I was wondering over the thought that people somehow are self centered to come to terms with what real love is. Since I didn’t hear the person in question speak on the topic myself, I will restrict my views to a general point of view.
A fleeting glance of the human population at large fails to generate a comforting image, I agree. But the insinuation that the people at large have become so engrossed in their egos that they understand what “love” is seems a bit preposterous.
Love or Care is an essential feeling having implications over the very existence/survival of the human species. While it may seem that world today, is evil and unjustified, but we tend to forget that if taken over a large amount of time, surpassing many lifetimes, one would observe an upwards curve in the tolerance level of the human society.But tolerance on a societal level cant be called love can it?
So then the apologists for human ignorance might say that ‘love’ is an essential feeling of complete submission to someone. It can be a deity, a loved one, a philosophy or anything else. It seems that love in invariably connected to loyalty in one way or another. While the implication of love is itself being loyal.I think that if you somehow come to realize that a person or an institution has not done enough to reciprocate, you might start feeling a little undone by them. And thats where the ‘ego’ comes in. Why ‘I’ wasn’t rewarded or ‘I’ was denied. But then again these are generalizations, and hence they are pretty hard to deal with. Sometimes it may so happen, that continuing with unwarranted affection for someone may be the becoming of our own harm. In that case if its in your own benefit to leave the person/institution, then perhaps why not? After all attachment is the precursor to pain.
“Never pretend to a love which you do not actually feel, for love is not ours to command.” ~Alan Watts