The threshold to the infinite definition of love is many. Although many cynics like me, may have thought it impossible, sociologists over the past several decades have been attempting to categorize and quantify the notion of love. Sternberg in 1986 sees love in terms of the interaction among three independent aspects: passion, intimacy (two components of love that many of us need no help in identifying or do I dare say practicing?) and the “C” word that sends many of us rushing to the door faster than the politicians can flip-flop on their policies, COMMITMENT. Yes, I said it. A whisper of the word is all that is needed to make many of us quake in fear. The intensity of each of the three aspects tells us how a relationship can be characterized. According to Sternberg, he defines liking as the type of love resulting from a high degree of intimacy but low on commitment and passion. How many of us are guilty of thinking that this “liking” we feel for someone is something more meaningful? Many times, we bear this ideology and plunge into relationships but only to find it, lack of a better word, stale. When passion is the only component that is strongly felt, infatuation best describes the relationship. Synonymous with adolescence, emotions are charged with testosterone and estrogen. When infatuated, we are thrilled, but not happy, wanting to trust, yet suspicious. There are lingering, nagging doubts about our “partner in infatuation” and their love for us. We’re miserable when they’re away, almost like we’re not complete unless we’re with them. In yet another categorization, Lee in 1973 divided love into six varied styles, each with its own name. Eros is love based on one’s ideal images of their perfect partner. A love that is known in certain circles as the superficial love, it is based on looks and love at first sight that is only skin deep.
Ludus is a playful, teasing, game playing of love where
one invests on keeping their partner guessing...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document