family is love meaning essay

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

The Importance of Family Love

Learn how to create and sustain this type of love.

Barbara is a writer and speaker who is passionate about mental health, overall wellness, and women's issues.

Carly Snyder, MD is a reproductive and perinatal psychiatrist who combines traditional psychiatry with integrative medicine-based treatments.

Klaus Vedfelt / Getty Images

What Is Family Love?

Benefits of family love.

• Estrangement
• Negative Impact of the Pandemic

Creating Family Love With Friends

• How to Sustain Family Relationships

The first love you ever know often comes from your mother and your immediate family members. This unconditional love seeks nothing in return. Those loving times you remember cuddling with your parents, playing ball with your brother in the backyard, or getting ice cream down the street with your grandmother aren’t just cherished memories.

A family's love psychologically grounds you and provides a framework for future relationships. It enables you to form secure attachments . Securely attached children feel safe and cared for. If you had secure bonds, your parents were likely responsive and fulfilled your needs when you were young.

Having positive attachments and feeling cared for by your loved ones leads to higher social functioning later on. A child with secure attachments also can more easily form healthy ties with others when they grow up and throughout their future.

The advantages mentioned above regarding the fostering of secure attachments and higher social functioning aren’t the only ones accrued by stable family relationships. When you feel safe, protected, and cared for during those crucial early years, you have a good framework for the world. The future outlook seems bright.

Living in a warm environment that is surrounded by a family's love generates other benefits including:

• You gain confidence and a high sense of self-esteem .
• You learn conflict resolution skills .
• You learn about communication and social interactions.
• You have good physical health (thanks to home-cooked healthy meals, regular exercise and play, and early bedtimes).
• You become more resilient and adaptable as you and your family surmount challenges.
• You feel like you have support when you need it.
• You feel a sense of stability and predictability based on routine.
• You don’t have to do anything to earn family love. You have it unconditionally—just for being born.
• Your childhood experiences and growth are seen in a positive light.
• You also decrease the possibility that you’ll have mental health challenges in the future.

Recent Research

A 2019 study showed that adults with higher levels of positive childhood experiences had lower odds of depression and/or poor mental health and greater adult-reported social and emotional support.

Feeling loved by our families and having great childhood experiences when you’re young is important. The study also showed that enhancing positive childhood experiences may reduce adult mental health problems even when adverse childhood events happened.

Estrangement From Family Members

Perhaps you didn’t have an idyllic childhood and your parents weren’t good role models. You might have chosen to distance yourself from them by choice. Or in later years, you preferred to strike out in a different direction than the one you were expected to follow.

Thus, rather than have tension and discomfort, you opted not to spend time with family.

About 27% of Americans are estranged from a family member. That’s according to a survey by the  Cornell Family Reconciliation Project  conducted for the book, Fault Lines: Fractured Families and How to Mend Them , by Cornell University sociologist Karl Pillemer.

What If Effects of the Pandemic Negatively Impacted Your Family?

During COVID-19, family dynamics often shifted. As a result of spending more time together, let’s face it. Many of us became frustrated with each other. Some relationships frayed. Unable to escape to movies or to meet friends, you might have even grown resentful of your brother playing his music too loud or your cousin eating your favorite cereal on a daily basis.

Though you are related to them by genetics, maybe you’ve grown tired of being cooped up with them. With added stressors and demands placed upon you, you might feel you didn’t get the understanding or assistance you needed.

Consequently, you may feel depleted and, to be frank, less than enamored with these people. Many confess they are more alienated from family members now than before the pandemic, although the whole family still remains under the same roof or in the same apartment building.

Recent research from Penn State showed because family members were stuck together for more time than they were used to, people's overall well-being began to suffer.

Others of us lived and worked across the country from our family. We couldn’t travel to visit them or perhaps we couldn’t give much time to loved ones. Maybe we felt guilty. Maybe we were relieved.

Disagreements over politics , wearing masks, and getting the vaccine strained family relationships. Perhaps you feel there won’t be a return to the way things were before the pandemic and that’s okay.

You can cope with estranged relationships and make peace with them through family therapy or individual therapy .

If you didn’t have a wonderful family experience growing up or don’t have one now, you still have agency in creating another kind of family. Family love can be found whether it’s based on bloodline relationships or not.

Family love can be built with a group outside of your family, such as your friendship circle. Rest assured you don’t have to be extremely close to your parents or siblings or children to have familial love.

The relationships you forge with neighbors, friends from work, or childhood friends who might be back in your life can serve extremely well as your family. Perhaps you’re close to college friends or church friends. You can establish your own close ties with people you choose to be with.

For many people, their close friends aren’t just "like family," they are family. The important thing is to have close, meaningful relationships as they sustain us.

According to a scientific review of about 150 studies that included 300,000 participants, people with strong social ties have a 50% better chance of survival than those with weaker ties. This is regardless of age, sex, or health status.

While we can maintain ties through texting or quick phone calls to just check in, you might want to devote more attention to these important relationships in your life. We need to remember that having these close relationships is a significant aspect of good health.

Tips for Nurturing Family Love

Let’s focus on easy ways to maintain these bonds; they matter deeply. Here are additional ways to nurture family love and significant relationships:

• Make spending time with loved ones a priority.
• Play games online regularly.
• Practice better listening skills .
• Write letters and send via snail mail .
• Set up a regular weekend hour to chat at length.
• Travel to your loved one’s home.
• Eat meals together.
• Cook together in person or virtually.
• Set up a weekly happy hour.
• Join an exercise or weight lifting class together.
• Join a recreational sports team together.
• Volunteer together for a charity you both admire.
• Be sensitive and caring.
• Tell your loved ones you love them .
• Express your gratitude to them, which not only will make them happy but makes you happier.
• Use non-verbal expressions like eye contact, smiles, and affectionate embraces.

Hugs are important as we need physical touch as human beings . In fact, during a warm and welcome hug , the hormone oxytocin is released, which slows down our heart rate, reduces stress, and lowers anxiety. In addition, the brain also releases endorphins that flood us with feelings of pleasure and happiness.

There are many benefits of belonging to a supportive family network.  It’s an integral part of physical and mental well-being. Begin to focus your time and attention on those you love. Soon you’ll be creating fun times and happy memories.

Bethell C, Jones J, Gombojav N, Linkenbach J, Sege R. Positive Childhood Experiences and Adult Mental and Relational Health in a Statewide Sample: Associations Across Adverse Childhood Experiences Levels .  JAMA Pediatr.  2019;173(11):e193007. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3007

Feinberg ME, Mogle, JA, Lee JK, Tornello SL, Hostetler ML, Cifelli JA, Bai S, Hotez E. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Parent, Child, and Family Functioning . Fam. Proc . 2021. 

Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB. Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review . PLOS Medicine . 2010.

By Barbara Field Barbara is a writer and speaker who is passionate about mental health, overall wellness, and women's issues.

Essay on Importance of Family for Students and Children

500 words essay on importance of family.

In today’s world when everything is losing its meaning, we need to realize the importance of family more than ever. While the world is becoming more modern and advanced, the meaning of family and what stands for remains the same.

A family is a group of people who are related by blood or heritage. These people are linked not only by blood but also by compassion, love, and support. A person’s character and personality are shaped by his or her family. There are various forms of families in today’s society. It is further subdivided into a tight and extended family (nuclear family, single parent, step-family, grandparent, cousins, etc.)

Family – A synonym for trust, comfort, love, care, happiness and belonging. Family is the relationship that we share from the moment we are born into this world. People that take care of us and help us grow are what we call family, and they become lifelines for us to live. Family members have an important role in deciding an individual’s success or failure in life since they provide a support system and source of encouragement.

It does not matter what kind of family one belongs to. It is all equal as long as there are caring and acceptance. You may be from a joint family, same-sex partner family, nuclear family, it is all the same. The relationships we have with our members make our family strong. We all have unique relations with each family member. In addition to other things, a family is the strongest unit in one’s life.

Things That Strengthens The Family

A family is made strong through a number of factors. The most important one is of course love. You instantly think of unconditional love when you think of family. It is the first source of love you receive in your life It teaches you the meaning of love which you carry on forever in your heart.

Secondly, we see that loyalty strengthens a family. When you have a family, you are devoted to them. You stick by them through the hard times and celebrate in their happy times. A family always supports and backs each other. They stand up for each other in front of a third party trying to harm them proving their loyalty.

Most importantly, the things one learns from their family brings them closer. For instance, we learn how to deal with the world through our family first. They are our first school and this teaching strengthens the bond. It gives us reason to stand by each other as we share the same values.

No matter what the situation arises, your family will never leave you alone. They will always stand alongside you to overcome the hardships in life. If anyone is dealing with any kind of trouble, even a small talk about it to the family will make ones’ mind lighter and will give them a sense of hope, an inner sense of strength to fight those problems.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Importance of Family

One cannot emphasize enough on the importance of family. They play a great role in our lives and make us better human beings. The one lucky enough to have a family often do not realize the value of a family.

However, those who do not have families know their worth. A family is our source of strength. It teaches us what relationships mean. They help us create meaningful relationships in the outside world. The love we inherit from our families, we pass on to our independent relationships.

Moreover, families teach us better communication . When we spend time with our families and love each other and communicate openly, we create a better future for ourselves. When we stay connected with our families, we learn to connect better with the world.

Similarly, families teach us patience. It gets tough sometimes to be patient with our family members. Yet we remain so out of love and respect. Thus, it teaches us patience to deal better with the world. Families boost our confidence and make us feel loved. They are the pillars of our strength who never fall instead keep us strong so we become better people.

We learn the values of love, respect, faith, hope, caring, cultures, ethics, traditions, and everything else that concerns us through our families. Being raised in a loving household provides a solid foundation for anyone.

People develop a value system inside their family structure in addition to life lessons. They learn what their family considers to be proper and wrong, as well as what the community considers to be significant.

Families are the epicentres of tradition. Many families keep on traditions by sharing stories from the past over the years. This allows you to reconnect with family relatives who are no longer alive. A child raised in this type of household feels as if they are a part of something bigger than themselves. They’ll be proud to be a part of a community that has had ups and downs. Communities thrive when families are strong. This, in turn, contributes to a robust society.

Q.1 What strengthens a family?

A.1 A family’s strength is made up of many factors. It is made of love that teaches us to love others unconditionally. Loyalty strengthens a family which makes the members be loyal to other people as well. Most importantly, acceptance and understanding strengthen a family.

Q.2 Why is family important?

A.2 Families are very important components of society and people’s lives. They teach us a lot about life and relationships. They love us and treat us valuably. They boost our self-confidence and make us feel valued. In addition, they teach us patience to deal with others in a graceful and accepting manner.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Essay about Family: What It Is and How to Nail It

Humans naturally seek belonging within families, finding comfort in knowing someone always cares. Yet, families can also stir up insecurities and mental health struggles.

Family dynamics continue to intrigue researchers across different fields. Every year, new studies explore how these relationships shape our minds and emotions.

In this article, our dissertation service will guide you through writing a family essay. You can also dive into our list of topics for inspiration and explore some standout examples to spark your creativity.

What is Family Essay

A family essay takes a close look at the bonds and experiences within families. It's a common academic assignment, especially in subjects like sociology, psychology, and literature.

So, what's involved exactly? Simply put, it's an exploration of what family signifies to you. You might reflect on cherished family memories or contemplate the portrayal of families in various media.

What sets a family essay apart is its personal touch. It allows you to express your own thoughts and experiences. Moreover, it's versatile – you can analyze family dynamics, reminisce about family customs, or explore other facets of familial life.

If you're feeling uncertain about how to write an essay about family, don't worry; you can explore different perspectives and select topics that resonate with various aspects of family life.

Tips For Writing An Essay On Family Topics

A family essay typically follows a free-form style, unless specified otherwise, and adheres to the classic 5-paragraph structure. As you jot down your thoughts, aim to infuse your essay with inspiration and the essence of creative writing, unless your family essay topics lean towards complexity or science.

Here are some easy-to-follow tips from our essay service experts:

• Focus on a Specific Aspect: Instead of a broad overview, delve into a specific angle that piques your interest, such as exploring how birth order influences sibling dynamics or examining the evolving role of grandparents in modern families.
• Share Personal Anecdotes: Start your family essay introduction with a personal touch by sharing stories from your own experiences. Whether it's about a favorite tradition, a special trip, or a tough time, these stories make your writing more interesting.
• Use Real-life Examples: Illustrate your points with concrete examples or anecdotes. Draw from sources like movies, books, historical events, or personal interviews to bring your ideas to life.
• Explore Cultural Diversity: Consider the diverse array of family structures across different cultures. Compare traditional values, extended family systems, or the unique hurdles faced by multicultural families.
• Take a Stance: Engage with contentious topics such as homeschooling, reproductive technologies, or governmental policies impacting families. Ensure your arguments are supported by solid evidence.
• Delve into Psychology: Explore the psychological underpinnings of family dynamics, touching on concepts like attachment theory, childhood trauma, or patterns of dysfunction within families.
• Emphasize Positivity: Share uplifting stories of families overcoming adversity or discuss strategies for nurturing strong, supportive family bonds.
• Offer Practical Solutions: Wrap up your essay by proposing actionable solutions to common family challenges, such as fostering better communication, achieving work-life balance, or advocating for family-friendly policies.

Family Essay Topics

When it comes to writing, essay topics about family are often considered easier because we're intimately familiar with our own families. The more you understand about your family dynamics, traditions, and experiences, the clearer your ideas become.

