Recently, my roommate broke up with his girlfriend. What was once a lovey-dovey, inseparable couple suddenly separated just like that. This inevitably made me start thinking about some questions I hadn’t carefully considered before: What ultimately determines romance and marriage?
I think that today, when free love has replaced arranged marriage and taken the dominant position, whether a man and woman can come together still depends on whether their views on love match. So what exactly are views on love? What influences them? And how do they affect people’s emotional lives? After spending considerable time on this, I came to my own conclusions. Philosophy truly deserves to be called the highest guiding discipline - any problem, when traced to its source, falls into the realm of philosophy.
I believe that when discussing love, we must first clarify one point: romance and marriage are two different stages of human emotional life. Some people, when dealing with these issues, always separate romance from marriage, thinking romance is romance and marriage is marriage. Of course, everyone has their own viewpoints, and this cannot be forced. My viewpoint, borrowing a phrase: all romance not aimed at marriage is just playing around. Therefore, when considering views on love, I view romance and marriage as one entity, because: romance destined to have no marriage is a waste of both parties’ youth.
So speaking of love, what exactly is love? The modern definition of love is: the most sincere admiration formed in each other’s hearts by two people based on certain material conditions and common life ideals, and the strongest, most stable, most devoted emotion of desiring the other to become their lifelong companion. This definition is good: it has both genus and specific differences, but it still doesn’t reveal the most fundamental thing: what is emotion? Different people have different views on this question. However, in Baidu Encyclopedia’s entry on love, I found this sentence:
Traditional views hold that human love and sexual desire reach their peak in the early stages of establishing emotional relationships, then gradually fade. The romantic state of couples being inseparable and infatuated begins to fade within 15 months of their relationship and has disappeared after 10 years.
This means that in a complete emotional relationship, the ultimate result of the evolution from romance to marriage is that this relationship is maintained by responsibility. Combining these viewpoints, my understanding of love is:
The strong, stable, devoted sense of responsibility generated by two people based on certain material conditions and common life ideals throughout the entire process from initial attraction to death or divorce.
Perhaps this logical reasoning is not very rigorous, but I personally think it’s reasonable to categorize love as a type of responsibility. This love here is love in the broad sense, including the marriage part. So according to this definition, is love determined by common life ideals and certain material conditions? Not enough. In my view, it should be further extended:
Love is determined by the following three factors: both parties’ three views (worldview, life view, values), methodology, and material foundation.
In the romance stage, the most important factor determining whether two people can be together is the compatibility of their three views, which is the decisive factor of love. Methodology is determined by worldview - what kind of worldview leads to what kind of methodology. This saying is true, but these things sometimes play very important roles in relationships, so I propose listing them separately. What I mean here is methodology in the narrow sense, which can be understood as methods and means used to understand and transform emotions. As for marriage, what needs to be considered is often not just spiritual compatibility, but also matching material foundations. The saying “matching social status” has extremely strong practical significance for marriage. Therefore, material foundation will also be a major determining factor of love. The importance of these three factors is: three views, methodology, material foundation. Overall, the relationship should be as shown in the figure below.
1. Worldview, Life View, Values#
A person’s worldview, values, and life view are the most important markers of an individual, encompassing almost all guiding principles for your behavior. Is the world a material entity or spiritual reflection? What is the purpose of life? What are ideals? What is good? What is evil? What is beautiful? What is ugly? What is justice? What is evil? What should be done and what shouldn’t? Types of people you like? The value weight of various things in your heart? The answers to all these questions constitute a person’s three views. Perhaps you don’t have clear answers to many questions yourself, but when making any decisions, these things will subtly influence your choices. Therefore, in love, the decisive role is played by the three views. High compatibility of three views means both parties are very in sync, the so-called “telepathic connection,” or having common life ideals. If three views have low compatibility, then there’s no chemistry, no feeling, unable to connect in conversation.
And compatibility also has levels. The highest level is soulmate-level compatibility, where both parties’ cognition is completely synchronized. What is destiny? This is destiny, this is love at first sight. No need for long discussions - a keyword or even a glance can let the other know your thoughts. Recognition of all things, even thinking processes, are extremely similar. Having such a soulmate in life is enough, but soulmates are hard to find - completely compatible people are really too difficult to find. More often, there are always more or less differences between people’s three views. And romance is such a process: both parties continuously adapt, accommodate, and match their three views with each other. Seeking common ground while reserving differences is the main theme of this stage. Both parties must constantly change themselves according to the other’s three views. This is like a key opening a lock - if they match completely, the lock naturally opens with one turn. Sometimes, the key and lock don’t match, which requires change and adjustment. If the shape difference is large, even after adjustment is complete, both will be scarred. Only when adjustment reaches a certain level, like the lock can barely open, can one enter the hall of marriage.
But adjustment won’t always be smooth sailing: change is bilateral, so sometimes there are situations where one party is unwilling to change, while the other doesn’t have the ability to change much to accommodate the unwilling party. Or this situation: everyone’s three views have a bottom line - what can be changed and what absolutely cannot be touched. When the gap is too large and changes too much, there’s always a time when bottom lines are touched. Or both parties change too slowly, and the adjustment takes too long. When such situations occur, it often means the end of romance. Love is a process of dedication, and responsibility needs to be shared by both parties.
According to this theory, the strategy of love is determined by such a slider: one end is: emphasize selection, finding someone who matches you, confirming high compatibility before starting love. The other end is: emphasize adjustment, deciding to adjust with her regardless of the gap. People must choose a balance point on this slider. The adjustment here is adjustment of three views, so we can’t say which is good and which is bad. But my personal choice leans toward emphasizing selection.
From this perspective, what determines love is undoubtedly the matching degree of two people’s worldview, life view, and values.
