Friday, January 01, 2010

In support of bigamy

I was reading Francis Bacon's essay 'Of Love'[1]. I thought I found something to write about by comparing our present knowledge of love and his views. However, when I started writing it went beyond my original scope. I had no control over its direction. So, I stopped (like so many of my other posts) abruptly and started this post. In this post my ambition is rather limited and simple.

Some of the points that he makes in the essay;

a. You may observe that amongst all the great and worthy persons there is not one that hath been transported to the mad degree of love; which shows that great spirits and great business do keep out this weak passion.
b. For it is a true rule that love is either rewarded either with the reciproque (reciprocal feeling) or with an inward and secret contempt
c. This passion hath his floods in the very times of weakness, which are great prosperity and great adversity (though this latter hath been less observed); both which times kindle love and make it more fervent, and therefore show it to be the child of folly.
d. There is in man's nature a secret inclination and motion towards love of others, which, if they it be not spent upon some one or a few, doth naturally spread itself towards many, and maketh men become humane and charitable.

According to a recent study[2];
e. love and lust are two different feelings. The regions of brain associated with them are mostly exclusive with only a small part overlapping.
f. love is stronger than lust
g. love is associated with motivation, reward and "drive" aspects (and not with lust or emotions)

According to a program that I saw on Discovery channel;
i. Regular sex releases enough oxytocin which is responsible for the bonding between couple.

My assumption:
j. Even though the researchers try to link love with procreation, I don't agree with that. I believe people love without being sexually attracted to each other and it goes well with (g). Conversely, people lust without being in love. I suppose nobody would argue on that one and is the central point of my arguments. From (i) I can say that love is not required for bonding and only regular sex between people in lust will create that magic.

I was going thro' Francis Bacon's life and found that
k. Historians have debated his sexuality and opined he was a homosexual
l. The woman he courted broke up with him and married his enemy in the court who was wealthier. Bacon years later was regretting that he couldn't marry her.

m. If Francis Bacon was a homosexual, then it appears sexual orientation (lust) has no bearing on love. This is in agreement with (e). A homosexual person can feel heterosexual love. Of course, I'm considering (l) indicates he was in love with that woman. I can't say what is the prevalent notion about homosexual's love as it's a rather confused domain.

n. Bacon's opinion (c) doesn't go well with (g). I wonder why do you need motivation in the times of prosperity. I would think drive and motivation are required in the times of adversity. Only that I'm not sure of Bacon's definitions of prosperity and adversity. But considering that his observations were mostly of "martial" men, he could have said, men in adversity and men(even though prosperous) who were driven by adversities are likely to fall in love. This again goes well with (g).

o. I wonder what he meant by second part in (b). Does that have anything to do with his love betraying him for a wealthier man?

p. Curiously, he connects love with altruism (d). The latter is rather controversial and still not fully understood.

q. (d) makes it very clear that in his opinion love and lust are two different feelings.

r. There was and even today there is a big chunk of population holds love and lust are the same.

s. If (e) and (q) are true, then even without scientific finding few men naturally understood the difference between these two because of their personal experience. That means love is not felt by everyone and that explains (r).

t. If (s) is true, a few other passions that motivate and drive people render this passion unnecessary. That makes (a) believable. But then why Bacon being one of those great men still felt love and even had a regret about its failure. Probably, I should give a stress to 'madly in love' in (a). So, everyone feels love even when s/he has other passions.

u. But (r) is still true. Then probably other notion that you fall in love only a selected few is true. So, it is possible that a great chunk of people may not feel love or more precisely may not meet their love at all in their life.

v. So not all men/women motivate you just like not all men/women arouse you.

Why does one need motivation? I started my last post trying to explain this point and totally exhausted and confused. All I can think it has something to do with our speech ability which has developed a tertiary personality (Secondary being modern human behaviour).

w. Of course, one can find love and lust with the same person. But the chances are very slim considering that you either lust for or love only a selected few.

x. My assumption here is heightened libido doesn't need a person but just body parts. Hence person married only for love may be able to have sex. I suppose for procreation and monogamous bonding person should follow his/her lust and not love.

y. Love should be asexual and lovers should be together. Lusters should only meet for the purpose of sex.

1. The Essays by Francis Bacon
2. Love May Be A Lateralized Brain Function

No comments: