Who else wants to know what the point of love is?

April 11, 2014

Articles | Collections | Newsletter

We've spoken about what we think love is made up of; for friends, family and lovers. We've also covered why our love gets stronger. But I'm sure you, like many are wondering what the point of love is at all. Well, in this article I'm going to tell you (and it might just leave you thinking...)

filed under:

Unfiled: this is an archived article from our predecessor website, The Dirt Psychology.

I've told you why we love some people more than others before. And we've talked about the definition of love; how we can visualise it and the different types (you should definitely read that before we go on, if you haven't already). Basically love comes down to three interacting things; commitment (a sense of wanting the relationship to continue); intimacy (a sense of wanting to be close to the other person); and passion (wanting to bone 'em). They combine in different ways to create most of the different ways we love. But we never talked about why. Why do we love? What's the point? It's such a prolific and poignant emotion. It's something most people seek in their lives. I'm sure you can guess part of it, the passion is related to sex. So obviously it motivates baby-making. Useful, sure. But what about those other two aspects? Where do commitment and intimacy come in?

Well, some psychologists theorise that that companionate love, that love made of intimacy and commitment is all about keeping us together for our safety. But also long enough to raise our helpless children and to love it too. We've talked before about attachment, and these questions led to that theory. Babies are utterly helpless and dependent for several years. They need the unconditional support of a caregiver to support them and keep them safe for a number of reasons (one of them is attachment, for those in the know). This is where some say love comes in. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) this particular theory doesn't allow us to test it, Psychology ethics boards aren't too keen on letting psychologists mess with babies, for some reason. The only really strong evidence we have was done by a man named Harlow in the 1950s.

Harlow  put together two monkey like figures. One made of wire and the other made of soft material with a hot water bottle inside. He strung up food and water on the wire one. They then got some baby monkeys and said "if babies need that security everyone keeps talking about, they'll go for the more comfortable 'mother', otherwise, they'll just want food and water and stick with the wire one". Predictably, the baby monkeys got the food and water from the wire mothers and went straight back to the soft, warm ones. So, we have some support for this idea.

We also know that babies elicit a bunch of fuzzy-feeling chemicals from us. Oxytocin for the mothers and prolactin for the fathers (although Oxytocin ain't all it's cracked up to be). These chemicals make us extremely affectionate towards the babies and keep us feeling good about our partners too. We also have 'separation distress' as evidence. Ever seen a woman leave her baby alone for a while? It can get loud. Or very, very quiet. Babies don't like that at all. These feelings stay with us as we are older, when our partners are away (or are lost to us), we feel deep, emotional pain. On the flip side, theorists think that caregivers get massive bonuses from giving and receiving affection, as well as security into old age.

But what about romantic love; intimacy and passion? If passion is about baby making and commitment is about baby keeping, where does intimacy fall? Well, there are many similarities between the attachment bond between caregiver and child and that of a loving couple. We spoke before about separation distress, but also think about things like mutual feeding and grooming, the baby talk and touching. We also know that our attachment styles stay with us too, influencing our relationships as we get older. This is because intimacy is the element of relationships that is crucial for our health and our happiness. Humans are social creatures, it's inherent in us. Without this element, we suffer. So love has a primarily evolutionary function. It is important distally. Babies, basically. But it is so important in the present. Sex (passion) feels pretty awesome, intimacy is absolutely imperative for our happiness and health and commitment not only keeps our babies safe, but it also keeps us safe. Love is one of the great glues that holds us all together. But mostly; babies. Of course, it's hard to really know what's more important to our species - babies or socialising or another factor we haven't come across yet. I just like to stir the pot - I enjoy the emails. Anyway, if you liked this article, you might be interested in learning why we have sex outside of babymaking. Or maybe, if you're interested in how important socialising is, you'll be keen on knowing why small talk is so awkwardGiving you the dirt on your search for understanding, psychological freedom and 'the good life' at The Dirt Psychology.

Articles | Collections | Email me

Ideologies you choose at The Armchair Collective.

There are over 2000 of us. Get the newsletter.
Contribute to the site's upkeep by donating: Bitcoin | Paypal