If you're feeling uninspired or unsure of where to start, don't worry! Below, we have compiled a list of good family essay topics to help get your creative juices flowing. Whether you're assigned this type of essay or simply want to explore the topic, these suggestions from our history essay writer are tailored to spark your imagination and prompt meaningful reflection on different aspects of family life.

So, take a moment to peruse the list. Choose the essay topics about family that resonate most with you. Then, dive in and start exploring your family's stories, traditions, and connections through your writing.

• Supporting Family Through Tough Times
• Staying Connected with Relatives
• Empathy and Compassion in Family Life
• Strengthening Bonds Through Family Gatherings
• Quality Time with Family: How Vital Is It?
• Navigating Family Relationships Across Generations
• Learning Kindness and Generosity in a Large Family
• Communication in Healthy Family Dynamics
• Forgiveness in Family Conflict Resolution
• Building Trust Among Extended Family
• Defining Family in Today's World
• Understanding Nuclear Family: Various Views and Cultural Differences
• Understanding Family Dynamics: Relationships Within the Family Unit
• What Defines a Family Member?
• Modernizing the Nuclear Family Concept
• Exploring Shared Beliefs Among Family Members
• Evolution of the Concept of Family Love Over Time
• Examining Family Expectations
• Modern Standards and the Idea of an Ideal Family
• Life Experiences and Perceptions of Family Life
• Genetics and Extended Family Connections
• Utilizing Family Trees for Ancestral Links
• The Role of Younger Siblings in Family Dynamics
• Tracing Family History Through Oral Tradition and Genealogy
• Tracing Family Values Through Your Family Tree
• Exploring Your Elder Sister's Legacy in the Family Tree
• Connecting Daily Habits to Family History
• Documenting and Preserving Your Family's Legacy
• Navigating Online Records and DNA Testing for Family History
• Tradition as a Tool for Family Resilience
• Involving Family in Daily Life to Maintain Traditions
• Creating New Traditions for a Small Family
• The Role of Traditions in Family Happiness
• Family Recipes and Bonding at House Parties
• Quality Time: The Secret Tradition for Family Happiness
• The Joy of Cousins Visiting for Christmas
• Including Family in Birthday Celebrations
• Balancing Traditions and Unconditional Love
• Building Family Bonds Through Traditions

Looking for Speedy Assistance With Your College Essays?

Reach out to our skilled writers, and they'll provide you with a top-notch paper that's sure to earn an A+ grade in record time!

Family Essay Example

For a better grasp of the essay on family, our team of skilled writers has crafted a great example. It looks into the subject matter, allowing you to explore and understand the intricacies involved in creating compelling family essays. So, check out our meticulously crafted sample to discover how to craft essays that are not only well-written but also thought-provoking and impactful.

Final Outlook

In wrapping up, let's remember: a family essay gives students a chance to showcase their academic skills and creativity by sharing personal stories. However, it's important to stick to academic standards when writing about these topics. We hope our list of topics sparked your creativity and got you on your way to a reflective journey. And if you hit a rough patch, you can just ask us to ' do my essay for me ' for top-notch results!

Having Trouble with Your Essay on the Family?

Our expert writers are committed to providing you with the best service possible in no time!

FAQs on Writing an Essay about Family

Family essays seem like something school children could be assigned at elementary schools, but family is no less important than climate change for our society today, and therefore it is one of the most central research themes.

Below you will find a list of frequently asked questions on family-related topics. Before you conduct research, scroll through them and find out how to write an essay about your family.

How to Write an Essay About Your Family History?

How to write an essay about a family member, how to write an essay about family and roots, how to write an essay about the importance of family.

Daniel Parker

is a seasoned educational writer focusing on scholarship guidance, research papers, and various forms of academic essays including reflective and narrative essays. His expertise also extends to detailed case studies. A scholar with a background in English Literature and Education, Daniel’s work on EssayPro blog aims to support students in achieving academic excellence and securing scholarships. His hobbies include reading classic literature and participating in academic forums.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

Related Articles

Essay on I Love My Family in English for Children and Students

Table of Contents

My family is the best thing that has happened to me in this lifetime. It is a close group of people who support each other and live in harmony. Love, respect for each other and mutual concern are some of the important characteristics of my family members. My family is like the soul of my life, without which, I can’t survive for a moment in this challenging and ever changing word. It means everything to me – I get love, learn moral conduct, get nurtured, learn to respect, share joy and sorrow, get protection and so many other things in my family. I love my family and I love being a part of it.

Fill Out the Form for Expert Academic Guidance!

Please indicate your interest Live Classes Books Test Series Self Learning

Verify OTP Code (required)

I agree to the terms and conditions and privacy policy .

Fill complete details

Target Exam ---

Long and Short Essay on I Love My Family in English

We have provided below short and long essay on I Love My Family in English for your information and knowledge.

The essays have been written in simple language to make them easily understandable and memorable for you to present them when needed.

After going through these I Love My Family essay you will know what type of family do I live in; why is my family so important to me; what do I learn from my family etc.

The essays will be useful to you in your school assignments like speech giving, essay writing or debate competitions.

Short Essay on I Love My Family – Essay 1 (200 words)

My family consists of six family members that include my father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, brother and me. We all live together in a flat that forms a part of a beautiful society located in Noida. Ours is a close knit family and that is what I love the most about it. The credit of keeping the family together and maintaining a strong bond certainly goes to my grandparents who have given such good values to us that we understand the meaning and power of living harmoniously with each other.

We make it a point to have our dinner together every day as we believe, “A family that dines together stay together”. During the afternoon hours, I and my brother have lunch with our grandparents as our parents go for work. My grandmother has been taking care of us during the day time ever since I was born as my mother is working and comes home in the evening.

While I love all my family members, I share a very close bond with my grandmother. She inspires me to be a better human being. One of the best things about her is that she manages her time extremely well and motivates us to do so too. It is because of her that I and my brother are so disciplined and good in studies as well as extra-curricular activities. I am blessed to have such a loving and caring family.

Essay on Why I Love My Family – Essay 2 (300 words)

Introduction

I love my family and can’t imagine my life without them. It is natural to love one’s family. We grow up with our parents taking care of our needs, our grandparents loving us endlessly and our siblings being partners in crime in whatever we do and hence we are bound to form a deep bond with them.

Why I Love My Family

I live with my parents and two younger sisters. My father runs a successful business and my mother is a wonderful homemaker. She looks after all our needs all day long and loves us immeasurably. She is always there for us.

Whether it is helping us in studies, cooking delicious food for us or teaching us art and craft – my mother is involved in all these activities only to nurture us in the best possible way. My father on the other hand works tirelessly to ensure we get a good lifestyle. He also makes sure that he takes us out on the weekends to spend quality time with us.

I and my sisters have a lot of fun together. We go to the same school and have a number of common friends. While we three love each others’ company and play together, we do call some of our friends home every once in a while and it becomes all the more fun.

During our summer vacations, we visit our grandparents’ house which is located in a beautiful village in the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh. It is a big house with a front lawn filled with various trees and plants. I and my sisters eagerly wait for this time of the year. We love our stay at our grandparents’ place. I especially love playing in the front yard filled with numerous fruits and flowers.

Growing up surrounded by such loving and affectionate family is like a dream. I love them all because of their loving and caring nature.

Essay on I Love All of My Family Members – Essay 3 (400 words)

I love my each family member because they all are precious to me. They love and care me a lot and never let me go anywhere alone. They always remain with me in my all ups and downs. They teach me morals, etiquettes, values and importance of relationships in human life. They are strong supporter, ideal and role model of my life.

I Love All of My Family Members

I live with my grandparents, parents, my sister and a cousin. My cousin has been staying with us since the last three years as his parents have shifted abroad. Initially, their plan was to come back after two years and they did not want to change his school as there is a drastic difference between the study patterns of the two countries.

This is the reason why my cousin came to stay with us. However, their plan has extended and so has our cousin’s stay at our place. He has now become an integral part of our family. I love all my family members. Here is what I love about each of them:

My Grandmother

My grandmother cooks delicious food and makes sure we are fed with healthy and scrumptious food each day. Besides her food, I also love the bed time stories she narrates to us. Me and my sister and cousin cuddle around her every night to listen to her stories.

My Grandfather

My grandfather is a highly learned person. He helps me with my studies. He teaches me mathematics and English. I especially enjoy the morning walks with my grandfather. He shares his life experiences during these long walks and I just love listening to them.

My mother keeps the entire house neat and clean. She organizes everything so well that we don’t have to waste our time looking for things. She also shops for us and takes us out to park and malls. She loves us dearly and takes care of all our needs.

My father works very hard to ensure we live comfortably. He spends time playing with us on the weekends and at times also during the evening hours. I really look forward to our weekend outings with him.

I am closest to my sister. We are like best friends. We share everything and keep each other’s secrets. We laugh, play and study together. We help and support each other during the good as well as the bad times.

My cousin is very disciplined and hard working. He also has a good sense of humour. He is three years elder to me. He helps me in my studies especially in mathematics. Our house has become livelier ever since he has come to stay with us.

Our home is filled with love and laughter. Our parents and grandparents have taught us to share and care and live cordially with everyone. This is a great life lesson and I am sure it will help me do well personally as well as professionally as I grow.

Essay on I Love My Family because – It is My Support System – Essay 4 (500 words)

My family consists of me, my father and my mother. I am their only child and am extremely loved and pampered. I love my family and am thankful to them for helping and supporting me in whatever I do. Every child has certain dreams and aspirations. However, not everyone is lucky to get the support of his/ her family to attain them. I am one of those few lucky ones who have got complete support from my family in this regard.

My Parents Supported Me to Follow My Passion

I have always been a great fan of Madhuri Dixit although she is from an era when I was not even born. I grew fond of her when I saw her performance in the movie, Aaja Nachle. I became a huge fan of her dance moves. It was then that I searched for all her songs online and watched her dance. I tried to copy her dance moves but could not. She inspired me to dance and I immediately knew that this is my calling in life.

I was in sixth standard at that time and I spoke to my mother about my newly found passion. I also told her that I wanted to learn dance from a professional dance school. I had joined drawing and swimming classes during my primary classes. However, since I had been promoted to sixth standard and had to take tuitions for mathematics and physics I had no time left for such hobby classes, so I withdrawn from these classes.

My parents wanted me to concentrate on my studies as this was the time to build a strong base. However, my mother agreed to enroll me at a professional dance school looking at my keen interest in it. I promised her that I will study dedicatedly and wouldn’t let this hamper my performance in school. My father also supported in my decision.

My Family Made Me a Confident Person

It has been 4 years now and I have been continuing with my dance classes. I am now in class tenth and have my boards this year. My parents suggested me to discontinue the dance class this year however they did not insist and asked me to take the decision on my own. This is what I love the most about my family. Nothing is forced upon me. They treat me like a mature person and this has actually made me wiser and mature.

It has enhanced my decision making ability. Slowly and steadily, I have developed the ability to analyze what is good for me and take decisions based on it. This has boosted my confidence and helped me so far and will certainly help me in future. This has only been possible because of the love and support of my parents. If they had objected to my decision, I would not have evolved so well in various aspects in life. Dance has given meaning to my life.

I love my family for standing by my side, loving me unconditionally and being my support system. I am lucky to have such a loving and understanding family.

Long Essay on I Love My Family – Essay 5 (600 words)

I live in a joint family. There are ten members in our family including me, my brother, mother, father, grandmother, grandfather, uncle, aunt and two cousins. We all bond well with each other. We help and support one another during all times. In today’s times, when most people live in nuclear families and hesitate meeting their extended family members due to various reasons, I am proud I come from a family that lives together in harmony with each other.

My Cordial Family Members

Ever since I was born, I have seen my family members living cordially with each other. Unlike other joint families where there are frequents quarrels and arguments, my family members do not indulge in any such thing. They are all happy in their own space. They have their duties and responsibilities well defined and work accordingly without questioning or blaming each other.

For instance, my grandfather manages all the finances, my mother and aunt take care of the kitchen and other household tasks, my father and uncle go out to earn and my grandmother teaches us good values and takes us to the park every evening.

One thing that I love about my family members is that they are all mature enough to understand that no one is perfect. They know that people are bound to make mistakes at times and that is how they learn and grow. They have taught me that it is necessary to understand and forgive in order to live cordially with one another. These are the few qualities that help us all live together harmoniously.

Our Weekend Outings

I just love our weekend outings together. Every alternate weekend we all go to a mall or amusement part or for picnic to a nearby picnic spot to spend the entire day together. For picnics, we pack food and take it along. We also take along games such as Tambola and Ludo.

All my family members participate in these games and we thoroughly enjoy this time together. It strengthens our bond all the more. During our outings to the mall, we sit and dine together. During these dining sessions we talk, laugh and get to know each other better.

Our in-House Parties

My grandparents are from the era where people invited their friends and relatives home and also visited them quite often. So, this trend still continues at our home. We host a lot of house parties wherein we invite our relatives and friends. These parties are full of fun. We get to meet our cousins and friends and have amazing food during these parties. We also meet our uncles and aunts who pamper us and shower us with blessings.

Cousins Visit during Summer Vacations

We eagerly look forward to our cousin’s and aunt’s visit during the summer vacations. It is the best time of the year. Our house is filled with joy and laughter during this time. There is no study pressure.

So, we all get to play a lot. We also get to eat a variety of food items cooked by our aunts. It is also the time to have a lot of ice creams and jellies. We study for around an hour or so during the entire day during this time and the rest of the time is for enjoying and playing with the cousins. During the evening hours we go to the nearby park and play football, cricket and hide and seek.

