Love this word, different people look at it will have different associations, or lingering pity, or liver and intestines, although the understanding is different, but almost no one denies its existence. We use this word to express an emotion for our lovers, for our relatives, for our friends, for our country, and even for the world.
But when asked what love really is, the person asked will often start searching for evidence of memory in a confused way, because it is not as visible and tangible as an apple, nor is it as untouchable and sometimes invisible as the moon, but we know where it is. Love, maybe some people will say that it is the kind of emotion that I want to share with someone when I have an apple, maybe some people will say that we will watch the first snow together, or tell each other that today's moonlight is beautiful.
Unfortunately, even if we can find more equivalents, even the diamond that symbolizes love cannot make everyone identify "this is love". So without a real form, does love therefore not exist?
From another point of view, asking a person whether a "state" exists will definitely get an answer without hesitation. But if you ask carefully, what is the country? Is it the map full of flowers and greenery? Is it a coastline border? Is it a landmark of the capital? Or is it one of those citizens struggling to survive? It can be said that none of them are countries, but it can also be said that some of them represent countries. The state does not have an entity counterpart, and we constantly give it connotation and extension, so that people have a common imagination on the word.
So does a ghost that also has no physical counterpart exist? This question is asked to different people, and it is conceivable that it will be difficult to get a consistent and affirmative answer. In the realm of science, people will say that "ghosts" do not exist. But it is also an imaginary thing, we can give maps, coastlines, national sentiments, capital symbols to the country, and claim that the country exists, so why can't we give a dark, shadow-like thing to the ghost, so as to declare that the ghost also exists?
It can be seen that the existence of a concept without an entity counterpart does not depend on the form of this giving and claiming, but more fundamentally on the content substance of the endowment.
To put it simply, although we think that the state is a real thing, many times we will say in an analogous way that the state is the mother, the state is like a person, and the internal organs are operating organically, but we all know that the country itself will not move, and there will not be a country that really "stands up" or walks on the Pacific Ocean, and the dynamic behind it is all people.
When it comes to ghosts, it is different, those who claim to have ghosts, in addition to giving ghosts a form, more critically give them the ability to act, and even have the ability to think independently, that is, ghosts have human characteristics. In the same way, those Buddhas, gods, and immortals, everything that can be embodied and physically thought, are endowed with agency. In most cases, this kind of construction will be denied by science.
In contrast, it is easier to understand. Concepts that have no corresponding entity, that is, concepts that humans have constructed using imagination, exist when we simply specify what it is and can be recognized by the majority. But if we declare, in addition to specifying "what," we declare that it "can be," that is, that the concept has human agency, this existence is false.
For example, we can construct the concept of an apple kingdom, saying that all the apples in the world constitute an apple kingdom, and this concept can be said to exist as long as most people recognize it. But if we are also going to say that the Apple Kingdom will be angry and will attack human society, this becomes nonsense, a pure illusion, which cannot be measured by existence.
Having said so much, back to love itself. The first thing to confirm is that "love has no flesh", that love is not an object, that it has no direct counterpart in the real world. Like the state and the ghost, it is the product of the construction of human thought.
So does love exist? It exists, or does not exist, and this has to do with the problem just mentioned.
That is, when we imagine what love is, love exists. Love is the flower that blooms at the beginning of spring, the bright moon in autumn, the walk in the first snow, the snuggle in the heavy rain, and we can give love a lot of things like the connotation of the country, and declare that love exists, which no one will object to.
But when we imagine what love can do, love doesn't exist. There is a lyric "love can keep us alive", love can make people survive, if this is considered a rhetoric is no problem, but if you really think that there is a kind of love, can carry this magic, it is magic. Love can't keep people together, love can't keep people going on for a long time, love can't maintain relationships between people, love can't do anything.
Perhaps some people will object, saying that it is precisely because of love that some people insist on living, and it is also because of love that a couple grows old in vain. This is probably the biggest misconception about love in the world.
For example, if we say "time management", can we really manage time? Leaving aside the complex philosophical and physical question of whether time exists. When people say time management, they don't mean to manage real time, let some time be faster, some time slower, let some days be more than 24 hours, etc., they are just talking about managing their own time, so that they can do something in an orderly manner in a fixed time.
So in retrospect, it's not what love can do, it's essentially what people can do. A descriptive, storytelling, reminiscent love exists, or rather, those are proofs of love's existence. But a kind of fairytale, dynamic love does not exist.
Or to use another lyric, "Love is a belief," just as we can't say that Almighty God must exist, but we can believe in God and do things under that faith. Love is the same, we can't say that there is a being that can change all love, but we can try to change something in the name of love.
Those who think that I love Him and He loves Me, and that the love between us will keep us going to the end, is the same as believing in the existence of God, that God will guarantee me to live, and that even if I do nothing, I will be able to eat and dress and warm.
Love is not a real being with substance, love is nothing more than a construct. Although the goal of the construction is to expect people to believe, its essence is to have faith in advance, and at the same time to use imagination to create action under faith.
The love before a couple did not fall from the sky, but in the interaction, jointly constructed and confirmed. They use the proofs of love that others have created in civilization, the words, as the materials for building the love between them, and use these materials to carefully construct the word love that belongs to them.
One or both of them believes in the love between them, and uses creativity to sketch a blueprint for the love between them, and then uses those building materials to finally build a temple of love exclusive to each other.
If there is really love, it is also unique, and in every relationship there is a unique building of love that belongs to that relationship, which is the proof that love once existed.
And when people feel that love is no longer there, it is not that love is gone, but they no longer believe in love, and at the same time they have lost their imagination about this love, and the skeleton of the building of love has completely collapsed, even if there is those past, those building materials that are used as proof, they are just ruins.
More specifically, in the love relationship between men and women, in most cases, although men take the initiative, it is on the female side that the control of love is spoken of. Men in love, are blind, have no imagination and creativity. Women are the ones who paint the blueprint for love, and men are just making some proof of love.
Therefore, in many marriages, after the fresh period, men tend to behave plainly and needlessly, but they can be sustained. But when women are disappointed in love and intend to destroy the building, marriage comes to an end. Because there is no female imagination as the framework of love, no amount of evidence of love is only a fragment of memory.
Maybe in a good love relationship, both partners are architects and builders. But as most people say, relationships and marriage need to be managed. But there are also people who want to operate but can't get out of the way, the problem is that many people are just creating some evidence of love, but they are not creating a blueprint for love at the top.
As Plato said, all real things have a perfect idea, and real things are only the embodiment of ideas. Love is like this, and the more perfect the idea of love, the more wonderful the proof of true love. But the idea of love is not natural, not universal, not universal. The idea of love is a relationship in which both parties create in their minds, which is the foundation and skeleton of the love skyscraper forged by imagination.
So how do you build love? Or to build the concept of love and lay a good foundation for love?
Some people like to create surprises in love, some people like to enjoy romance, some people like to create memories, but these without common love beliefs, they are just fragments. Behind these, there must be a strong imagination, in communication and getting along, to create a common understanding of love between the two parties, even if it is different from others, even extreme, but in such a relationship, it is stable, and constantly given more connotations, and add more evidence of recollection in addition to this.
Going back and asking whether Ai Cun exists or not seems a bit redundant. Love, like life, exists through experience, but there is no unified answer, just as why people live, no one can give an accurate answer on behalf of others. Evidence of love exists in human history and the future, but the idea of love exists in every loving relationship, a wonderful thing that people independently construct and create. It doesn't matter what love is, it doesn't matter what love can do, the key is that a person can know the love they want and what they should do in that love.