Clinical love
I always used to believe that there is no clinical or scientific or objective explanation that can convince me that love is an ordinary man’s myth. I always used to believe that love is an unexplainable power. I used to think that love is everything and thus, can explain everything, no matter how illogical it may be.
But two days ago, I read a short part of M. Scott Peck’s exceptional definition of love. He described it as the "falling down of individual barriers between two people…" Kind of like a merging of two souls, believing that they each had found the one person they can call their other half, the other individual that can complete them, only to find after some time that the other person remains an individual, a different person and thus, cannot be exactly like us. The other person will have personal choices that will be different from ours and the recognition of this will bring about the separation and the falling back of barriers and soon, the loss of the feeling of love. I haven’t explained it well here, I know. (Don’t have much time…)
But still, though this clinical explanation has somehow convinced me for a time, I’ll probably go back to my original assumption of love being the all-glorious, all-powerful, all-explaining force. Because the romantic gene is bred in me. What’s more, my God is love, so that one line explains it all.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"Mountains bow down and the seas will roar… Nothing compares to the promise I have in You…" (Listening to Yahoo Messenger’s Praise and Worship Station)
