Aphelion

I fucking missed my Statistics class AGAIN.  My phone is the shittiest alarm clock ever.  We have an exam next week that might have gotten moved to this week on account of next week being a holiday and the following week being spring break.  L;AKSJDFLSAKJDFLKSADJF.

There are, by my  observation, two possible ways to interpret love.  One being the common, grandiose definition in which it says that love is this omnipotent and benign type of thing that is capable of all our salvation and also happens to be the most direct route to the elusive happiness. In other words a compilation of things generally associated with the divine. Perhaps.  But it is in my estimation that there is another kind of love or maybe it is the love that we always hear about but it's interpretation becomes increasingly misconstrued through all the vessels it travels through.  When someone says something like, "I will always love you."  There is a part that is innately implied that we don't realize.   I have grown fond of the belief that love isn't this eternal, majestic kind of thing but it's a temporary, potent, and overbearing kind of sensation.  In certain moments, which I believe myself to be whole or happy, I can say that I love.  Now, being with someone you cherish, whether they are your best friend, soul mate, or lover you will undoubtedly share things that you will also love. But to be balanced, there are also the kinds of moments in which you loathe the essence of many things that you would ordinarily hold in high regard.  Love is fleeting.  Now say you are with your dearest counterpart and you say to him/her, "I love you."  This kind of statement has innumerable possible outcomes.  In the moment you said those words you may have meant it. However, your other (in that moment) didn't reciprocate that same feeling.  Disastrous. But it is possible in so many other moments the feeling was mutual.  So, the inferred part of such occasions is in that moment they love you.  Albeit sincere and persuasive there are so many other times in which you may not mean it.  When someone attaches the word "forever" or "always" they insist that in every moment this will be true.  This brings conflict.  Say there is a rough spot in a relationship and this love is this kind of slicked rabbit that even when you manage to grasp it, it escapes leaving behind only the grimy residue.  To catch the hare is impossible by the means we have and so it seems to be perfectly justifiable to give up.  Thus, simply, we do.  Because if there is an easier way, without the burden of blame, we rarely seem to hesitate.   

It is because this love is so fickle and becomes disinterested so quickly it is praised to the highest in attempts to try to entice this thing to take refuge in yourself and what you hold to the highest.

You might ask what about moments or other things that don't involve particulars like people. To me this kind of love follows the same path as the prior.  However, because these things are often well maintained and persistent in their sameness it is, I believe, possible to in practically every moment, to love what it represents.  For all that we love and hold dear is a replicate of what we desire the most.  We are animals.  We are selfish.  We are human.

Now I myself have never been in love (that I know of).  However, I consider myself a keen observer of human nature.  I can objectively ascertain most of my faults, my motives, and my emotions enabling me to, as honestly as our nature permits, project these kinds of cognitive properties on most people.  Although, I leave this argument open just in case the more venerable type of love was to make itself known to me.