There is a great deal that can be said - and probably more that cannot be easily articulated regarding Love. Throughout the centuries, a motley crew of philosophers, poets, and scientists have each offered viewpoints that remain stubbornly distinct and alike in some ways. As humans, we hope that we experience love in at least one of its many guises. Yet, the challenge of fostering a ‘healthy’ relationship lies in the realisation that love is not a single emotion, but includes a complex spectrum of needs and projections.
The Vocab of the Heart
We are all, to some extent, fluent in different dialects of affection, though we rarely stop to translate them. Consider Eros, that passionate, romantic force named for the Greek god of desire. It is the love popular in movies and the high-street novel - intense, physical and intoxicating. The philosopher Plato viewed Eros as a force that transcends, starting with physical attraction but eventually guiding the soul toward a deeper appreciation of beauty itself. However, Eros possesses a well-known ‘shadow side’ - left to its own devices, it can curdle into possessiveness, transforming a partner from a person into a required drug, leading to the exhaustion of obsession rather than the peace of connection.
In the more playful corners of our lives, we find Ludus. Though the term is largely absent from our modern vocab, it’s spirit is captured in the thrill of the chase and the light-hearted flirtation that seeks joy in the moment. It is the love of the ‘now’, with no gravity of long-term commitment.
Then there is Storge, the slow-growing, affectionate bond of the family. It is built on the sturdy foundations of familiarity and trust- a sense of belonging that should, in a kinder world, provide us with our first secure base. Yet, we have to accept on the one hand that we do not live in a perfect world. Not everyone is granted a childhood environment that nurtures a secure sense of self. For many of us, the lack of this familial warmth creates a psychological impact that colours the lens through which we experience the world.
There are also other forms of love, which the world could do more of, commonly recognised in relationship diversity, which is Compersion - the ability to feel joy in a partner’s happiness even when it does not directly serve us. It is the radical antithesis of possessiveness and still so unrecognised that my word processor underlined the word in red as I am writing this. Compersion asks us to expand our understanding of love from a competitive resource to one of inclusiveness, suggesting that the joy of the other is, in itself, a legitimate source of our own contentment.
Attachment and beyond
Contemporary psychotherapy suggests that our adult lives holds the echo of our early interactions. The psychiatrist John Bowlby’s Attachment Theory, although not without controversy – propose an understanding of why we behave in certain ways in relationship. Those blessed with a secure attachment are more likely to carry a certain confidence, and are able to rely on others with less fear.
However, those of us with insecure attachment can have a more difficult time. The Anxious individual lives in a state of permanent high alert, craving a level of reassurance that partners may not ever fully provide - a hunger born of a historical fear of abandonment. Conversely, the Avoidant person views emotional closeness as a threat to their sovereignty, retreating into the perceived safety of independence, often refusing to accept their aloofness might not be a strength. A combination of these two affects us when we are of the Disorganised attachment style, oscillating between the desire for connection and the terror of it, creating a relationship dynamic that is as unpredictable as it is tiring.
The philosophical traditions of Buddhism offer a different perspective. Here, attachment is viewed as the primary architect of human suffering. To cling to a person as if they were a permanent possession is a recipe for distress. The goal, instead, is Non-attachment - not with cold indifference, but compassion. It is to love deeply while recognising that our lives are transient, allowing us to give ourselves freely while accepting the fear of loss.
Wholeness
In our pursuit of connection, we can often stumble into Co-dependence. This is the dysfunctional symmetry where one person’s emotional regulation is primarily dependent on another. In such a state, boundaries can dissolve. We become ‘enmeshed,’ losing our own identity until we can no longer tell where our own needs apart from our partner's. It is a state of emotional exhaustion that can be mistaken for devotion.
The healthier alternative - and the primary goal of modern relationship therapy - is Interdependence. In an interdependent union, individuals maintain their distinct identities while offering mutual support. It is a partnership of beings who are already whole, rather than seeking completion. It requires a high degree of self-awareness and a commitment to communication that is both clear and kind, ensuring nobody is neglected for the relationship’s survival.
To love well is to engage in a play involving the desire for intimacy and for independence. It is about being with someone without being consumed by them. Why we find this so challenging is simple: love, attachment, and dependence are deeply intertwined, and we are remarkably complex, contradictory creatures.
Ask Yourself:
In your relationship, can you discern which parts of your behaviour are echoing ‘scripts’ from your childhood?
How much of your sense of self-worth has been based on the moods and expectations of another?