I really love all my family members and wish we live together forever. I strongly believe that joint family system is the best however only if the family members accept each other as they are live together in harmony. I am truly lucky to have such a loving family and extended family. Life is so much fun when we are surrounded by such beautiful people.

Related Information:

My Family Essay

Essay on Importance of Family

Speech on Importance of Family Values

Essay on A Picnic with Family

Essay on Family Planning in India

Speech on Family Planning

Essay on My Father

Essay on My Father My Hero

Essay on Grandparents

Essay on Good Mother

Essay on Love

Related content

Talk to our academic expert!

Language --- English Hindi Marathi Tamil Telugu Malayalam

Get access to free Mock Test and Master Class

Register to Get Free Mock Test and Study Material

Offer Ends in 5:00

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• I Love My Family Essay

Essay on I Love My Family

Family is a very important part of our lives. There can be nothing better than having love and support of your family. The significance of having a family is that a child can learn all his/ her values from it which reflects on his/ her character as well. In a nutshell, a family helps to build the character of a child. 

The essay given in the following deals with a beautiful topic ‘I love my family’. Students of primary classes can refer to this essay to gain an idea about the structure of an essay. Any student or parent can refer to this essay to get help with how to learn an essay on ‘I love my family’ or ‘my family’. We at Vedantu strive to provide the best quality study materials to students of every level so that they can score well in the exam and can be able to hold command over the subject. Download Vedantu app to avail the best study materials at the comfort of your home.

There is no greater wealth than having a lovely, supportive and great family. I belong to a middle-class family where there are four members in my sweet little family. My father, my mother, me and a sister after me are involved in it. My grandparents live in a nearby village. My father used to take us towards them frequently.   

My grandfather is a retired person and focused all his attention on agriculture. He has been influenced by the agriculture work of one of his friends and strongly believes that technology and agriculture is the perfect combination in a country's economic growth. He is blessed with the assistance of my grandmother. Teaching was a speciality of my grandmother in her young times. She can't hear properly but she can hear what I want.

My father is the core of our family. He always works for social-work organizations which help the needy. He taught us many patriotic lessons which created a love for our country inside our heart. I am always amazed by the respect and care he shows towards his parents and this inspires me to do the same. He is my role model and I started walking in his footsteps. His words and thoughts about a great family touch everyone’s heart. He thinks that earning money must be our second priority while helping the family should be primary. 

My mother is a brave soul. She is a housewife. She raised my sister traditionally along with me. She always takes care of household chores. Our family’s unity is only maintained due to her constant efforts. The Mythological stories narrated by her sparkles the spiritual qualities in our minds. Starting from brushing till the bedtime stories at night, she assists all the members in multiple ways. Moreover, she drives us to Grandpa's home, in father’s unavailability. She is a great cook with a variety of options for delicious dishes available with her. Countless lessons must be learned from her. Next one is my sister. My sister is a cute little precious gift of god. She is the heart of our family. The bond between us gets stronger each day. Multiple times her homework is completed by me. My father’s ideas have had a profound effect on her. She is more connected to my grandparents than me.  

A tragic moment happened to me when I was a child. I used to ride my bicycle very fast and collide with a car. Everyone cared a lot for me from the family. All family members stayed 24 hours in the hospital and provided me with huge mental strength. Even when I was healed up, no one shouted at me. This incident ignited huge family respect inside me. Lucky! I am extremely lucky to have a great family. My family members have a combination of all the emotions a human being can have but the care is listed on the top of it amongst all. In the time of crises, our family is with us as a divine power. In this Iron age, we forgot the importance of a united family.

Format to Write a Great Essay

Great Essays can really set a great impression on any reader. Essays are not all about information, it's the way one communicates with the reader without being physically there. To write a great essay, one must start with a great headline as most of the people who will ever go through the essay will definitely check the title of it. A great title can be witty, quirky or even something that creates suspense for the reader and makes them curious to read ahead. To complement a good title, one must write a compelling introduction paragraph or paragraphs. Usually, essays are introduced with word limits and the format is divided according to that. But each essay has at least an introductory paragraph that introduces the reader to the writer's argument or opinion. The introductory paragraph is also the important part as it sets the tone for the rest of the essay. The introduction once perfected can move on to the body of the essay. The body is the largest part of an essay. A Body of an essay consists of all the explanations to the argument or opinion raised in the first introductory paragraphs. The body is supposed to be lengthy and detailed. It can have facts, numbers, etc. Many essays that are asked in an exam can be divided into the Cause and Solution type of body in which the writer explains the argument by first stating the cause and then providing a solution to it. A great introduction followed by a heavy body should also end with a juicy and crispy conclusion. Once the thesis is stated, the conclusion's job remains to summarise the whole argument for the reader so that they can take back the necessary information. A good conclusion can create a good impact on the overall essay and even save the whole essay sometimes. This is how great essays can be written with ease. One should remember that they can write a great essay only with practice. They can find sample essays and essay topics at Vedantu's official website.

FAQs on I Love My Family Essay

1. Why are families important?

Families are an actual blessing to everyone. A family acts as an important teacher to a child from the beginning. It develops the child’s character, provides a sense of security, and helps them to create an individual identity as well. A family is a great teacher to any humankind as it teaches the moral value in every phase of life. It is really important to grow in a happy and healthy family. It helps to nourish a child’s character and intellect.

2. Why are families considered as pillars of strength?

Families are always considered as the pillars of strength because they give us the enormous courage to face this tough world. Every family member i.e our parents, brother, sister will always stand by us in the moment of need. Even in the toughest and loneliest moment, families make us feel better.

3. Why is the essay writing important for the kids?

Essay learning is quite crucial for a young preschooler as this will help them improve their thinking skills and ability and writing skills as well. There are many studies which have already proved that any kind of short form or long-form writing enhances their thought process and creativity. It always helps to keep one’s mind sharp. Essay Writing also enables the concept of critical thinking in kids when they think and research in the topic deeply and goes to its core to write a good essay.

4. Why should we refer to Vedantu?

Vedantu is presently India’s no.1 live tutorial platform. Not only live tutorial, but Vedantu has also gained its popularity as a best online learning platform as well amongst the students and parents. We at Vedantu provide the top-notch quality study materials for K12 level which includes NCERT Solutions, Important Questions, Previous Year Question Papers, study materials for various entrance exams etc. And, the best part is all the study materials are available for free of cost on our website and mobile application. All you have to do is sign in to Vedantu website and download the app from Google play store and then voila!

5. How to write better essays?

You're about to take a big test, and you know it'll feature an essay question that will count for a significant portion of your overall mark for the semester. Perhaps your teacher will give you an essay question for your final project. One of the most valuable abilities you may acquire during your college years is the ability to write well. Most students, on the other hand, will make numerous mistakes before mastering the art of academic essay writing.

The following are some essay writing tweaks that will help you spice up your writings:

Understand the Purpose of the Essay and your Audience - The first rule to writing a good essay is understanding the purpose of the essay. Your purpose will determine the choices you make in your essay, whether you want to communicate knowledge, and experience, or persuade readers to change their beliefs. If you're responding to an assignment, make sure you know exactly what you're supposed to write about. It's just as crucial to know your goals if you're writing for a different reason. The more information you have about the audience for your essay, the better. Readers who are knowledgeable about your subject will already have some background information. Readers, your age will be familiar with the movies and songs you'll probably mention.

Research Above and Beyond  - Remember to go above conventional research. Use books, articles, newspapers, documentaries, questionnaires, and any source you could lay your hands on. Make a list of everything that comes to mind about the topic you're going to write about. Lists are made by some people, while diagrams and maps are drawn by others. The goal is to jot down a lot of ideas rapidly to get started.

Always Brainstorm and Draft an Outline  - The world is full of ideas and topics for you to write about. Takedown notes, draw outlines and come up with new ideas. You must research before beginning to write your academic essay to ensure that you have captured all of the most important parts of your argument. Include your facts and proof in an outline so that you can arrange it efficiently and determine all of the beats you want to strike.

Include your Thesis Statement at the Beginning of your Body  - Your thesis statement, which explains the point of your essay, will be included in the introduction paragraph, along with strong and fascinating imagery and examples that connect to it and draw your audience in. Rather than serving as a synopsis of your essay topic, your thesis statement should present your argument or major concept and convince your readers to continue reading.

10 Reasons Familial Love Can Be Important

Familial love is a type of love often directed at family members, whether biological, adoptive, external, or chosen. Ancient Greek scholars called this love "storge," an unconditional, familial type of love. Although conflicts can arise in families, familial love may be essential for human development, mental health, and well-being.

1. It helps you form secure attachments

How your caregivers meet your needs as an infant and child forms the attachment style that can follow you into adulthood. Your social needs include love and belonging, which can be essential for development and safety. Those who feel a strong sense of familial love growing up may form secure attachments as adults. A secure attachment style can mean: 

You feel safe setting boundaries

You can end relationships that aren't healthy 

You know you have people to turn to 

You know you have yourself to turn to 

You feel self-assured and healthily confident

You can fall in love and be yourself with others

You feel open to having healthy conversations and communicating directly 

You can actively listen when others have conflicts to bring up 

However, there may be hope if you do not form a secure attachment. Studies show that you can change your attachment to have support, understanding, and self-actualization. 

2. It can make you feel safe

Having a family that loves you can make you feel safe. Sources show that having a healthy support network can make you safer by allowing mental and physical health. Additionally, if something goes wrong in your life, you might be able to lean on family and have somewhere to go if you lose your home. If you do not have a healthy family, you may feel unsafe. 

3. You can pass it on to your own family

If you felt loved and cared for as a child, you may want to pass on that sense of love and care to your own family. That could include any of your own children, your partner, or the pets you adopt. It might also include yourself or your chosen family if you choose not to have a traditional family. 

In some cases, even if you do not feel familial love growing up, you might feel motivated to pass on care to your family in hopes of providing what you did not receive and finding healing. 

4. You can choose what "family" means to you 

Familial love can be subjective. If you don't feel loved by your biological or adoptive immediate family, you might choose other people in your life to be part of your chosen family. It could comprise friends, distant relatives, coworkers, or people that make you feel safe. You may feel similar love toward them that you might have for the family members who aren't in your life. 

5. Love is essential for physical and mental health 

Studies show that love can promote chemicals in your brain that make you feel optimistic and happy and has several health benefits, including reduced blood pressure. Feeling love toward your family or being loved by your family can make you feel happier, safer, and safeguarded. Additionally, if you have mental health concerns, having a healthy family might reduce your symptoms' severity. However, love is not a cure, and reaching out for support from a professional can be essential if you're experiencing symptoms of a mental health condition.

6. You might have a support system 

Many individuals who experience family love might also feel they have a support system in their family. They may be able to reach out for help if they encounter challenges in life, such as financial loss, career setbacks, or difficulty with health. Health problems can be unexpected, and having a healthy family might offer you the chance to stay somewhere free of charge with people who love you while you heal. 

Although some people have this option, families may not always have the resources to support everyone within the family. That doesn't necessarily mean that your family doesn't love you. However, if your family abandons you, kicks you out of your home, or refuses to offer support during tough times, it might be a sign that they are acting unhealthy or abusive toward you.  

If you are facing or witnessing abuse of any kind, the National Domestic Violence Hotline is available 24/7 for support. Call 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or text "START" to 88788. You can also use the online chat .

7. You can gain confidence

A family that loves and supports you could make you feel confident in your abilities. If your family always attended your games or concerts at school and always supported your passions, you might feel safe trying any avenue in your adult career or schooling. You might also feel confident in making new friends or trying new hobbies. 

8. You may gain social skills 

If your family showed love through family gatherings, social support, jokes, and family nights, you might feel more comfortable socializing with others as an adult. Your family can teach you how to interact with others healthily. 

9. It can be unconditional

Familial love may be unconditional, according to ancient Greek scholars. Knowing you have a family or family member who will always love you no matter what can feel empowering and give you a sense of belonging. 

10. You can learn life skills 

Finally, families may teach you life skills through familial love. For example, as a child or teen, you might learn how to clean your room, wash your laundry, and apply for scholarships. As an adult, your parents might help you learn how to pay bills, set up a bank account, and take out a loan. These skills can be essential for adult life and may feel easier to learn if you have older and more experienced adults on your side. 

What to do when you don't have a family 

If you do not have a family that you consider close or healthy, or you are in a family where the benefits of familial love don't seem to be present, you might be experiencing an unhealthy family dynamic. In these cases, reaching out to your family or trying to connect might have been something you've already tried and failed to do. 

It is not your fault if your parents, caregivers, or family do not treat you healthily. Although you may be able to repair some aspects of your relationship through techniques like family therapy or open discussion, some individuals choose to go "no contact" with their families and try to form chosen families. 

You can reap the benefits of familial love as an adult in chosen family relationships. For example, you might hold "family gatherings," "Friendsgiving," or "Galentine's Day" events with your friend group or distant relatives. Or you may create your own traditions with your created family and show familial love to your children, who may show it back to you. If you have pets, you can spoil them with treats and toys or spend time with them in nature. Not everyone has a traditional family, and they might still find healthy ways to cope. 

Counseling options 

If you are struggling to find familial love in your life or want to learn healthy methods of connecting with family members, you can try counseling. Whether you want to try family, couples, or individual therapy, a therapist can offer professional advice and support you emotionally. 

For those who find the idea of therapy overwhelming or face barriers to treatment, online counseling can be a rewarding option. You can choose between phone, video, and live chat sessions in online counseling with your licensed therapist. They can also send you worksheets and PDF files with further resources to utilize outside your sessions. Additionally, studies show that online therapy is highly effective for families experiencing long-term stress and serious mental health conditions. 