2. Methodology#
Methodology is our general method of understanding and transforming the world, the way and method people use to observe things and handle problems. Here we narrow the scope, changing “world” to “love.” The reason for listing it separately is simple: even if two people’s three views match well, improper handling methods can still cause love to die prematurely. For example, when a couple has disagreement when buying furniture - say the man is a rational type pursuing practicality, favoring something powerful but ugly, while the woman is very emotional, choosing something gorgeous but single-function (well, this is the influence that incompatible three views often bring!). So how should both parties handle this? Choose to fight to the end? Choose compromise? Or should one party choose tolerance, abandoning their principles to temporarily accommodate the other? Well, like this, when disagreements arise due to differences in three views, it’s time for methodology to work. Persistence in beliefs is unconditional, but actual behavior needs strength as guarantee. I really appreciate this saying. Sometimes, some methods indeed deviate from what you want, but their effects are indeed very good. Temporary compromise often works better than immediate fierce collision and adjustment.
Methodology is a large category with many types: sweet words, catering to preferences - I can’t list them all. But one very practical method I advocate is tolerance. Tolerance is a very great virtue. If everyone had this virtue, there wouldn’t be so many cruel things happening. Therefore, tolerance is not something everyone is born with, so we need to cultivate this character ourselves. Tolerance is like a layer of lubricant, reducing some bumps during the adjustment process. Why hold grudges over the other’s small mistakes? To err is human - when misunderstandings occur, rational thinking should dominate your brain. Think about how to solve problems rather than how to retaliate or demand apologies. Facing these setbacks with a tolerant attitude can make you live more happily. But remember, no matter how well methods and means are used, they can’t compare to solid compatibility.
3. Material Foundation#
Material foundation doesn’t play a big role in the romance stage. If it plays a big role, are you looking for gold-diggers? That would blaspheme the word romance. Material foundation mainly plays a decisive role in marriage. As Marx said: economic base determines superstructure. For a happy and fulfilling marriage, material foundation is indispensable. First, material foundation includes both parties’ family environment, growth environment, living environment, etc. This is important because it directly affects the establishment of people’s three views, though this isn’t absolute - through education, people’s three views can be reshaped. Theory is hard to explain, examples are easier.
First, let’s talk about material foundation in terms of family education. For instance, if your parents are all college graduates, while her parents are all farmers (no disrespect to farmers intended here). Then the family education received and values would definitely not be on the same level. Then huge problems would appear in married life. Huge problems. Like children’s education, living habits, etc.
More representative is material foundation in terms of growth environment. North-south differences. Objectively speaking, statistically, southern women tend to be gentle and wise, while northern women are more heroic. So according to my values and living habits, I naturally prefer southern girls more. Then considering living habits, you’ll feel that girls from your own province are more attractive than those from other provinces. Then considering geographical location, of course those closer to you are more attractive - long-distance or even international relationships are indeed… very painful. The best would be living across from you, which belongs to childhood sweethearts type (same growth environment, naturally similar three views, highest success rate, but hard to come by).
Then consider material foundation in terms of economics. For example, one party has multiple properties while the other has only one house and needs to support parents and four elderly people. Cough cough, at this time I think your parents would likely strongly oppose when you’re dating? Or vice versa. Inconsistency or independence in economic status leads to imbalanced positions between men and women, and as mentioned before, love is bilateral work. Position imbalance leads to a series of problems, including family resistance, hurt self-esteem, etc.
But material foundation’s influence on love isn’t absolute. There are always individual cases that make you believe true love transcends everything. There are also various stories of wealthy bachelors and rich widows seeking spouses that are extremely attractive to gold-diggers. But based on the impossibility of low-probability events actually occurring, it’s better to honestly find someone of matching social status.
Then perhaps someone would ask, what about appearance? I’m not handsome, I’m not beautiful - would it be harder for me to gain love than others? Here’s my personal view: everyone loves beauty, but physical beauty is always temporary - only spiritual beauty is eternal. Physical form will eventually age, but spirit is immortal. I think appearance’s role is to increase your personal impression favorability baseline. It’s only limited to increasing your probability of further communication with the opposite sex, but true love still requires deep understanding and exploration. If you want a permanent companion who can have spiritual collisions and soul communication with you, appearance’s influence is small - judging by appearance is shallow behavior. Love purely based on appearance is like rootless duckweed. However, when internal qualities are similar, appearance naturally becomes an important factor. In summary, appearance is not a determining factor of love.
So what results do these three factors produce when combined? I’ll roughly list the results under extreme conditions. Results are estimates - there are always exceptions, and variables like fate and luck can’t be considered.
Compatible three views, emphasis on methodology, material foundation available
Perfect love, definitely has happy results
Compatible three views, emphasis on methodology, no material foundation
Love but difficult to become spouses, need to overcome huge difficulties to enter marriage
Compatible three views, ignore methodology, material foundation available
Tacit combination, may have some twists in process, but should ultimately be happy
Compatible three views, ignore methodology, no material foundation
Ill-fated relationship, love but difficult to become spouses, need to overcome huge difficulties to enter marriage
Conflicting three views, emphasis on methodology, no material foundation
In many cases, such shallow romance is destined not to last
Conflicting three views, emphasis on methodology, material foundation available
Emotion obtained through tolerance and compromise. Can live together but have no common ideals
Conflicting three views, ignore methods, have material foundation
Court political marriage?
Conflicting three views, ignore methods, lack material foundation
This is the most impossible love, basically can’t even be friends, let alone lovers or spouses
In summary, I believe worldview, values, and life view matching has decisive influence on love.
Finally, I quote a passage from the Bible:
Love is patient, love is kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things; love never ends.
Love is responsibility, love is dedication