Love as Intimate Identification

Bennett W. Helm
{"title":"Love as Intimate Identification","authors":"Bennett W. Helm","doi":"10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199567898.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is widely acknowledged that love is a distinctively intimate form of concern in which we in some sense identify with our beloveds; it is common, moreover, to construe such identification in terms of the lover’s taking on the interests of the beloved. From this starting point, Harry Frankfurt argues that the paradigm form of love is that between parents and infants or young children. I think this is mistaken: the kind of loving attitude or relationship we can have towards or with young children is distinct in kind from that which we can have towards adult persons, as is revealed by reflection on the depth of love and its phenomenology. My aim is to present an alternative conception of the sort of distinctively intimate identification at issue in love, arguing that this account makes better sense of love and our experience of love. Harry Frankfurt claims that the paradigm form of love is that between parents and infants or young children. By contrast, I think infants and young children are not proper objects of love at all—at least not in the sense of “love” that applies to love among adult persons. Ultimately the point is that the sort of attitude or relationship we can have towards or with infants is distinct in kind from the sort of attitude or relationship we can have towards adult persons, and so it is best in our theorizing about these attitudes to call them different things. If only one of these forms of attitude has a claim to be called “love”, I submit it is our attitude towards adults, not that towards infants, which we might instead call “care” or “affection.” Why should we think that love of adults and care of infants are distinct in kind? I shall start by considering Frankfurt’s account of love in more detail, arguing that it leads to an unacceptable account of the nature of intimacy involved in love as well as our experience of love. In arguing for an alternative account of love and its phenomenology, I shall conclude that the kind of love that applies to adults cannot apply to infants as well. 1. Frankfurt and Identification To love someone is to care about him in a certain way. Part of what we need to understand is precisely what that way is and how it differs from other ways in which we might care for someone, such as compassionate concern for disaster 2 Philosophic Exchange, Vol. 40 [2010], No. 1, Art. 2 http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/phil_ex/vol40/iss1/2","PeriodicalId":82309,"journal":{"name":"Philosophic exchange","volume":"40 1","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophic exchange","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199567898.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

It is widely acknowledged that love is a distinctively intimate form of concern in which we in some sense identify with our beloveds; it is common, moreover, to construe such identification in terms of the lover’s taking on the interests of the beloved. From this starting point, Harry Frankfurt argues that the paradigm form of love is that between parents and infants or young children. I think this is mistaken: the kind of loving attitude or relationship we can have towards or with young children is distinct in kind from that which we can have towards adult persons, as is revealed by reflection on the depth of love and its phenomenology. My aim is to present an alternative conception of the sort of distinctively intimate identification at issue in love, arguing that this account makes better sense of love and our experience of love. Harry Frankfurt claims that the paradigm form of love is that between parents and infants or young children. By contrast, I think infants and young children are not proper objects of love at all—at least not in the sense of “love” that applies to love among adult persons. Ultimately the point is that the sort of attitude or relationship we can have towards or with infants is distinct in kind from the sort of attitude or relationship we can have towards adult persons, and so it is best in our theorizing about these attitudes to call them different things. If only one of these forms of attitude has a claim to be called “love”, I submit it is our attitude towards adults, not that towards infants, which we might instead call “care” or “affection.” Why should we think that love of adults and care of infants are distinct in kind? I shall start by considering Frankfurt’s account of love in more detail, arguing that it leads to an unacceptable account of the nature of intimacy involved in love as well as our experience of love. In arguing for an alternative account of love and its phenomenology, I shall conclude that the kind of love that applies to adults cannot apply to infants as well. 1. Frankfurt and Identification To love someone is to care about him in a certain way. Part of what we need to understand is precisely what that way is and how it differs from other ways in which we might care for someone, such as compassionate concern for disaster 2 Philosophic Exchange, Vol. 40 [2010], No. 1, Art. 2 http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/phil_ex/vol40/iss1/2
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
爱是亲密的认同
人们普遍认为,爱是一种特别亲密的关心形式,我们在某种意义上认同我们所爱的人;此外,从爱人对被爱之人的兴趣来解释这种认同是很常见的。从这个出发点出发,Harry Frankfurt认为爱的范式形式是父母与婴儿或幼儿之间的爱。我认为这是错误的:我们对幼儿的爱的态度或关系与我们对成年人的爱的态度或关系是截然不同的,正如对爱的深度及其现象学的反思所揭示的那样。我的目的是提出另一种关于爱的独特亲密认同的概念,认为这种解释能更好地理解爱和我们对爱的体验。哈里·法兰克福声称,爱的范式形式是父母与婴儿或幼儿之间的爱。相比之下,我认为婴幼儿根本不是爱的合适对象——至少不是适用于成年人之间的爱的“爱”的意义上的爱。归根结底,我们对婴儿的态度或关系与我们对成年人的态度或关系在本质上是不同的,所以在我们对这些态度进行理论化的时候,最好把它们叫做不同的东西。如果这些态度中只有一种可以被称为“爱”的话,我认为那就是我们对成年人的态度,而不是对婴儿的态度,我们可以称之为“关心”或“感情”。为什么我们要认为对成年人的爱和对婴儿的照顾是截然不同的呢?我将从更详细地考虑法兰克福对爱的描述开始,认为它导致了一种不可接受的关于爱中涉及的亲密本质的描述,以及我们对爱的体验。在论证爱及其现象学的另一种解释时,我将得出结论:适用于成年人的那种爱,不可能同样适用于婴儿。1. 爱一个人,就是用某种方式去关心他。我们需要了解的部分内容是,这种方式究竟是什么,以及它与我们可能关心某人的其他方式有何不同,例如对灾难的同情关怀2《哲学交流》,Vol. 40 [2010], No. 1, Art. 2 http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/phil_ex/vol40/iss1/2
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Love as Intimate Identification Gandhi, Newton, and the Enlightenment The Plurality of Consciousness Future Genders? Future Races? The Scope of Motivation and the Basis of Practical Reason
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1