If you are interested in trying counseling, online platforms like BetterHelp for individuals or ReGain for couples can allow you to connect with a therapist from home and match with a counselor who fits your preferences and concerns. 

What is the difference between familial and romantic love?

Although familial and romantic love are both types of strong emotional attachment, several things set them apart. 

Common traits associated with familial love may include: 

• It lacks a romantic component. 
• It tends to involve a sense of belonging and community. 
• It is often viewed as unconditional.
• It tends to persist despite changing circumstances and life events.
• It typically develops between relatives. 

On the other hand, romantic love generally has the following features:

• It tends to develop over time. 
• It often involves physical or sexual attraction. 
• It can depend more on outside circumstances. 
• It is often viewed as exclusive.

These are a few common differences between familial and romantic love. That said, these traits can sometimes vary. 

What is another word for familial love?

“Storge” was a term used in ancient Greece to describe the specific kind of love that develops between family members. Storge was considered separate from romantic and platonic love. 

What is the difference between platonic love and familial love?

While familial love and platonic love each lack a romantic component, they are separate forms of love. Familial love is typically thought of as the love between relatives, either through blood or adoption. It is often seen as unconditional and long-lasting. 

In contrast, platonic love tends to have the following features:

• It may take time to develop. 
• It is not limited to family relationships. 
• It may wax and wane over time. 
• It can be conditional. 

Perhaps the biggest difference between platonic love and familial love is that platonic love usually has an element of choice. While family members are often out of a person’s control, platonic love is distinct in that people can make the choice to become friends with someone. 

How do you show familial love?

Different individuals and cultures may have different ways of expressing familial love. That said, common ways family members might show each other love may include:

• Spending quality time together
• Giving each other emotional support 
• Encouraging open, honest communication
• Providing help and encouragement without expecting something in return
• Being patient with each other
• Practicing healthy conflict resolution
• Expressing affection through words and actions

Because traditions and expectations can vary, these expressions may not always be the same for all families.  

Is familial love unconditional?

Many cultures and individuals view familial love as unconditional, meaning it endures through changing circumstances and conflicts. That said, this may not always be a given. Some people may place expectations on familial love, and others might not feel love for their family members. 

It can be important to prioritize your emotional, mental, and physical well-being, even when it comes to family. If a family relationship is unhealthy or abusive, seeking help and getting distance can often be a good idea. 

Can true love be familial?

Although the idea of “true love” is often associated with romantic partners, familial love can also be a form of true love. In fact, many traits commonly associated with true love can often be found in family relationships, such as:

• Unconditionality
• Selflessness
• The desire to grow and learn together
• Frequent expressions of affection
• Collaboration on life decisions

It can be helpful to think of true love as a strong emotional bond that is not limited to a single type of relationship. Friendships, family relationships, and romantic relationships can all be the foundation for true love.

• Characteristics To Look For In A Romantic Partner Medically reviewed by Julie Dodson , MA
• Can You Learn How To Get Someone To Fall In Love With You? Medically reviewed by Melissa Guarnaccia , LCSW
• Relationships and Relations

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Student Opinion

How Do You Define ‘Family’?

By Michael Gonchar

• Feb. 8, 2019

Is your definition of a “normal family” two married parents and their biological children living together under one roof? If not, what do you think a “family” is — or can be? Who is your family?

What do you think holds a family together? Is it biological relationships? Love and support? Sharing the same home?

In “ What’s a ‘Normal’ Family, Anyway? ” Claire Haug writes:

It’s a typical Thursday night and my family is gathered in the kitchen of my childhood home. There’s me, freshly returned from college, helping my mom set the table; my half brother, also home on break, debating our father about politics; and my half siblings’ mother chiding my half sister for Snapchatting with her high school friends. If it took you a minute to process the relationships I just described, don’t worry — you are far from the only one. I’ll give my best simplified description of our family: my mother, my half siblings’ mother and our father were friends living in the Bay Area in the ’90s. At the time, both women were in their 30s and wanted to have children — but neither had a long-term partner. My father, a gay man and also partnerless, agreed to be their donor and, if things worked out, involved in their children’s lives. My brother was born in March 1997, followed by me in October of the same year, and my half sister came along three years later. As a child I got strange looks when I told people that my brother was seven months older than me. But I just thought of us as a family that happened to live in three separate households. Even growing up in Berkeley, Calif., which is generally known for being culturally diverse and politically progressive, my family structure has struck people as unconventional. I’ve had trouble explaining it to just about everyone, including friends I’ve known for years and financial aid administrators. It seems hard for people to get that you can have a family with parents who were never married, and that some women might choose to conceive and raise a child without a husband. But unconventional families like mine are becoming increasingly common: the number of two-parent households has been in steady decline since the 1960s, dropping from 87 percent of households in 1960 to 69 percent in 2014 , according to the Pew Research Center. The report notes that “the declining share of children living in what is often deemed a ‘traditional’ family has been largely supplanted by the rising shares of children living with single or cohabiting parents.”

She continues:

Family should be, above all else, about love — I hope we can all agree on that. Perhaps it’s time for us to prioritize finding love through community and friendships in the same way many of us prioritize finding romantic love. Maybe one day that will be conventional.

Students, read the entire article, then tell us:

— What does “family” mean to you? Do you count only those bound to you by blood or legal ties, or do friends or other kinds of communities also fill some of the traditional role of family for you?

— Who is your family, however you define that word? What role does your family play in your life in general?

— Ms. Haug writes:

But can anyone really say their experience of family was perfect? My parents have shown me that friendships can be just as important as romantic relationships, and that it’s possible to live a fulfilling life without defining your life by a single long-term relationship. How could that be bad?

Do you agree? Do you think friendships can be just as important as romantic relationships? Should having a single long-term relationship be the universal goal for living a fulfilling life?

— Does society need a more expansive definition of “family,” in your opinion? Why or why not?

Students 13 and older are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

I Love My Family Essay

The moment we are all born, a family is formed, and it is this family that becomes a significant part of our lives thereafter. The father and mother of the child, along with siblings, constitute a family, and they stay together through times of joy and sorrow. In life, we come across many things where we harbour a special liking for certain things. Among all, family is the most loved and respected, and I love my family short essay will help you understand why.

I love my family essay writing is a simple task that you can engage your kids with so that they will be able to appreciate the value of a family, and you can understand what your children are capable of achieving through a well-knit family.

Experience on I Love My Family

I am fortunate to have been born into a family that loves me and cares for me. My family has 6 members, and they are my father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, brother and myself. As I am the eldest, I was able to get great affection from my grandparents and parents. My family has given me ample support whenever I face any difficulties, and that is why I love my family.

We belong to a middle-class family, and we share a close bond. I never have to think twice if I wish to convey my problems to my family as I know that they will surely come up with a solution that finds my best interest. Even though both my parents are working, they make sure that they spend their time with my brother and me by playing with us and listening to our stories from school. My parents would also share their interesting moments in their work life and teach us important lessons.

When my parents are busy with their work, it is my grandparents who would help me do my homework and tell us wonderful stories about their childhood. Even when my parents scolded us for any mischief I did, my grandparents would protect me from their anger. My grandmother would prepare delicious snacks for me, and my grandfather would take me for a walk every day. My younger brother is my go-to companion whenever I have a bad day. He is my best friend, and there is nothing that we do not tell each other. As a family, we all live together under a single roof and share the little joys in life.

Moral of the Essay

Thus, I love my family essay writing enables your kid to express their love for your family and understand the role of each member. There is nothing that we would be able to achieve if we did not have a family, and we go to any extent for the welfare of our family. Family is our first and foremost priority, which is what I love my family short essay talks about. One could find love, care, support and strength in a family.

For more essays similar to I love my family essay, visit BYJU’S website. You can also find other exciting kid-friendly learning resources, such as short stories, poems, worksheets, etc., to enhance kids’ learning.

What is meant by family?

Family is formed when a group of people who are tied by blood or marriage come to live together. Usually, a family includes parents and their children. But, it could also extend to grandparents.

Are families important?

Families are very important in a person’s life. It is from a family that we learn many things and develop our personality. For young children, family plays a crucial role, as it gives them a sense of belonging and identity.

How does a family support you?

Family supports each other in different ways. By having quality family time, you are conveying that we would be there for each other despite our busy work. The family communicates problems, and this ensures that the family backs you up whenever you face any difficulty. The family also shows appreciation when you accomplish something, and this would act as great support for you.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

The Importance Of Family Love For Emotional Well-Being

Note: The following article contains references to familial abuse. If you or someone you know is experiencing abuse of any kind, stay safe and  immediately contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline : 1-800-799-SAFE (7233)

The psychology of love as it occurs in the context of family is unlike any other. The quality of family love experienced by a person affects them from infancy through adolescence into adulthood. In a healthy scenario, they're the people who give most of your life’s milestones and whom you can always turn to when something good or bad happens.

Of course, this paints a perfect-sounding picture when no family is perfect. You may have a strained or antagonistic relationship with your blood family or not have any living family, but that does not mean you can never experience positive family love. You may have past experiences where you received a lot of healthy family love but don't now. If not, remember that you are more than a family and deserve love and care regardless of your relationship. 

Evidence that family love is important for emotional well-being

Research and anecdotal evidence show that family love can significantly impact our emotional well-being. That impact can be either positive or negative and affects our emotions and behaviors. 

For example, a Harvard longitudinal study on a sample of 81 men found that "warmer relationships with parents in childhood predict greater attachment to intimate partners in late life, and that this link is mediated in part by the degree to which individuals in midlife rely on styles that facilitate or inhibit close relationship connections." These findings highlight how the childhood environment can impact individuals, even as adults.

Just like a nurturing, loving, and supportive family environment contributes to healthy emotions and behaviors, the opposite is true. For example, many children who grow up in abusive households and witness domestic violence firsthand model the same behavior in their family relationships when they are older. Both examples show how the quality of family love we are exposed to from a young age can have far-reaching consequences.

Navigating troubles with family love to improve emotional well-being

People who grow up exposed to appropriate amounts of positive family love are lucky. These individuals may experience fewer problems with emotional well-being as they age. Suppose you grew up in a situation where family love was missing or skewed or are currently experiencing issues with a family affecting your emotional well-being. In that case, there are a few things that you can do to improve this situation:

Children have no control over what family they are born into. They may suffer the consequences if their family is abusive or otherwise dysfunctional. These situations can leave long-lasting scars, including trust issues, low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and difficulty getting close to people with age.  

Counseling can help you understand and start to heal through issues you may be coping with because of family problems or trauma. Whether the trouble is in the past or ongoing, there are many options for family counseling. You can search for support groups in your area or online or use conventional family counseling to work through issues together. Online therapy is also a highly effective choice because of its convenience, accessibility, and affordability.

Search for connection elsewhere

You can also cope with a lack of family love or start healing from an unhealthy family dynamic by choosing to develop close relationships with others. This can be hard to do when you are younger and still live with your parents, but as adults, we can choose to end unhealthy family relationships in most cases. To cultivate the type of family love you desire, reach out to the people you trust and feel close to for support. These people might be friends, co-workers, or anyone with whom you have a close connection. These relationships may start as friendships, but friends can become tight, like family, over time. 

Put yourself first

Ideally, one or both suggestions above can be helpful if you are struggling with your emotional well-being because of a lack of family love. If counseling or choosing your own family doesn't seem like viable options due to a lack of finances or people you consider close, like family, don't give up. Remember that self-love and self-expression are also essential factors in your emotional well-being. Sometimes taking your emotional well-being into your own hands can be just as empowering. Even though it can be challenging, you must learn to recognize your self-worth. Standing up for yourself is essential if you live with a family that doesn't treat you with love and respect. This may be difficult for some, and they may need the support of others to guide them through those times. 

Remember, how your family treats you does not reflect your worth. Don't be afraid to set boundaries around unhealthy family relationships (if you have that option). Don’t keep company with people who make you feel bad about yourself. Take your emotional well-being into your own hands by taking good care of yourself physically, doing what makes you happy, and seeking support.

Navigate family challenges with professional guidance

Family love is fundamental when it comes to a person's emotional well-being. Growing up in a loving and supportive family can help you develop into an emotionally healthy teen and adult. In contrast, a lack of family love or growing up in an unhealthy family environment can negatively impact your emotional well-being in the long term. Just know that whatever happens in your family life, you can always change your situation for the better.

If you grew up with a lack of family love or are having family problems, there are several things that you can do to improve your emotional well-being. These things include seeing a counselor online or in person, choosing your own family, and putting yourself first instead of letting others get you down. Our family indeed shapes us, but if you were dealt a bad hand, it doesn't mean you can't take things into your own hands and create the change you deserve.

A few final things to remember as you embark on this journey: First, be patient. Healing emotional scars takes time, and there will be highs and lows along the way. Also, don't give up. Finally, because we’re all unique in our situations and personalities, be self-aware. Take note of what things work for you and what don't.

Even though it’s often critical for repairing family damage or cultivating better mental health for people with negative family experiences, many choose not to seek therapy. Some find it difficult to commute to and attend appointments during the busy work week. People in more rural areas or with limited transportation options may experience barriers to treatment as well. Familial and/or societal stigma deters some from seeking counseling, and issues of discretion may be a priority for them. In such cases, encountering others in a therapist’s office or talking to a counselor face-to-face may be particularly uncomfortable. 

Online therapy provides a comprehensive solution to these obstacles and more. It allows people to attend therapy from home or anywhere with an internet connection on a schedule that works for them. Platforms like Regain match licensed, accredited mental health professionals with clients to provide the best online therapy experience. 

Virtual therapy is often more affordable than in-person therapy without insurance, and a growing body of research indicates it’s as effective as conventional therapy for families and individuals.  For example, a 2021 study published in the Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review states: “Findings of the current studies offer significant support for delivery by TH (Telehealth) methods of family therapy services. The collective evidence suggests equivalent efficacy for relational and mental health outcomes from telehealth relative to face-to-face delivery.”

If your family needs help (re)establishing a healthy bond, or you need support from a professional to work through mental health issues due to family dysfunction, reaching out to Regain is the first step on the road to healing. 

Counselor reviews

“Yumi is amazing and a perfect fit for us. Just having one video session help our family so much in so many ways. He responses are on point and we value it greatly. I can’t thank her enough for all she has continued to do to strengthen our family. I would recommend her to the world that’s how amazing she is.”

“Dr Bown has made significant impact in our lives and She is always giving honest advice and we feel she genuinely cares about our family. She is a valued treasure that we are grateful for in our lives :)”

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

What is family love?

Family  love is the bond characterized by affection, respect, loyalty, and healthy attachment.  Family love is a different kind of life love experienced in other relationships; it can be a healthy father-daughter relationship or a healthy mother-son relationship. In most cases, it is unconditional and never-ending, despite the highs and lows of life.  Even after children have grown up and left the house, adult children always know they have a place to go no matter where life takes them.

What do you call the love for family?

Storge , or familial love, is the love of family experienced between parents and their children. This is often an unconditional and unbreakable love that lasts a lifetime.

Why is love important in a family?

Familial life love is important because family and friends are caring and love and support one another in a way nobody else can.  A family that offers time, caring, and love will be there to support you when you are in a time of need and during the good times, as well.  A family also makes you feel at home, and love is unconditional. Bonds between small and large loving, caring, close families are very strong, and family and friends who love you unconditionally will support you throughout all the ups and downs of life. They will be there for you when you feel like giving up on life . They will be your strength when you're weak.

What family means quotes?

Family life love is the topic of many love quotes , which express the caring and love behind a family.  Family love quotes can help you express the love your family has and its impact on your wellbeing. One popular quote is by Friedrich Nietzsche, who said, “In family, life love is the oil that eases friction, the cement that binds closer together.”   “Love is the oil” refers to the love your family shows that helps get you through the “friction” or tough times in life. Those are just 2 out of so many family quotes that could help you and your family get through different situations in life together.

Should I choose love or family?

Family and romantic love are both very important.  In truth, a family isn’t always close with one another or may not always agree with your choice for a romantic partner.  There may be seasons in life where you may need to choose family home love over your partner or vice versa.  Every situation is unique, and it is important to weigh the pros and cons before making a decision.  It can be hard to choose a romantic partner over a large loving, caring, close family.  In some cases, the family loves you enough to understand and respect you can make your own choices, even though they may not agree with your choice of a romantic partner.

Why is family so important?

A family home and love of family is so important because a family loves you unconditionally and, in most cases, you can always count on them to be there through the good times and the bad. For instance, the " I love you son " from your parents is an affirmation of their unconditional love.

What are the 7 kinds of love?

• Philia-Affectionate love.
• Storge-Love of the child.
• Agape-Selfless love.
• Ludus-Playful love.
• Pragma-Long-lasting love.
• Philautia-Love of the self.

What are good questions about family? Is true love real? What is the best love?

Why is it better to have positive relationships with family, what are ways to strengthen family bonds.

• What Is Tantric Love, And Is It Right For Your Relationship?
• 22 Keys To Writing Love Letters For Her

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

This essay focuses on personal love, or the love of particular persons as such. Part of the philosophical task in understanding personal love is to distinguish the various kinds of personal love. For example, the way in which I love my wife is seemingly very different from the way I love my mother, my child, and my friend. This task has typically proceeded hand-in-hand with philosophical analyses of these kinds of personal love, analyses that in part respond to various puzzles about love. Can love be justified? If so, how? What is the value of personal love? What impact does love have on the autonomy of both the lover and the beloved?

1. Preliminary Distinctions

2. love as union, 3. love as robust concern, 4.1 love as appraisal of value, 4.2 love as bestowal of value, 4.3 an intermediate position, 5.1 love as emotion proper, 5.2 love as emotion complex, 6. the value and justification of love, other internet resources, related entries.

In ordinary conversations, we often say things like the following:

• I love chocolate (or skiing).
• I love doing philosophy (or being a father).
• I love my dog (or cat).
• I love my wife (or mother or child or friend).

However, what is meant by ‘love’ differs from case to case. (1) may be understood as meaning merely that I like this thing or activity very much. In (2) the implication is typically that I find engaging in a certain activity or being a certain kind of person to be a part of my identity and so what makes my life worth living; I might just as well say that I value these. By contrast, (3) and (4) seem to indicate a mode of concern that cannot be neatly assimilated to anything else. Thus, we might understand the sort of love at issue in (4) to be, roughly, a matter of caring about another person as the person she is, for her own sake. (Accordingly, (3) may be understood as a kind of deficient mode of the sort of love we typically reserve for persons.) Philosophical accounts of love have focused primarily on the sort of personal love at issue in (4); such personal love will be the focus here (though see Frankfurt (1999) and Jaworska & Wonderly (2017) for attempts to provide a more general account that applies to non-persons as well).

Even within personal love, philosophers from the ancient Greeks on have traditionally distinguished three notions that can properly be called “love”: eros , agape , and philia . It will be useful to distinguish these three and say something about how contemporary discussions typically blur these distinctions (sometimes intentionally so) or use them for other purposes.

‘ Eros ’ originally meant love in the sense of a kind of passionate desire for an object, typically sexual passion (Liddell et al., 1940). Nygren (1953a,b) describes eros as the “‘love of desire,’ or acquisitive love” and therefore as egocentric (1953b, p. 89). Soble (1989b, 1990) similarly describes eros as “selfish” and as a response to the merits of the beloved—especially the beloved’s goodness or beauty. What is evident in Soble’s description of eros is a shift away from the sexual: to love something in the “erosic” sense (to use the term Soble coins) is to love it in a way that, by being responsive to its merits, is dependent on reasons. Such an understanding of eros is encouraged by Plato’s discussion in the Symposium , in which Socrates understands sexual desire to be a deficient response to physical beauty in particular, a response which ought to be developed into a response to the beauty of a person’s soul and, ultimately, into a response to the form, Beauty.

Soble’s intent in understanding eros to be a reason-dependent sort of love is to articulate a sharp contrast with agape , a sort of love that does not respond to the value of its object. ‘ Agape ’ has come, primarily through the Christian tradition, to mean the sort of love God has for us persons, as well as our love for God and, by extension, of our love for each other—a kind of brotherly love. In the paradigm case of God’s love for us, agape is “spontaneous and unmotivated,” revealing not that we merit that love but that God’s nature is love (Nygren 1953b, p. 85). Rather than responding to antecedent value in its object, agape instead is supposed to create value in its object and therefore to initiate our fellowship with God (pp. 87–88). Consequently, Badhwar (2003, p. 58) characterizes agape as “independent of the loved individual’s fundamental characteristics as the particular person she is”; and Soble (1990, p. 5) infers that agape , in contrast to eros , is therefore not reason dependent but is rationally “incomprehensible,” admitting at best of causal or historical explanations. [ 1 ]

Finally, ‘ philia ’ originally meant a kind of affectionate regard or friendly feeling towards not just one’s friends but also possibly towards family members, business partners, and one’s country at large (Liddell et al., 1940; Cooper, 1977). Like eros , philia is generally (but not universally) understood to be responsive to (good) qualities in one’s beloved. This similarity between eros and philia has led Thomas (1987) to wonder whether the only difference between romantic love and friendship is the sexual involvement of the former—and whether that is adequate to account for the real differences we experience. The distinction between eros and philia becomes harder to draw with Soble’s attempt to diminish the importance of the sexual in eros (1990).

Maintaining the distinctions among eros , agape , and philia becomes even more difficult when faced with contemporary theories of love (including romantic love) and friendship. For, as discussed below, some theories of romantic love understand it along the lines of the agape tradition as creating value in the beloved (cf. Section 4.2 ), and other accounts of romantic love treat sexual activity as merely the expression of what otherwise looks very much like friendship.

Given the focus here on personal love, Christian conceptions of God’s love for persons (and vice versa ) will be omitted, and the distinction between eros and philia will be blurred—as it typically is in contemporary accounts. Instead, the focus here will be on these contemporary understandings of love, including romantic love, understood as an attitude we take towards other persons. [ 2 ]

In providing an account of love, philosophical analyses must be careful to distinguish love from other positive attitudes we take towards persons, such as liking. Intuitively, love differs from such attitudes as liking in terms of its “depth,” and the problem is to elucidate the kind of “depth” we intuitively find love to have. Some analyses do this in part by providing thin conceptions of what liking amounts to. Thus, Singer (1991) and Brown (1987) understand liking to be a matter of desiring, an attitude that at best involves its object having only instrumental (and not intrinsic) value. Yet this seems inadequate: surely there are attitudes towards persons intermediate between having a desire with a person as its object and loving the person. I can care about a person for her own sake and not merely instrumentally, and yet such caring does not on its own amount to (non-deficiently) loving her, for it seems I can care about my dog in exactly the same way, a kind of caring which is insufficiently personal for love.

It is more common to distinguish loving from liking via the intuition that the “depth” of love is to be explained in terms of a notion of identification: to love someone is somehow to identify yourself with him, whereas no such notion of identification is involved in liking. As Nussbaum puts it, “The choice between one potential love and another can feel, and be, like a choice of a way of life, a decision to dedicate oneself to these values rather than these” (1990, p. 328); liking clearly does not have this sort of “depth” (see also Helm 2010; Bagley 2015). Whether love involves some kind of identification, and if so exactly how to understand such identification, is a central bone of contention among the various analyses of love. In particular, Whiting (2013) argues that the appeal to a notion of identification distorts our understanding of the sort of motivation love can provide, for taken literally it implies that love motivates through self -interest rather than through the beloved’s interests. Thus, Whiting argues, central to love is the possibility that love takes the lover “outside herself”, potentially forgetting herself in being moved directly by the interests of the beloved. (Of course, we need not take the notion of identification literally in this way: in identifying with one’s beloved, one might have a concern for one’s beloved that is analogous to one’s concern for oneself; see Helm 2010.)

Another common way to distinguish love from other personal attitudes is in terms of a distinctive kind of evaluation, which itself can account for love’s “depth.” Again, whether love essentially involves a distinctive kind of evaluation, and if so how to make sense of that evaluation, is hotly disputed. Closely related to questions of evaluation are questions of justification: can we justify loving or continuing to love a particular person, and if so, how? For those who think the justification of love is possible, it is common to understand such justification in terms of evaluation, and the answers here affect various accounts’ attempts to make sense of the kind of constancy or commitment love seems to involve, as well as the sense in which love is directed at particular individuals.

In what follows, theories of love are tentatively and hesitantly classified into four types: love as union, love as robust concern, love as valuing, and love as an emotion. It should be clear, however, that particular theories classified under one type sometimes also include, without contradiction, ideas central to other types. The types identified here overlap to some extent, and in some cases classifying particular theories may involve excessive pigeonholing. (Such cases are noted below.) Part of the classificatory problem is that many accounts of love are quasi-reductionistic, understanding love in terms of notions like affection, evaluation, attachment, etc., which themselves never get analyzed. Even when these accounts eschew explicitly reductionistic language, very often little attempt is made to show how one such “aspect” of love is conceptually connected to others. As a result, there is no clear and obvious way to classify particular theories, let alone identify what the relevant classes should be.

The union view claims that love consists in the formation of (or the desire to form) some significant kind of union, a “we.” A central task for union theorists, therefore, is to spell out just what such a “we” comes to—whether it is literally a new entity in the world somehow composed of the lover and the beloved, or whether it is merely metaphorical. Variants of this view perhaps go back to Aristotle (cf. Sherman 1993) and can also be found in Montaigne ([E]) and Hegel (1997); contemporary proponents include Solomon (1981, 1988), Scruton (1986), Nozick (1989), Fisher (1990), and Delaney (1996).

Scruton, writing in particular about romantic love, claims that love exists “just so soon as reciprocity becomes community: that is, just so soon as all distinction between my interests and your interests is overcome” (1986, p. 230). The idea is that the union is a union of concern, so that when I act out of that concern it is not for my sake alone or for your sake alone but for our sake. Fisher (1990) holds a similar, but somewhat more moderate view, claiming that love is a partial fusion of the lovers’ cares, concerns, emotional responses, and actions. What is striking about both Scruton and Fisher is the claim that love requires the actual union of the lovers’ concerns, for it thus becomes clear that they conceive of love not so much as an attitude we take towards another but as a relationship: the distinction between your interests and mine genuinely disappears only when we together come to have shared cares, concerns, etc., and my merely having a certain attitude towards you is not enough for love. This provides content to the notion of a “we” as the (metaphorical?) subject of these shared cares and concerns, and as that for whose sake we act.

Solomon (1988) offers a union view as well, though one that tries “to make new sense out of ‘love’ through a literal rather than metaphoric sense of the ‘fusion’ of two souls” (p. 24, cf. Solomon 1981; however, it is unclear exactly what he means by a “soul” here and so how love can be a “literal” fusion of two souls). What Solomon has in mind is the way in which, through love, the lovers redefine their identities as persons in terms of the relationship: “Love is the concentration and the intensive focus of mutual definition on a single individual, subjecting virtually every personal aspect of one’s self to this process” (1988, p. 197). The result is that lovers come to share the interests, roles, virtues, and so on that constitute what formerly was two individual identities but now has become a shared identity, and they do so in part by each allowing the other to play an important role in defining his own identity.

Nozick (1989) offers a union view that differs from those of Scruton, Fisher, and Solomon in that Nozick thinks that what is necessary for love is merely the desire to form a “we,” together with the desire that your beloved reciprocates. Nonetheless, he claims that this “we” is “a new entity in the world…created by a new web of relationships between [the lovers] which makes them no longer separate” (p. 70). In spelling out this web of relationships, Nozick appeals to the lovers “pooling” not only their well-beings, in the sense that the well-being of each is tied up with that of the other, but also their autonomy, in that “each transfers some previous rights to make certain decisions unilaterally into a joint pool” (p. 71). In addition, Nozick claims, the lovers each acquire a new identity as a part of the “we,” a new identity constituted by their (a) wanting to be perceived publicly as a couple, (b) their attending to their pooled well-being, and (c) their accepting a “certain kind of division of labor” (p. 72):

A person in a we might find himself coming across something interesting to read yet leaving it for the other person, not because he himself would not be interested in it but because the other would be more interested, and one of them reading it is sufficient for it to be registered by the wider identity now shared, the we . [ 3 ]

Opponents of the union view have seized on claims like this as excessive: union theorists, they claim, take too literally the ontological commitments of this notion of a “we.” This leads to two specific criticisms of the union view. The first is that union views do away with individual autonomy. Autonomy, it seems, involves a kind of independence on the part of the autonomous agent, such that she is in control over not only what she does but also who she is, as this is constituted by her interests, values, concerns, etc. However, union views, by doing away with a clear distinction between your interests and mine, thereby undermine this sort of independence and so undermine the autonomy of the lovers. If autonomy is a part of the individual’s good, then, on the union view, love is to this extent bad; so much the worse for the union view (Singer 1994; Soble 1997). Moreover, Singer (1994) argues that a necessary part of having your beloved be the object of your love is respect for your beloved as the particular person she is, and this requires respecting her autonomy.

Union theorists have responded to this objection in several ways. Nozick (1989) seems to think of a loss of autonomy in love as a desirable feature of the sort of union lovers can achieve. Fisher (1990), somewhat more reluctantly, claims that the loss of autonomy in love is an acceptable consequence of love. Yet without further argument these claims seem like mere bullet biting. Solomon (1988, pp. 64ff) describes this “tension” between union and autonomy as “the paradox of love.” However, this a view that Soble (1997) derides: merely to call it a paradox, as Solomon does, is not to face up to the problem.

The second criticism involves a substantive view concerning love. Part of what it is to love someone, these opponents say, is to have concern for him for his sake. However, union views make such concern unintelligible and eliminate the possibility of both selfishness and self-sacrifice, for by doing away with the distinction between my interests and your interests they have in effect turned your interests into mine and vice versa (Soble 1997; see also Blum 1980, 1993). Some advocates of union views see this as a point in their favor: we need to explain how it is I can have concern for people other than myself, and the union view apparently does this by understanding your interests to be part of my own. And Delaney, responding to an apparent tension between our desire to be loved unselfishly (for fear of otherwise being exploited) and our desire to be loved for reasons (which presumably are attractive to our lover and hence have a kind of selfish basis), says (1996, p. 346):

Given my view that the romantic ideal is primarily characterized by a desire to achieve a profound consolidation of needs and interests through the formation of a we , I do not think a little selfishness of the sort described should pose a worry to either party.

The objection, however, lies precisely in this attempt to explain my concern for my beloved egoistically. As Whiting (1991, p. 10) puts it, such an attempt “strikes me as unnecessary and potentially objectionable colonization”: in love, I ought to be concerned with my beloved for her sake, and not because I somehow get something out of it. (This can be true whether my concern with my beloved is merely instrumental to my good or whether it is partly constitutive of my good.)

Although Whiting’s and Soble’s criticisms here succeed against the more radical advocates of the union view, they in part fail to acknowledge the kernel of truth to be gleaned from the idea of union. Whiting’s way of formulating the second objection in terms of an unnecessary egoism in part points to a way out: we persons are in part social creatures, and love is one profound mode of that sociality. Indeed, part of the point of union accounts is to make sense of this social dimension: to make sense of a way in which we can sometimes identify ourselves with others not merely in becoming interdependent with them (as Singer 1994, p. 165, suggests, understanding ‘interdependence’ to be a kind of reciprocal benevolence and respect) but rather in making who we are as persons be constituted in part by those we love (cf., e.g., Rorty 1986/1993; Nussbaum 1990).

Along these lines, Friedman (1998), taking her inspiration in part from Delaney (1996), argues that we should understand the sort of union at issue in love to be a kind of federation of selves:

On the federation model, a third unified entity is constituted by the interaction of the lovers, one which involves the lovers acting in concert across a range of conditions and for a range of purposes. This concerted action, however, does not erase the existence of the two lovers as separable and separate agents with continuing possibilities for the exercise of their own respective agencies. [p. 165]

Given that on this view the lovers do not give up their individual identities, there is no principled reason why the union view cannot make sense of the lover’s concern for her beloved for his sake. [ 4 ] Moreover, Friedman argues, once we construe union as federation, we can see that autonomy is not a zero-sum game; rather, love can both directly enhance the autonomy of each and promote the growth of various skills, like realistic and critical self-evaluation, that foster autonomy.

Nonetheless, this federation model is not without its problems—problems that affect other versions of the union view as well. For if the federation (or the “we”, as on Nozick’s view) is understood as a third entity, we need a clearer account than has been given of its ontological status and how it comes to be. Relevant here is the literature on shared intention and plural subjects. Gilbert (1989, 1996, 2000) has argued that we should take quite seriously the existence of a plural subject as an entity over and above its constituent members. Others, such as Tuomela (1984, 1995), Searle (1990), and Bratman (1999) are more cautious, treating such talk of “us” having an intention as metaphorical.

As this criticism of the union view indicates, many find caring about your beloved for her sake to be a part of what it is to love her. The robust concern view of love takes this to be the central and defining feature of love (cf. Taylor 1976; Newton-Smith 1989; Soble 1990, 1997; LaFollette 1996; Frankfurt 1999; White 2001). As Taylor puts it:

To summarize: if x loves y then x wants to benefit and be with y etc., and he has these wants (or at least some of them) because he believes y has some determinate characteristics ψ in virtue of which he thinks it worth while to benefit and be with y . He regards satisfaction of these wants as an end and not as a means towards some other end. [p. 157]

In conceiving of my love for you as constituted by my concern for you for your sake, the robust concern view rejects the idea, central to the union view, that love is to be understood in terms of the (literal or metaphorical) creation of a “we”: I am the one who has this concern for you, though it is nonetheless disinterested and so not egoistic insofar as it is for your sake rather than for my own. [ 5 ]

At the heart of the robust concern view is the idea that love “is neither affective nor cognitive. It is volitional” (Frankfurt 1999, p. 129; see also Martin 2015). Frankfurt continues:

That a person cares about or that he loves something has less to do with how things make him feel, or with his opinions about them, than with the more or less stable motivational structures that shape his preferences and that guide and limit his conduct.

This account analyzes caring about someone for her sake as a matter of being motivated in certain ways, in part as a response to what happens to one’s beloved. Of course, to understand love in terms of desires is not to leave other emotional responses out in the cold, for these emotions should be understood as consequences of desires. Thus, just as I can be emotionally crushed when one of my strong desires is disappointed, so too I can be emotionally crushed when things similarly go badly for my beloved. In this way Frankfurt (1999) tacitly, and White (2001) more explicitly, acknowledge the way in which my caring for my beloved for her sake results in my identity being transformed through her influence insofar as I become vulnerable to things that happen to her.

Not all robust concern theorists seem to accept this line, however; in particular, Taylor (1976) and Soble (1990) seem to have a strongly individualistic conception of persons that prevents my identity being bound up with my beloved in this sort of way, a kind of view that may seem to undermine the intuitive “depth” that love seems to have. (For more on this point, see Rorty 1986/1993.) In the middle is Stump (2006), who follows Aquinas in understanding love to involve not only the desire for your beloved’s well-being but also a desire for a certain kind of relationship with your beloved—as a parent or spouse or sibling or priest or friend, for example—a relationship within which you share yourself with and connect yourself to your beloved. [ 6 ]

One source of worry about the robust concern view is that it involves too passive an understanding of one’s beloved (Ebels-Duggan 2008). The thought is that on the robust concern view the lover merely tries to discover what the beloved’s well-being consists in and then acts to promote that, potentially by thwarting the beloved’s own efforts when the lover thinks those efforts would harm her well-being. This, however, would be disrespectful and demeaning, not the sort of attitude that love is. What robust concern views seem to miss, Ebels-Duggan suggests, is the way love involves interacting agents, each with a capacity for autonomy the recognition and engagement with which is an essential part of love. In response, advocates of the robust concern view might point out that promoting someone’s well-being normally requires promoting her autonomy (though they may maintain that this need not always be true: that paternalism towards a beloved can sometimes be justified and appropriate as an expression of one’s love). Moreover, we might plausibly think, it is only through the exercise of one’s autonomy that one can define one’s own well-being as a person, so that a lover’s failure to respect the beloved’s autonomy would be a failure to promote her well-being and therefore not an expression of love, contrary to what Ebels-Duggan suggests. Consequently, it might seem, robust concern views can counter this objection by offering an enriched conception of what it is to be a person and so of the well-being of persons.

Another source of worry is that the robust concern view offers too thin a conception of love. By emphasizing robust concern, this view understands other features we think characteristic of love, such as one’s emotional responsiveness to one’s beloved, to be the effects of that concern rather than constituents of it. Thus Velleman (1999) argues that robust concern views, by understanding love merely as a matter of aiming at a particular end (viz., the welfare of one’s beloved), understand love to be merely conative. However, he claims, love can have nothing to do with desires, offering as a counterexample the possibility of loving a troublemaking relation whom you do not want to be with, whose well being you do not want to promote, etc. Similarly, Badhwar (2003) argues that such a “teleological” view of love makes it mysterious how “we can continue to love someone long after death has taken him beyond harm or benefit” (p. 46). Moreover Badhwar argues, if love is essentially a desire, then it implies that we lack something; yet love does not imply this and, indeed, can be felt most strongly at times when we feel our lives most complete and lacking in nothing. Consequently, Velleman and Badhwar conclude, love need not involve any desire or concern for the well-being of one’s beloved.

This conclusion, however, seems too hasty, for such examples can be accommodated within the robust concern view. Thus, the concern for your relative in Velleman’s example can be understood to be present but swamped by other, more powerful desires to avoid him. Indeed, keeping the idea that you want to some degree to benefit him, an idea Velleman rejects, seems to be essential to understanding the conceptual tension between loving someone and not wanting to help him, a tension Velleman does not fully acknowledge. Similarly, continued love for someone who has died can be understood on the robust concern view as parasitic on the former love you had for him when he was still alive: your desires to benefit him get transformed, through your subsequent understanding of the impossibility of doing so, into wishes. [ 7 ] Finally, the idea of concern for your beloved’s well-being need not imply the idea that you lack something, for such concern can be understood in terms of the disposition to be vigilant for occasions when you can come to his aid and consequently to have the relevant occurrent desires. All of this seems fully compatible with the robust concern view.

One might also question whether Velleman and Badhwar make proper use of their examples of loving your meddlesome relation or someone who has died. For although we can understand these as genuine cases of love, they are nonetheless deficient cases and ought therefore be understood as parasitic on the standard cases. Readily to accommodate such deficient cases of love into a philosophical analysis as being on a par with paradigm cases, and to do so without some special justification, is dubious.

Nonetheless, the robust concern view as it stands does not seem properly able to account for the intuitive “depth” of love and so does not seem properly to distinguish loving from liking. Although, as noted above, the robust concern view can begin to make some sense of the way in which the lover’s identity is altered by the beloved, it understands this only an effect of love, and not as a central part of what love consists in.

This vague thought is nicely developed by Wonderly (2017), who emphasizes that in addition to the sort of disinterested concern for another that is central to robust-concern accounts of love, an essential part of at least romantic love is the idea that in loving someone I must find them to be not merely important for their own sake but also important to me . Wonderly (2017) fleshes out what this “importance to me” involves in terms of the idea of attachment (developed in Wonderly 2016) that she argues can make sense of the intimacy and depth of love from within what remains fundamentally a robust-concern account. [ 8 ]

4. Love as Valuing

A third kind of view of love understands love to be a distinctive mode of valuing a person. As the distinction between eros and agape in Section 1 indicates, there are at least two ways to construe this in terms of whether the lover values the beloved because she is valuable, or whether the beloved comes to be valuable to the lover as a result of her loving him. The former view, which understands the lover as appraising the value of the beloved in loving him, is the topic of Section 4.1 , whereas the latter view, which understands her as bestowing value on him, will be discussed in Section 4.2 .

Velleman (1999, 2008) offers an appraisal view of love, understanding love to be fundamentally a matter of acknowledging and responding in a distinctive way to the value of the beloved. (For a very different appraisal view of love, see Kolodny 2003.) Understanding this more fully requires understanding both the kind of value of the beloved to which one responds and the distinctive kind of response to such value that love is. Nonetheless, it should be clear that what makes an account be an appraisal view of love is not the mere fact that love is understood to involve appraisal; many other accounts do so, and it is typical of robust concern accounts, for example (cf. the quote from Taylor above , Section 3 ). Rather, appraisal views are distinctive in understanding love to consist in that appraisal.

