h2>Dating : Love is a Word.
“Anyone who doesn’t take love as their starting point will never understand the nature of philosophy.” — Plato
In the third iteration of Hollywood blockbuster, The Matrix, Neo speaks to a computer program about love. To clear the confusion, Rama Kandra elaborates, “Love is a word. What matters is the connection this word implies… What would you do to hold on to this connection?”
Although it may be a rather reductionist view, this definition aligns itself well with other great definitions. In this mini-essay, we explore how Matrix Revolutions’ concept of love as implied connection holds up against the philosophical tradition.
Psychology: Is love an emotion? A person’s mind/body connection with someone or something necessarily contains emotional context. As psychosomatic beings, our sentiments precede cognition. The emotion, ‘love,’ arises from a perceived connection. Even self-love can be seen as connecting with oneself. Perhaps this idea explains the therapeutic value of meditative breathing: connecting with the sustenance of life.
Christianity: The bible states that “God is love” (1 John 4:8), what does scripture reveal about connection? In the view of Spinoza, everything is connected; he considered “God” to be the subtle energy that permeates the unified whole. This concept of the divine reveals itself when a connection — whether to people, places, and things — can move entire nations. In this light, the Christian view of Hell as the place devoid of God, devoid of love, nears the modern symptoms of neurosis. Within such a psychic state, such as depression or anxiety, people feel disconnected from activity, from others, even from themselves… Congruent with Spinoza’s concept of God, this lonely despair, the inability to feel connected with the world, is indeed Hell on Earth.
Nietzsche: Contrasting the Christian view, Nietzsche claims that when a man is in love, one defers power to another and “submits to almost anything” (The Antichrist, 23). Love as connection implies this pessimism as well. In martial arts, our limbs are both the primary tools for defeating an opponent, and yet they are also our most vulnerable part when extended. By analogy, our loved ones could be our greatest aid through life, but we inevitably become vulnerable through these connections. In the aforementioned scene, Rama Kandra submits to the Frenchman due to his love of Sati.
Does the imminent danger mean that we should avoid connection altogether? No! Although we should be aware of the risks of love and exercise caution, the absence of connection leads to Hell. Despite his pessimism, Nietzsche held love in high regard; he observed loving actions transcend good and evil. To further this view, Carl Jung based himself on Nietzsche’s philosophy when he claimed “where there is will to power, there is no love”. That is, in order to form a genuine connection, one must lower their personal defenses and willingly become vulnerable to the significant other. Thus, the egotistical, manipulative, and domineering have no place in love, for they all damage this foundational trust — both in the loved one and in oneself.
Baidou: In his interview, In Praise of Love, Alain Baidou defines love as “the construction of an identity in difference.” Indeed, connection implies a distinction between two or more parties, a vacancy that must be bridged by some form of construction, yet it is precisely this difference that enables a joint identity in the first place. If both the lover and the beloved were the same person, love would not be as exciting. However, because this newfound, internally perceived identity is formed around the external object — or rather, around the connection between the Two — it is all the more painful when it is lost. Love hurts because we feel a personal loss of identity when the connection is missing. Accordingly, neuroscience has pointed out that the identity of love has a biochemical dimension similar to that of narcotics, we even experience addiction and withdrawal.
Baidou’s concept of love as hard work echoes Nietzsche’s thought in a more positive light; he acknowledges the difficulty in moving beyond one’s own will to power, one’s individualism, to form an interpersonal connection. Because of this difficulty, Baidou observes that in the era of instant gratification, we seek love without risk, “love without the fall,” via the safe distance of dating platforms. Despite all the marketing efforts for these matchmaking services, the contemporary philosopher argues that it is precisely the latent risk in trusting another, the inherent vulnerability arising from the connection, that makes real love so invaluable, so worthwhile, so hard to find… As the age old saying goes, “nothing ventured, nothing gained.”
Baudrillard: Speaking about the Matrix, what can Baudrillard’s insights teach us about love? The connection implied in love can be simulated, but it cannot be faked. That is, one could fall in love with the specter of a person — an ideal, a shadow, a fantasy — over a person. This instance would not make love fake; as Baudrillard points out, “simulating is not pretending.” Whoever falls in hyperreal love feels the exact same emotions as whoever finds the real thing, perhaps even more…
What about people who fake love in order to gain an advantage? Coming back to Jung, power does not belong with love. Although this person’s seduction may induce simulation of love upon another, his/her own love was already non-existent. Within such a character, there might be a love for something — power, money, status, pleasure…— but s/he does not feel a connection with the other person as such. Moreover, following Jung’s view, predation in romance shows an unwillingness to form a loving connection, a fundamental distrust. Unlike Neo, this person would not go to the ends of the Earth to keep whatever semblance of love they have; instead, they would find another, equally (de)valuable, to satisfy their real needs and desires.
Despite the vast literature written on the subject, we can reduce love to a mere word. Still, it is a word loaded with meaning, which Matrix Revolutions attributes to a sense of connection. But is that all there is to love? How should we go about forming or maintaining personal connections? What about their quality? Is there such a thing as a poor connection? Like the cancerous limb, is it better, ethical even, to sever this bad love altogether? Can we ever be sure that we’ve found a real, lasting connection? If so, how? I’ve personally experienced the ardor of betrayal, toxic relationships, and failed love; naturally, these sorts of questions pervade my mind…
I hope you have found something worthy of reflection in this short piece, as we are ultimately responsible for the connections we create and the consequences they beget. As Rama Kandra instills, all we do is tied to our Karma. In effect, we bring our Fate upon ourselves.
