955718723

Philosophy of Love

Essay II

How might eros and agape co-exist together in a real love relationship?

Draw from the authors for critique and support.

Introduction

In order to see how eros and agape can co-exist together in a real love relationship, I will first look at the similarities and differences between agape and eros. I will then try to determine whether the differences between agape and eros can be reconciled. I will try to determine whether the similarities between the two are enough to overcome their differences, so that if the two were to co-exist in a real love relationship, a form of love intermediate between the two would result. If the differences between the two are so great as to make them mutually exclusive, I will conclude that they cannot co-exist together in a real love relationship.

Agape love is spontaneous and unmotivated. Perhaps more than any other characteristic, being spontaneous and unmotivated defines Agape love. As Anders

Nygren, points out, this is the most striking feature of God's love as Jesus presents it. In contrast, Eros is acquisitive love, a desire, a longing, a striving. For one to have eros, he must feel a need and recognize a value in the object of his love that can meet this need. Eros exists because of the perceived value of its object whereas agape is indifferent to value. The question which is central to this essay is whether one can love a person because of the value they perceive in them (eros) and at the same time have a different kind of love for them which is indifferent to the value they perceive in them. This may at first sound like a contradiction but it doesn't have to be, a reconciliation may be possible. If one had agape love for someone but over and above this recognized and desired a value in the beloved that would meet his needs, he can be said to have both agape and eros for the same person. If the value he recognized in his beloved were to cease to exist, his eros would cease but the agape would remain. Similarly, if, his agape love ceased, he would still be cognizant of the value in his beloved that could meet his needs and his eros would remain. From this perspective, eros and agape can co-exist in a real love relationship in different dimensions. If eros and agape were to exist in a real love relationship in this manner they would need to be independent of each other.

Agape is creative. God does not love that which is already in itself worthy of love, but on the contrary, that which in itself has no worth acquires worth just by becoming the object of God's love. If one already recognizes value in his beloved and has eros for him/her, it is possible for one to come to love their beloved not only for the value recognized in them, but regardless of their value. It is important to note that such love would not supersede the eros that one previously had but would co-exist with it in parallel. Eros is egocentric love, a form of self assertion.

Agape is unselfish love, it “seeketh not it's own,” it gives itself away.

Theoretically, it is possible for one to seek both his own good and the good of another and therefore have agape and eros for his beloved. However in the context of a real love relationship this presents problems. Being human, one's resources are limited and an individual must choose whether to use his resources for their own good or for the good of their beloved. Furthermore, there may be times when one's good is diametrically opposed to the good of one's beloved. If I am hungry and my beloved is hungry, I must choose whether to eat the food I find or use it to feed my beloved. To the extend that I choose to feed my beloved, I choose to remain hungry.

Given the differences between eros and agape, how would the two co-exist in a real love relationship? Since eros is centered on the value that one perceives in their beloved but agape is indifferent to this value, if the two types of love are to exist in the same real love relationship, one would have to love their beloved both because of and regardless of the value they perceive in them. One aspect of such love would exist because of the value one sees in their beloved but another aspect of this love would exist independent of the value of one's beloved. A person who has both eros and agape for their beloved would desire and long for their beloved but simultaneously have an unmotivated spontaneous love for their beloved.

While discussing the possibility of eros and agape existing in the same love relationship it is necessary to clarify what exactly we mean by love. Taking the different definitions of love that we have come across from different authors, It is possible to address the question of eros and agape co-existing in a relationship more concretely. Plato considers love to be a feeling. If both agape and eros are feelings, are they the same feeling? If they are the same feeling but aroused for different reasons they can still co-exist in the same relationship. I can have a love feeling for you aroused in me spontaneously, and have that feeling intensified because of the value that I perceive in you. If eros and agape are different feelings, it is easier to imagine them co-existing in the same relationship, furthermore, regarding eros and agape as different feelings is more consistent with the great differences that we have seen between them. Peck considers love to be the will to extend oneself for the spiritual growth of another. Can I have the will to extend myself for the spiritual growth of another spontaneously but also because of the value I perceive in them? The two can build on one another. I can spontaneously have the will to extend myself for the growth of another and have that will intensified because of the value that I perceive in them. Since peck considers will to be desire of sufficient intensity that it leads to action, a case in which eros and agape co-exist in the same relationship would be one in which a person extends themselves spontaneously for the spiritual growth of another but all the more because of the value perceived in the other.

Agape is unselfish, eros is selfish. If I have both agape and eros for a person it would mean that I want them for my own selfish reasons but I also wish them well.

If agape and eros exist to a comparable extent in the same relationship, the result is philia, a form of love in which a person loves another spontaneously but only to the extent that they also love them selfishly, i.e. For the value perceived in them.

I have looked at eros and agape co-existing in a real love relationship from the perspective of an individual having both agape and eros for another individual.

However, eros and agape can also exist in a relationship such that one individual has eros and the other has agape. An individual can love another spontaneously, but the other loves them back because of the value they perceive in them.

Theoretically there is no reason why such a relationship cannot exist and the best example of such a relationship is the relationship between man and God. The relationship between man and God is perhaps the most interesting to analyze while considering agape and eros co-existing in the same love relationship. Agape is the initiator of fellowship with God. Eros is man's way to the divine. From plato's definition of eros God cannot have eros because there is no value he perceives outside himself that could meet his needs since he does not have any needs. We can safely conclude that in this relationship God would have agape love for man.

Man on the other hand is in precisely the opposite position of God. All his needs can be met by the infinite value that he perceives in God. It is then possible that man will have eros for the divine in this relationship.

Although agape and eros have different characteristics, there appears to be no reason why the two cannot co-exist in a real love relationship. The differences between eros and agape are not of the type that cancel each other out. On the contrary, eros and agape appear to exist on different planes and it is not necessary for their similarities to outweigh their differences for them to co-exist in a relationship. The differences between eros and agape need not be reconciled for us to conclude that the two can co-exist precisely because eros and agape are independent and do not interfere with each other.