In articulating the kind of value love involves, Velleman, following Kant, distinguishes dignity from price. To have a price , as the economic metaphor suggests, is to have a value that can be compared to the value of other things with prices, such that it is intelligible to exchange without loss items of the same value. By contrast, to have dignity is to have a value such that comparisons of relative value become meaningless. Material goods are normally understood to have prices, but we persons have dignity: no substitution of one person for another can preserve exactly the same value, for something of incomparable worth would be lost (and gained) in such a substitution.

On this Kantian view, our dignity as persons consists in our rational nature: our capacity both to be actuated by reasons that we autonomously provide ourselves in setting our own ends and to respond appropriately to the intrinsic values we discover in the world. Consequently, one important way in which we exercise our rational natures is to respond with respect to the dignity of other persons (a dignity that consists in part in their capacity for respect): respect just is the required minimal response to the dignity of persons. What makes a response to a person be that of respect, Velleman claims, still following Kant, is that it “arrests our self-love” and thereby prevents us from treating him as a means to our ends (p. 360).

Given this, Velleman claims that love is similarly a response to the dignity of persons, and as such it is the dignity of the object of our love that justifies that love. However, love and respect are different kinds of responses to the same value. For love arrests not our self-love but rather

our tendencies toward emotional self-protection from another person, tendencies to draw ourselves in and close ourselves off from being affected by him. Love disarms our emotional defenses; it makes us vulnerable to the other. [1999, p. 361]

This means that the concern, attraction, sympathy, etc. that we normally associate with love are not constituents of love but are rather its normal effects, and love can remain without them (as in the case of the love for a meddlesome relative one cannot stand being around). Moreover, this provides Velleman with a clear account of the intuitive “depth” of love: it is essentially a response to persons as such, and to say that you love your dog is therefore to be confused.

Of course, we do not respond with love to the dignity of every person we meet, nor are we somehow required to: love, as the disarming of our emotional defenses in a way that makes us especially vulnerable to another, is the optional maximal response to others’ dignity. What, then, explains the selectivity of love—why I love some people and not others? The answer lies in the contingent fit between the way some people behaviorally express their dignity as persons and the way I happen to respond to those expressions by becoming emotionally vulnerable to them. The right sort of fit makes someone “lovable” by me (1999, p. 372), and my responding with love in these cases is a matter of my “really seeing” this person in a way that I fail to do with others who do not fit with me in this way. By ‘lovable’ here Velleman seems to mean able to be loved, not worthy of being loved, for nothing Velleman says here speaks to a question about the justification of my loving this person rather than that. Rather, what he offers is an explanation of the selectivity of my love, an explanation that as a matter of fact makes my response be that of love rather than mere respect.

This understanding of the selectivity of love as something that can be explained but not justified is potentially troubling. For we ordinarily think we can justify not only my loving you rather than someone else but also and more importantly the constancy of my love: my continuing to love you even as you change in certain fundamental ways (but not others). As Delaney (1996, p. 347) puts the worry about constancy:

while you seem to want it to be true that, were you to become a schmuck, your lover would continue to love you,…you also want it to be the case that your lover would never love a schmuck.

The issue here is not merely that we can offer explanations of the selectivity of my love, of why I do not love schmucks; rather, at issue is the discernment of love, of loving and continuing to love for good reasons as well as of ceasing to love for good reasons. To have these good reasons seems to involve attributing different values to you now rather than formerly or rather than to someone else, yet this is precisely what Velleman denies is the case in making the distinction between love and respect the way he does.

It is also questionable whether Velleman can even explain the selectivity of love in terms of the “fit” between your expressions and my sensitivities. For the relevant sensitivities on my part are emotional sensitivities: the lowering of my emotional defenses and so becoming emotionally vulnerable to you. Thus, I become vulnerable to the harms (or goods) that befall you and so sympathetically feel your pain (or joy). Such emotions are themselves assessable for warrant, and now we can ask why my disappointment that you lost the race is warranted, but my being disappointed that a mere stranger lost would not be warranted. The intuitive answer is that I love you but not him. However, this answer is unavailable to Velleman, because he thinks that what makes my response to your dignity that of love rather than respect is precisely that I feel such emotions, and to appeal to my love in explaining the emotions therefore seems viciously circular.

Although these problems are specific to Velleman’s account, the difficulty can be generalized to any appraisal account of love (such as that offered in Kolodny 2003). For if love is an appraisal, it needs to be distinguished from other forms of appraisal, including our evaluative judgments. On the one hand, to try to distinguish love as an appraisal from other appraisals in terms of love’s having certain effects on our emotional and motivational life (as on Velleman’s account) is unsatisfying because it ignores part of what needs to be explained: why the appraisal of love has these effects and yet judgments with the same evaluative content do not. Indeed, this question is crucial if we are to understand the intuitive “depth” of love, for without an answer to this question we do not understand why love should have the kind of centrality in our lives it manifestly does. [ 9 ] On the other hand, to bundle this emotional component into the appraisal itself would be to turn the view into either the robust concern view ( Section 3 ) or a variant of the emotion view ( Section 5.1 ).

In contrast to Velleman, Singer (1991, 1994, 2009) understands love to be fundamentally a matter of bestowing value on the beloved. To bestow value on another is to project a kind of intrinsic value onto him. Indeed, this fact about love is supposed to distinguish love from liking: “Love is an attitude with no clear objective,” whereas liking is inherently teleological (1991, p. 272). As such, there are no standards of correctness for bestowing such value, and this is how love differs from other personal attitudes like gratitude, generosity, and condescension: “love…confers importance no matter what the object is worth” (p. 273). Consequently, Singer thinks, love is not an attitude that can be justified in any way.

What is it, exactly, to bestow this kind of value on someone? It is, Singer says, a kind of attachment and commitment to the beloved, in which one comes to treat him as an end in himself and so to respond to his ends, interests, concerns, etc. as having value for their own sake. This means in part that the bestowal of value reveals itself “by caring about the needs and interests of the beloved, by wishing to benefit or protect her, by delighting in her achievements,” etc. (p. 270). This sounds very much like the robust concern view, yet the bestowal view differs in understanding such robust concern to be the effect of the bestowal of value that is love rather than itself what constitutes love: in bestowing value on my beloved, I make him be valuable in such a way that I ought to respond with robust concern.

For it to be intelligible that I have bestowed value on someone, I must therefore respond appropriately to him as valuable, and this requires having some sense of what his well-being is and of what affects that well-being positively or negatively. Yet having this sense requires in turn knowing what his strengths and deficiencies are, and this is a matter of appraising him in various ways. Bestowal thus presupposes a kind of appraisal, as a way of “really seeing” the beloved and attending to him. Nonetheless, Singer claims, it is the bestowal that is primary for understanding what love consists in: the appraisal is required only so that the commitment to one’s beloved and his value as thus bestowed has practical import and is not “a blind submission to some unknown being” (1991, p. 272; see also Singer 1994, pp. 139ff).

Singer is walking a tightrope in trying to make room for appraisal in his account of love. Insofar as the account is fundamentally a bestowal account, Singer claims that love cannot be justified, that we bestow the relevant kind of value “gratuitously.” This suggests that love is blind, that it does not matter what our beloved is like, which seems patently false. Singer tries to avoid this conclusion by appealing to the role of appraisal: it is only because we appraise another as having certain virtues and vices that we come to bestow value on him. Yet the “because” here, since it cannot justify the bestowal, is at best a kind of contingent causal explanation. [ 10 ] In this respect, Singer’s account of the selectivity of love is much the same as Velleman’s, and it is liable to the same criticism: it makes unintelligible the way in which our love can be discerning for better or worse reasons. Indeed, this failure to make sense of the idea that love can be justified is a problem for any bestowal view. For either (a) a bestowal itself cannot be justified (as on Singer’s account), in which case the justification of love is impossible, or (b) a bestowal can be justified, in which case it is hard to make sense of value as being bestowed rather than there antecedently in the object as the grounds of that “bestowal.”

More generally, a proponent of the bestowal view needs to be much clearer than Singer is in articulating precisely what a bestowal is. What is the value that I create in a bestowal, and how can my bestowal create it? On a crude Humean view, the answer might be that the value is something projected onto the world through my pro-attitudes, like desire. Yet such a view would be inadequate, since the projected value, being relative to a particular individual, would do no theoretical work, and the account would essentially be a variant of the robust concern view. Moreover, in providing a bestowal account of love, care is needed to distinguish love from other personal attitudes such as admiration and respect: do these other attitudes involve bestowal? If so, how does the bestowal in these cases differ from the bestowal of love? If not, why not, and what is so special about love that requires a fundamentally different evaluative attitude than admiration and respect?

Nonetheless, there is a kernel of truth in the bestowal view: there is surely something right about the idea that love is creative and not merely a response to antecedent value, and accounts of love that understand the kind of evaluation implicit in love merely in terms of appraisal seem to be missing something. Precisely what may be missed will be discussed below in Section 6 .

Perhaps there is room for an understanding of love and its relation to value that is intermediate between appraisal and bestowal accounts. After all, if we think of appraisal as something like perception, a matter of responding to what is out there in the world, and of bestowal as something like action, a matter of doing something and creating something, we should recognize that the responsiveness central to appraisal may itself depend on our active, creative choices. Thus, just as we must recognize that ordinary perception depends on our actively directing our attention and deploying concepts, interpretations, and even arguments in order to perceive things accurately, so too we might think our vision of our beloved’s valuable properties that is love also depends on our actively attending to and interpreting him. Something like this is Jollimore’s view (2011). According to Jollimore, in loving someone we actively attend to his valuable properties in a way that we take to provide us with reasons to treat him preferentially. Although we may acknowledge that others might have such properties even to a greater degree than our beloved does, we do not attend to and appreciate such properties in others in the same way we do those in our beloveds; indeed, we find our appreciation of our beloved’s valuable properties to “silence” our similar appreciation of those in others. (In this way, Jollimore thinks, we can solve the problem of fungibility, discussed below in Section 6 .) Likewise, in perceiving our beloved’s actions and character, we do so through the lens of such an appreciation, which will tend as to “silence” interpretations inconsistent with that appreciation. In this way, love involves finding one’s beloved to be valuable in a way that involves elements of both appraisal (insofar as one must thereby be responsive to valuable properties one’s beloved really has) and bestowal (insofar as through one’s attention and committed appreciation of these properties they come to have special significance for one).

One might object that this conception of love as silencing the special value of others or to negative interpretations of our beloveds is irrational in a way that love is not. For, it might seem, such “silencing” is merely a matter of our blinding ourselves to how things really are. Yet Jollimore claims that this sense in which love is blind is not objectionable, for (a) we can still intellectually recognize the things that love’s vision silences, and (b) there really is no impartial perspective we can take on the values things have, and love is one appropriate sort of partial perspective from which the value of persons can be manifest. Nonetheless, one might wonder about whether that perspective of love itself can be distorted and what the norms are in terms of which such distortions are intelligible. Furthermore, it may seem that Jollimore’s attempt to reconcile appraisal and bestowal fails to appreciate the underlying metaphysical difficulty: appraisal is a response to value that is antecedently there, whereas bestowal is the creation of value that was not antecedently there. Consequently, it might seem, appraisal and bestowal are mutually exclusive and cannot be reconciled in the way Jollimore hopes.

Whereas Jollimore tries to combine separate elements of appraisal and of bestowal in a single account, Helm (2010) and Bagley (2015) offer accounts that reject the metaphysical presupposition that values must be either prior to love (as with appraisal) or posterior to love (as with bestowal), instead understanding the love and the values to emerge simultaneously. Thus, Helm presents a detailed account of valuing in terms of the emotions, arguing that while we can understand individual emotions as appraisals , responding to values already their in their objects, these values are bestowed on those objects via broad, holistic patterns of emotions. How this amounts to an account of love will be discussed in Section 5.2 , below. Bagley (2015) instead appeals to a metaphor of improvisation, arguing that just as jazz musicians jointly make determinate the content of their musical ideas through on-going processes of their expression, so too lovers jointly engage in “deep improvisation”, thereby working out of their values and identities through the on-going process of living their lives together. These values are thus something the lovers jointly construct through the process of recognizing and responding to those very values. To love someone is thus to engage with them as partners in such “deep improvisation”. (This account is similar to Helm (2008, 2010)’s account of plural agency, which he uses to provide an account of friendship and other loving relationships; see the discussion of shared activity in the entry on friendship .)

5. Emotion Views

Given these problems with the accounts of love as valuing, perhaps we should turn to the emotions. For emotions just are responses to objects that combine evaluation, motivation, and a kind of phenomenology, all central features of the attitude of love.

Many accounts of love claim that it is an emotion; these include: Wollheim 1984, Rorty 1986/1993, Brown 1987, Hamlyn 1989, Baier 1991, and Badhwar 2003. [ 11 ] Thus, Hamlyn (1989, p. 219) says:

It would not be a plausible move to defend any theory of the emotions to which love and hate seemed exceptions by saying that love and hate are after all not emotions. I have heard this said, but it does seem to me a desperate move to make. If love and hate are not emotions what is?

The difficulty with this claim, as Rorty (1980) argues, is that the word, ‘emotion,’ does not seem to pick out a homogeneous collection of mental states, and so various theories claiming that love is an emotion mean very different things. Consequently, what are here labeled “emotion views” are divided into those that understand love to be a particular kind of evaluative-cum-motivational response to an object, whether that response is merely occurrent or dispositional (‘emotions proper,’ see Section 5.1 , below), and those that understand love to involve a collection of related and interconnected emotions proper (‘emotion complexes,’ see Section 5.2 , below).

