A simple answer to the question, "What is love?"

I recently watched a Netflix documentary in which a journalist asks spiritual leaders from diverse backgrounds "the deeper questions". The answers were diverse, but each originated from a specific religious narrative. Even when a religious leader was trying to be bigger than their own religion by excluding specific doctrine, it still seemed that the most truthful answers were missed. It was as if these leaders couldn't see the obvious because their minds were so bogged down by religious narratives created from centuries of assumptions, fictions, and error tangents.

While the documentary was disappointing, it inspired me to answer a few of the questions myself. Here is a definition of the word "love" in answer to the question, "What is love?" for consideration:

It's a word. Like many words, it can mean different things to many people, different things to many situations, and different things to even just one person. The word, even in its deepest use refers to a cacophony of emotions, social responsibilities, and other psychological factors. This thing that the word "love" represents, is less concrete than what is communicated by words like "table" or "anger".

Combine instinctual attraction with respect, obligation, personal history, morals, lust, with knowing oneself, pheromones, selfishness, self-definition, opinions of relationships-- and a type of definition for the word evolves for each person. What the word describes exists in many different combinations and amounts based on education, experience, propensity, and the type of person, object, or behavior one "loves".

Because there are so many reasons and combinations of reasons to feel strongly positive about something or someone, it's easier just to use the word "love" than to analyze these reasons and figure out what's going on. It's a shortcut of sorts. The "magic" we feel surrounding love doesn't come from what it is, but from the fact that it isn't anything we can (or are willing to because of the difficulty) concretely identify. We submit to not knowing, and let it remain bigger than us.

Love is nothing, and there isn't anything wrong with this! Just because the emperor doesn't have any clothes doesn't mean we can't appreciate his natural form or that he isn't a functional leader we can respect. The things we are referring to when we use the word "love" as a shortcut, are what is important. Further, being "in love" and giving in to things we might not be able to completely understand is part of enjoying life. Just as our brains filter out stimuli to allow us to focus and keep from being overwhelmed, our language (sometimes) functions the same. When you whisper "I love you" to a significant other, it is a sweet nothing of sorts, but a sweet nothing that taps into our human attraction to the unknown, the spirit, and the empty.

More on this next post...

Going full cyborg

I recently bought a pair of wireless headphones. I can leave my cell phone or get up from the computer and walk around the apartment without having to remove the headphones or stop what I'm listening to. This slight increase in convenience doesn't seem like a big deal, but I've come to define these headphones by more than their lack of cord. They are my first step towards becoming a cyborg. In the near future Google Glass and others similar will only increase this cyborgity.

A cyborg is usually defined as an organism that has enhanced abilities due to built-in technology. Yes, headphones and Glass aren't built-in, but for all functional purposes, they may as well be. Disregarding medical and surgical details, the difference to the end user between headphones with a cord and that without are more numerous than the difference between wireless headphones and an ear implant. It's all about the cord and the control mechanism. By not being tied to a computer which is stuck on a table or plugged into a wall, the headphones become a part of me as much as my clothes or a tooth filling.

The image of cyborgs being human flesh grafted with steel causes us to miss the reality of cyborgs that exist now. Research is being done on brain control of foreign objects, but in the meantime, Google Glass and similar devices will push us towards being a different type of cyborg. Putting computers between the world and someone's perception of it, and allowing remote control of computers is more than enough.

Currently, I use hard disks for much of my long-term memory. I store the memories of trips, events, people, and more in the form of pictures, sounds, and writing. Because I know these memories are stored and easily accessible, I spend less time maintaining them than I would otherwise. My memory is poor, but I'm not afraid about forgetting because I have the disks. Something cataclysmic could occur to destroy these disks, but this is no different than the risk to the brain.

Like the wireless headphones, eventually devices will create a direct link from computer cloud memory to an attached device and this will further convince my brain to rely on an external device and memory. Growing up I dreamed of having a photographic memory. Before long, it will be as if I do.

Interesting: 3 Articles for self improvement

Keeping up with your 2013 New Year's resolutions? Here are a few more inspirations for self improvement:

1. Psychology Today: Relationship between openness and intellectual ability

"People who are high on Openness to experience are generally receptive to entertaining new and challenging facets of cultural life, as well as personal thoughts and emotions (McCrae & Costa, 2003), and studies have reported a positive relationship between Openness to experience and performance on tests of intelligence (Ackerman & Heggestad, 1997; Gignac, Stough, & Loukomitis, 2004). Specifically, in a meta-analysis of studies that examined relationships between personality and intelligence, Ackerman and Heggestad (1997) found Openness correlated positively with both general intelligence (r = .33) and crystallized intelligence (r = .30). Gignac, Stough, and Loukomitis (2004) similarly reported a positive correlation between Openness and general intelligence (r = .43)."

2. Lifehacker: Create a Life Plan by Answering Three Questions

1. How do you want to be remembered—especially by the key people and groups in your life?
2. What matters most to you? Hyatt uses a metaphor of "life accounts" to list your priorities (e.g., spiritual, family, career).
3. How can you get from here to where you want to be? Envision your future and compare it to your current reality, then create an action list to get you moving towards you goals.

3. NY Times: The Science and Art of Listening

"Hearing is a vastly underrated sense. We tend to think of the world as a place that we see, interacting with things and people based on how they look. Studies have shown that conscious thought takes place at about the same rate as visual recognition, requiring a significant fraction of a second per event. But hearing is a quantitatively faster sense. While it might take you a full second to notice something out of the corner of your eye, turn your head toward it, recognize it and respond to it, the same reaction to a new or sudden sound happens at least 10 times as fast"

Videos: Symphony of Science

Previously, a Symphony of Science video inspired me to make this comparison between Carl Sagan and Saw III. A few more of my favorites from Symphony of Science:

Saw III, Carl Sagan, and self-extermination

I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I watched the first three Saw movies last week. My wife and I had borrowed the movies for Halloween, but never got around to watching. I finished all three with mild amusement. The plot twists and creative torture devices are fun, but I'd rather be watching Cloud Atlas.

One thing I did like, and only came to fully appreciate after seeing the following video from Symphony of Science, was the movie premise: a killer who creates tests in which victims must kill themselves due to their failure to overcome their own faults. This premise was perfected in the third movie when the Jigsaw Killer sets up a game to test his pupil whose inability to overcome her emotion and blood-lust leads to her death. Here is a clip if you need a reminder.

A similar attitude is reflected by Carl Sagan in the Symphony of Science video in the line, "If we do not destroy ourselves we will one day venture to the stars." I believe this in both a literal and metaphorical sense. Humans are extremely powerful. The faster we move past the faults practiced by the weakest and most selfish of us, the more we will achieve. The more we succumb the more likely we are to create a hell similar to that depicted in Saw (think atrocities resulting from religious and political hate).