Barbara Fredrickson challenges many of the preconceptions we have about love in “Selections from Love 2.0” of the New Humanities Reader. Love is traditionally thought of as being the connection which is shared only with the people closest to you such as, your family or your wife. Fredrickson refutes this and even says that love isn’t “exclusive lasting or unconditional” and dismisses these as wishes that people have about love. In fact, she believes that love is transient. Fredrickson’s belief of love being transitory may challenge the idea of marriage. Love is transitory, while the decision to marry often carries many consequences. She believes that in order for all of us to truly understand love, we shouldn't equate it to these preconceived
…show more content…
Fredrickson uses the word “special bond” instead of love to address that there is a difference between a relationship and love. “Commitments” built around “special bonds” include the commitment to one partner during a marriage or boyfriend/girlfriend relationship as well as many other sacrifices. These commitments happen because of the many moments in which couples experience love. Fredrickson shows this by describing an equation in which “love” equals the many smaller moments in which we experience love and the product of this “love” results in relationships and commitment. Neural coupling can cause couples to realize that love isn’t exclusive to their partner, which can lead to couples reducing their sacrifices in the name of “love”. “Neural coupling” as described by Fredrickson are the moments in which a connection is made between people over positivity. You truly understand and care for another person as your brain expands to include them. This is what “love” is in Barbara’s eyes and not relationships. In fact, this connection can occur even between someone you don’t know. This realization demonstrates that love isn’t specific to only people who know each other …show more content…
Fredrickson, however, has shown this to be false, even citing scientific evidence showing that this connection can be reached by any strangers. In the experiment illustrated by Barbara on page 111, it is proven that the neural coupling can occur with some random person in an airport. By challenging preconceived notions about love itself, Fredrickson may even be challenging the entire concept of marriage itself. What is the point of marriage if love is ephemeral? Marriage today could be altered by recognizing the moments in which there is a lack of positive resonance. If this lack of positive resonance is recognized properly, the amount of divorces may be reduced as well. Since, people would understand that you cannot fall out of love, people would rethink getting a divorce in the first place. This would increase the success rate of marriages. The concept of neural coupling would also make these successful marriages happier by reducing the sacrifices made by each partner. Couples would no longer view sacrifices as being crucial to the success of the marriage. Seeing the body as a verb allows for more openness and room for someone else in your brain. It allows to see someone else’s point of view to allow for the elimination of sacrifice through understanding and low self-esteem during a relationship. Sacrifice which may lead to a low self-esteem is very dangerous
Fredrickson uses the word “special bond” instead of love to address that there is a difference between a relationship and love. “Commitments” built around “special bonds” include the commitment to one partner during a marriage or boyfriend/girlfriend relationship as well as many other sacrifices. These commitments happen because of the many moments in which couples experience love. Fredrickson shows this by describing an equation in which “love” equals the many smaller moments in which we experience love and the product of this “love” results in relationships and commitment. Neural coupling can cause couples to realize that love isn’t exclusive to their partner, which can lead to couples reducing their sacrifices in the name of “love”. “Neural coupling” as described by Fredrickson are the moments in which a connection is made between people over positivity. You truly understand and care for another person as your brain expands to include them. This is what “love” is in Barbara’s eyes and not relationships. In fact, this connection can occur even between someone you don’t know. This realization demonstrates that love isn’t specific to only people who know each other …show more content…
Fredrickson, however, has shown this to be false, even citing scientific evidence showing that this connection can be reached by any strangers. In the experiment illustrated by Barbara on page 111, it is proven that the neural coupling can occur with some random person in an airport. By challenging preconceived notions about love itself, Fredrickson may even be challenging the entire concept of marriage itself. What is the point of marriage if love is ephemeral? Marriage today could be altered by recognizing the moments in which there is a lack of positive resonance. If this lack of positive resonance is recognized properly, the amount of divorces may be reduced as well. Since, people would understand that you cannot fall out of love, people would rethink getting a divorce in the first place. This would increase the success rate of marriages. The concept of neural coupling would also make these successful marriages happier by reducing the sacrifices made by each partner. Couples would no longer view sacrifices as being crucial to the success of the marriage. Seeing the body as a verb allows for more openness and room for someone else in your brain. It allows to see someone else’s point of view to allow for the elimination of sacrifice through understanding and low self-esteem during a relationship. Sacrifice which may lead to a low self-esteem is very dangerous