"The general phenomenon of love encompasses romantic love, the love of a parent for a child, love of one 's country, and more." This statement can be found in Robert Nozicks 's article, Love 's Bond. Robert Nozick has some great points he makes in his article. He explains what romantic love is; for instance he defines it as "wanting to form a we with a particular person and also wanting the other person to feel the same way." He gives many explanations on why this definition of romantic love is correct; however, I will only focus on how he explains a "we" to become a new entity or a new identity; furthermore, I will not explain his view on friendship, marriage, and loving more than one person at a time be it isn 't that important to the deffiniton.
…show more content…
However, characteristics seem to be conditional because they seem to change with age as well as with different situations you are put into. Characteristics change but we don’t trade up or stop loving the person. Nozick explains not wanting to trade up the "we" when the characteristics change by economics because it would be a large investment to trade up for both time, energy and money. For instance, wanting to trade up may take a lot of energy, but putting that energy into the current relationship seems better because a new relationship causes for …show more content…
The widow may still love the person however, they can not officially form a "we" anymore because the other person is gone. After all I believe Nozick would believe this is still wanting to form a "we" with that particular person even though they are have passed away because you will meet that particular person again in a better place. Therefore, the widow or widower can still romantically love their significant other that passed away.
In conclusion, Robert Nozick, I believe is one the right track on defining romantic love because I do believe people have a desire to form a "we" with a particular person when they are romantically in love. For instance, when we are in love with someone we acquire a new entity or identity; we view the couple as one, not separate.; therefore, they are a "we" together. Concluding, Nozick took on an enormous task on defining love because it is not the most simplest explanations to explain; however, he tackled it and was decently successful at defining
However, characteristics seem to be conditional because they seem to change with age as well as with different situations you are put into. Characteristics change but we don’t trade up or stop loving the person. Nozick explains not wanting to trade up the "we" when the characteristics change by economics because it would be a large investment to trade up for both time, energy and money. For instance, wanting to trade up may take a lot of energy, but putting that energy into the current relationship seems better because a new relationship causes for …show more content…
The widow may still love the person however, they can not officially form a "we" anymore because the other person is gone. After all I believe Nozick would believe this is still wanting to form a "we" with that particular person even though they are have passed away because you will meet that particular person again in a better place. Therefore, the widow or widower can still romantically love their significant other that passed away.
In conclusion, Robert Nozick, I believe is one the right track on defining romantic love because I do believe people have a desire to form a "we" with a particular person when they are romantically in love. For instance, when we are in love with someone we acquire a new entity or identity; we view the couple as one, not separate.; therefore, they are a "we" together. Concluding, Nozick took on an enormous task on defining love because it is not the most simplest explanations to explain; however, he tackled it and was decently successful at defining