Romantic love vs deep emotional attachment

The argument

This argument holds that what is called love covers at least two distinct states, and that they are different enough in their experience and their effects that no single definition can cover both. The first is romantic love, associated with the feelings, behaviour and science behind the honeymoon period of a relationship. Its signs are physical before they are anything else: butterflies in the stomach, sweaty palms, a high sex drive, and intense feelings of attraction towards the other person. The state is unmistakable while it lasts. The second emerges as the connection between a couple deepens, when love evolves into something closer to an emotional attachment. Its characteristic effect is different in kind rather than in degree: attachment allows a more profound enjoyment of life when that life is shared with the other person. The pleasure is no longer located in the other person as an object of excitement, but in ordinary experience made better by their presence. The second state is also defined partly by the absence of the first's markers. It may not carry the same physical, behavioural and sensational side effects — a couple may be less affectionate and sexual, less forthcoming with gifts, and have fewer intense cravings for one another. Measured against the honeymoon period, that reads as decline; measured on its own terms it is the arrival of something the honeymoon period does not contain. This is the difficulty for anyone seeking a single answer to what love is. A definition built on the first state makes the second look like its failure, and a definition built on the second cannot account for the first. Because love takes forms as different as romantic love and deep emotional attachment, what love is depends on the type of love.

Context

Relationships often begin with romantic love. This love is more physical, intense and short-lived. When this recedes, often a deeper emotional connection is formed. This connection is longer-lasting. Both are forms of love but they feel different from each other. Therefore, they are not the same thing.

Premises

Counter-arguments

There is only one true form of love and that is divine love. All other forms of human love are false. Human love is not real love. It comes from a desire to possess another person. When we seek out human love, we seek to be loved by that human in return, making human love inherently selfish. Divine love, on the other hand, is self-fulfilling - to love God simply because, without expecting anything in return. This pure form of love is the only true love that exists.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Neither of these are true love. They are both selfish mortal forms of love.