In examining love as well as in inquiring into the nature of any other human phenomenon, one must examine both the psychological and sociological aspect of the problem. The psychological aspect involves the personal attitudes and aims of the individual, which are based upon the intellectual and emotional development of his personality. The sociological aspect involves the social concepts and conventions of the community of which the individual is a part. An objective evaluation of the problem of love must include both aspects. In this chapter we will deal with the psychological aspect of love.
Psychologically, since love is considered one of the emotion complexes, we may proceed by examining first the general characteristics of emotion and then the specific characteristics of the emotion of love.
Emotion is generally considered as caused by some environmental situation. The individual subjected to certain stimulation is supposed automatically to react with the emotion corresponding to the situation. For example, in the infant, the stimulus of loud noise (like thunder) or the stimulus of loss of support may evoke the reaction of fear. The whole elaborate structure of adult fear is supposed to be erected upon such primitive stimulus-response mechanisms. The theory that human behavior is mainly based on such stimulus-response mechanisms is widely accepted today.
According to the Freudian theory, all fears can be traced back to the “psychic trauma” of being born, the “primary anxiety” experienced by every individual during his passage from the warmth and security of his mother’s body into a cold world. Freud also advances the theory that fears and anxiety are caused by the suppression of sexual excitement which is not permitted to take its normal course.’
Such concepts, interesting and correct as they may be, are inadequate in explaining the real function of fear. It is obvious that the individual needs the emotion of fear for biological or psychological reasons. It serves a purpose, namely, that of avoiding dangers or unpleasant situations. Regarding fear from a teleological or purposive point of view is helpful not only in gaining a better understanding of the psychological mechanisms involved; it also provides a better approach for helping the individual to understand his fears and to deal with them sensibly. The purpose of fear might not be easily recognized, especially if common sense and logic do not justify the fear, as in cases of imaginary dangers and unreasonable emotional anxieties. A careful psychological study of such instances reveals nevertheless a very definite purpose motivating the individual to take a defensive attitude against a situation which may imply dangers not only to his physical well-being, but more often to his prestige and social status.
All emotions are directed toward specific goals, even if these goals in adults are not obvious but concealed by an elaborate psychological superstructure. Emotions are actively selected by the individual. It is difficult to perceive this fact, because emotions cannot serve well if and when recognized in their purposiveness. Therefore, it is psychologically necessary that one does not admit to oneself one’s own control over one’s own emotions. Emotions prepare, support, or reject actions. Every action is the result of intellectual and emotional motivations. In thinking, we consider both the pros and cons of the future action. Reason and logic permit and even demand the recognition of advantages and obstacles to any action. However, often enough the decision is difficult to make, as the pros and cons almost equal up. In order to move in anyone direction, we must strengthen the apparent value of the direction we favor. It is here that we call upon our emotions. We need emotions to justify our decision and to meet the obstacles which logically might deter us from our chosen course. Without emotions we could not act forcefully. We, therefore, select those emotions which are appropriate to the maintenance and strengthening of our fundamental direction in life.