What is Love?

[InfiniteNow]

With all the complexity going on, it is a wonder love ever sticks. The reason it does is that the unconscious mind still controls 90% of the brain.

 

Actually, it's 88.7351949867%... the 90% is rounded.

 

 

Where do you get numbers like this? We can hardly provide an adequate definition of unconscious mind (and conscious mind for that matter), let alone what percentage of "control" each has...

[coberst]

Occasionally when reading I run across a phrase or sentence or paragraph, which really rings a bell for me. The bell may be recognition of the compatibility of the point to my own conclusions or perhaps the point caused an epiphany, or other reasons. When I encounter such a point I often copy it and store it in a file for later analysis. One such point is as follows: “Platonic idea that the giving and receiving of knowledge, the active formation of another’s character, or the more passive growth under another’s guidance, is the truest and strongest foundation of love”.

 

My analysis of this sentence led me down a long trail over an extended period of time to an understanding of the meaning of the statement and to an agreement with the meaning of that statement.

 

When studying philosophy I had read some of Plato’s work and had a slight remembrance of one of his Dialogues in which he dealt with the subject of love. After some study of the particular Dialogue in question and some further study of Plato’s general philosophy I realized what was meant by the point made in the sentence I had saved.

 

I often watch the Discovery Channel on TV. As you probably know this channel often has a great documentary on animal life. Their audio/visual presentations give the viewer wonderful insights into the life of animals. Often the animals in question are large mammals such as lions, gorillas, monkeys, etc.

 

Plato wrote, “An unexamined life is not worth living”. I find this a bit hyperbolic but nevertheless agree with the general point. Plato also argued that the giving and receiving of knowledge, the active formation of another’s character, or the more passive growth under another’s guidance, is the truest and strongest foundation of love. Plato judged that the basis of love is centered upon the mutual struggle for truth.

 

I would not attempt to explain why Plato’s Idealistic philosophy leads to this conclusion but I think one can find justification for this point of view by considering the nature of the parent to progeny relationship. Considering the nature of evolution one might easily discover that the origin of love could be observed in the obvious relationship of present day mammals. The educational relationship between the animal mother and their progeny are evident to the most casual observer.

 

Evolutionary Psychology is based on the theory that all human psychological traits, such as love, must be traceable to our evolutionary ancestors. The source of love in humans is evolved from the mother infant relationship in early mammals (perhaps).

[HydrogenBond]

That is a valid criticism. I am not really sure what the number is, but I do know that most of what we do consciously is processed at an unconscious level. If one can type well, an unconscious subroutine will actually do the task. The ego only has to stir. The ego played a very important role creating this practical unconscious subroutine. I can't type too well, so it requires more conscious control with less unconscious subroutine support. Irronical isn't it.

 

Maybe a good analogy of the ego and brain is an officer in the army with all his troops beneath him. He gives orders, they obey, and if things go well, he gets the credit. If his troops decided to AWOL, he can command but nothing will happen, because there are no troops. There are diseases that create such conditions. Without troops it is harder to take credit for all those things done behind the scenes. If one had to do all those things oneself, things would go very slow and not as smooth due to the lack of trained specialist.

 

The ego is the captain with many unconscious troops beneath it, proving support. These become active alongside ego consciousness and are mistaken for the ego. This makes the ego percent appear to go up. I do not consciously have to control all my muscles to walk. I merely enter a mental command line and the support software does the rest. I have to periodically stir and alter the tempo. If one did a brain scan, it might look like my ego is all over the brain even though it is only enterring simple command lines here and there that may only require 1% of the brain.

 

Although the ego is the captain, the unconscious mind also has software aspects associated with higher levels of command. These stem from the general called the inner self. The inner self is the juke box of personality software, including the love software. The ego can disobey orders and go renegade. This creates the illusion that there are no natural instincts. It also causes the higher potential software to run after the ego. This creates the illusion that the ego is controlling even more of the brain. THis is sort of true, but not in the progressive way implied by percent.

[HydrogenBond]

Coberst, your observation is consistent with personality software, which defines the nature of animal species, with humans a very advanced species requiring more elaborate software. The mother-offspring relationship is so similar in much of nature, that it seems likely this is the genetic foundation onto which aspects of software builds in many species.