An emotion proper is a kind of “evaluative-cum-motivational response to an object”; what does this mean? Emotions are generally understood to have several objects. The target of an emotion is that at which the emotion is directed: if I am afraid or angry at you, then you are the target. In responding to you with fear or anger, I am implicitly evaluating you in a particular way, and this evaluation—called the formal object —is the kind of evaluation of the target that is distinctive of a particular emotion type. Thus, in fearing you, I implicitly evaluate you as somehow dangerous, whereas in being angry at you I implicitly evaluate you as somehow offensive. Yet emotions are not merely evaluations of their targets; they in part motivate us to behave in certain ways, both rationally (by motivating action to avoid the danger) and arationally (via certain characteristic expressions, such as slamming a door out of anger). Moreover, emotions are generally understood to involve a phenomenological component, though just how to understand the characteristic “feel” of an emotion and its relation to the evaluation and motivation is hotly disputed. Finally, emotions are typically understood to be passions: responses that we feel imposed on us as if from the outside, rather than anything we actively do. (For more on the philosophy of emotions, see entry on emotion .)

What then are we saying when we say that love is an emotion proper? According to Brown (1987, p. 14), emotions as occurrent mental states are “abnormal bodily changes caused by the agent’s evaluation or appraisal of some object or situation that the agent believes to be of concern to him or her.” He spells this out by saying that in love, we “cherish” the person for having “a particular complex of instantiated qualities” that is “open-ended” so that we can continue to love the person even as she changes over time (pp. 106–7). These qualities, which include historical and relational qualities, are evaluated in love as worthwhile. [ 12 ] All of this seems aimed at spelling out what love’s formal object is, a task that is fundamental to understanding love as an emotion proper. Thus, Brown seems to say that love’s formal object is just being worthwhile (or, given his examples, perhaps: worthwhile as a person), and he resists being any more specific than this in order to preserve the open-endedness of love. Hamlyn (1989) offers a similar account, saying (p. 228):

With love the difficulty is to find anything of this kind [i.e., a formal object] which is uniquely appropriate to love. My thesis is that there is nothing of this kind that must be so, and that this differentiates it and hate from the other emotions.

Hamlyn goes on to suggest that love and hate might be primordial emotions, a kind of positive or negative “feeling towards,” presupposed by all other emotions. [ 13 ]

The trouble with these accounts of love as an emotion proper is that they provide too thin a conception of love. In Hamlyn’s case, love is conceived as a fairly generic pro-attitude, rather than as the specific kind of distinctively personal attitude discussed here. In Brown’s case, spelling out the formal object of love as simply being worthwhile (as a person) fails to distinguish love from other evaluative responses like admiration and respect. Part of the problem seems to be the rather simple account of what an emotion is that Brown and Hamlyn use as their starting point: if love is an emotion, then the understanding of what an emotion is must be enriched considerably to accommodate love. Yet it is not at all clear whether the idea of an “emotion proper” can be adequately enriched so as to do so. As Pismenny & Prinz (2017) point out, love seems to be too varied both in its ground and in the sort of experience it involves to be capturable by a single emotion.

The emotion complex view, which understands love to be a complex emotional attitude towards another person, may initially seem to hold out great promise to overcome the problems of alternative types of views. By articulating the emotional interconnections between persons, it could offer a satisfying account of the “depth” of love without the excesses of the union view and without the overly narrow teleological focus of the robust concern view; and because these emotional interconnections are themselves evaluations, it could offer an understanding of love as simultaneously evaluative, without needing to specify a single formal object of love. However, the devil is in the details.

Rorty (1986/1993) does not try to present a complete account of love; rather, she focuses on the idea that “relational psychological attitudes” which, like love, essentially involve emotional and desiderative responses, exhibit historicity : “they arise from, and are shaped by, dynamic interactions between a subject and an object” (p. 73). In part this means that what makes an attitude be one of love is not the presence of a state that we can point to at a particular time within the lover; rather, love is to be “identified by a characteristic narrative history” (p. 75). Moreover, Rorty argues, the historicity of love involves the lover’s being permanently transformed by loving who he does.

Baier (1991), seeming to pick up on this understanding of love as exhibiting historicity, says (p. 444):

Love is not just an emotion people feel toward other people, but also a complex tying together of the emotions that two or a few more people have; it is a special form of emotional interdependence.

To a certain extent, such emotional interdependence involves feeling sympathetic emotions, so that, for example, I feel disappointed and frustrated on behalf of my beloved when she fails, and joyful when she succeeds. However, Baier insists, love is “more than just the duplication of the emotion of each in a sympathetic echo in the other” (p. 442); the emotional interdependence of the lovers involves also appropriate follow-up responses to the emotional predicaments of your beloved. Two examples Baier gives (pp. 443–44) are a feeling of “mischievous delight” at your beloved’s temporary bafflement, and amusement at her embarrassment. The idea is that in a loving relationship your beloved gives you permission to feel such emotions when no one else is permitted to do so, and a condition of her granting you that permission is that you feel these emotions “tenderly.” Moreover, you ought to respond emotionally to your beloved’s emotional responses to you: by feeling hurt when she is indifferent to you, for example. All of these foster the sort of emotional interdependence Baier is after—a kind of intimacy you have with your beloved.

Badhwar (2003, p. 46) similarly understands love to be a matter of “one’s overall emotional orientation towards a person—the complex of perceptions, thoughts, and feelings”; as such, love is a matter of having a certain “character structure.” Central to this complex emotional orientation, Badhwar thinks, is what she calls the “look of love”: “an ongoing [emotional] affirmation of the loved object as worthy of existence…for her own sake” (p. 44), an affirmation that involves taking pleasure in your beloved’s well-being. Moreover, Badhwar claims, the look of love also provides to the beloved reliable testimony concerning the quality of the beloved’s character and actions (p. 57).

There is surely something very right about the idea that love, as an attitude central to deeply personal relationships, should not be understood as a state that can simply come and go. Rather, as the emotion complex view insists, the complexity of love is to be found in the historical patterns of one’s emotional responsiveness to one’s beloved—a pattern that also projects into the future. Indeed, as suggested above, the kind of emotional interdependence that results from this complex pattern can seem to account for the intuitive “depth” of love as fully interwoven into one’s emotional sense of oneself. And it seems to make some headway in understanding the complex phenomenology of love: love can at times be a matter of intense pleasure in the presence of one’s beloved, yet it can at other times involve frustration, exasperation, anger, and hurt as a manifestation of the complexities and depth of the relationships it fosters.

This understanding of love as constituted by a history of emotional interdependence enables emotion complex views to say something interesting about the impact love has on the lover’s identity. This is partly Rorty’s point (1986/1993) in her discussion of the historicity of love ( above ). Thus, she argues, one important feature of such historicity is that love is “ dynamically permeable ” in that the lover is continually “changed by loving” such that these changes “tend to ramify through a person’s character” (p. 77). Through such dynamic permeability, love transforms the identity of the lover in a way that can sometimes foster the continuity of the love, as each lover continually changes in response to the changes in the other. [ 14 ] Indeed, Rorty concludes, love should be understood in terms of “a characteristic narrative history” (p. 75) that results from such dynamic permeability. It should be clear, however, that the mere fact of dynamic permeability need not result in the love’s continuing: nothing about the dynamics of a relationship requires that the characteristic narrative history project into the future, and such permeability can therefore lead to the dissolution of the love. Love is therefore risky—indeed, all the more risky because of the way the identity of the lover is defined in part through the love. The loss of a love can therefore make one feel no longer oneself in ways poignantly described by Nussbaum (1990).

By focusing on such emotionally complex histories, emotion complex views differ from most alternative accounts of love. For alternative accounts tend to view love as a kind of attitude we take toward our beloveds, something we can analyze simply in terms of our mental state at the moment. [ 15 ] By ignoring this historical dimension of love in providing an account of what love is, alternative accounts have a hard time providing either satisfying accounts of the sense in which our identities as person are at stake in loving another or satisfactory solutions to problems concerning how love is to be justified (cf. Section 6 , especially the discussion of fungibility ).

Nonetheless, some questions remain. If love is to be understood as an emotion complex, we need a much more explicit account of the pattern at issue here: what ties all of these emotional responses together into a single thing, namely love? Baier and Badhwar seem content to provide interesting and insightful examples of this pattern, but that does not seem to be enough. For example, what connects my amusement at my beloved’s embarrassment to other emotions like my joy on his behalf when he succeeds? Why shouldn’t my amusement at his embarrassment be understood instead as a somewhat cruel case of schadenfreude and so as antithetical to, and disconnected from, love? Moreover, as Naar (2013) notes, we need a principled account of when such historical patterns are disrupted in such a way as to end the love and when they are not. Do I stop loving when, in the midst of clinical depression, I lose my normal pattern of emotional concern?

Presumably the answer requires returning to the historicity of love: it all depends on the historical details of the relationship my beloved and I have forged. Some loves develop so that the intimacy within the relationship is such as to allow for tender, teasing responses to each other, whereas other loves may not. The historical details, together with the lovers’ understanding of their relationship, presumably determine which emotional responses belong to the pattern constitutive of love and which do not. However, this answer so far is inadequate: not just any historical relationship involving emotional interdependence is a loving relationship, and we need a principled way of distinguishing loving relationships from other relational evaluative attitudes: precisely what is the characteristic narrative history that is characteristic of love?

Helm (2009, 2010) tries to answer some of these questions in presenting an account of love as intimate identification. To love another, Helm claims, is to care about him as the particular person he is and so, other things being equal, to value the things he values. Insofar as a person’s (structured) set of values—his sense of the kind of life worth his living—constitutes his identity as a person, such sharing of values amounts to sharing his identity, which sounds very much like union accounts of love. However, Helm is careful to understand such sharing of values as for the sake of the beloved (as robust concern accounts insist), and he spells this all out in terms of patterns of emotions. Thus, Helm claims, all emotions have not only a target and a formal object (as indicated above), but also a focus : a background object the subject cares about in terms of which the implicit evaluation of the target is made intelligible. (For example, if I am afraid of the approaching hailstorm, I thereby evaluate it as dangerous, and what explains this evaluation is the way that hailstorm bears on my vegetable garden, which I care about; my garden, therefore, is the focus of my fear.) Moreover, emotions normally come in patterns with a common focus: fearing the hailstorm is normally connected to other emotions as being relieved when it passes by harmlessly (or disappointed or sad when it does not), being angry at the rabbits for killing the spinach, delighted at the productivity of the tomato plants, etc. Helm argues that a projectible pattern of such emotions with a common focus constitute caring about that focus. Consequently, we might say along the lines of Section 4.3 , while particular emotions appraise events in the world as having certain evaluative properties, their having these properties is partly bestowed on them by the overall patterns of emotions.

Helm identifies some emotions as person-focused emotions : emotions like pride and shame that essentially take persons as their focuses, for these emotions implicitly evaluate in terms of the target’s bearing on the quality of life of the person that is their focus. To exhibit a pattern of such emotions focused on oneself and subfocused on being a mother, for example, is to care about the place being a mother has in the kind of life you find worth living—in your identity as a person; to care in this way is to value being a mother as a part of your concern for your own identity. Likewise, to exhibit a projectible pattern of such emotions focused on someone else and subfocused on his being a father is to value this as a part of your concern for his identity—to value it for his sake. Such sharing of another’s values for his sake, which, Helm argues, essentially involves trust, respect, and affection, amounts to intimate identification with him, and such intimate identification just is love. Thus, Helm tries to provide an account of love that is grounded in an explicit account of caring (and caring about something for the sake of someone else) that makes room for the intuitive “depth” of love through intimate identification.

Jaworska & Wonderly (2017) argue that Helm’s construal of intimacy as intimate identification is too demanding. Rather, they argue, the sort of intimacy that distinguishes love from mere caring is one that involves a kind of emotional vulnerability in which things going well or poorly for one’s beloved are directly connected not merely to one’s well-being, but to one’s ability to flourish. This connection, they argue, runs through the lover’s self-understanding and the place the beloved has in the lover’s sense of a meaningful life.

Why do we love? It has been suggested above that any account of love needs to be able to answer some such justificatory question. Although the issue of the justification of love is important on its own, it is also important for the implications it has for understanding more clearly the precise object of love: how can we make sense of the intuitions not only that we love the individuals themselves rather than their properties, but also that my beloved is not fungible—that no one could simply take her place without loss. Different theories approach these questions in different ways, but, as will become clear below, the question of justification is primary.

One way to understand the question of why we love is as asking for what the value of love is: what do we get out of it? One kind of answer, which has its roots in Aristotle, is that having loving relationships promotes self-knowledge insofar as your beloved acts as a kind of mirror, reflecting your character back to you (Badhwar, 2003, p. 58). Of course, this answer presupposes that we cannot accurately know ourselves in other ways: that left alone, our sense of ourselves will be too imperfect, too biased, to help us grow and mature as persons. The metaphor of a mirror also suggests that our beloveds will be in the relevant respects similar to us, so that merely by observing them, we can come to know ourselves better in a way that is, if not free from bias, at least more objective than otherwise.

Brink (1999, pp. 264–65) argues that there are serious limits to the value of such mirroring of one’s self in a beloved. For if the aim is not just to know yourself better but to improve yourself, you ought also to interact with others who are not just like yourself: interacting with such diverse others can help you recognize alternative possibilities for how to live and so better assess the relative merits of these possibilities. Whiting (2013) also emphasizes the importance of our beloveds’ having an independent voice capable of reflecting not who one now is but an ideal for who one is to be. Nonetheless, we need not take the metaphor of the mirror quite so literally; rather, our beloveds can reflect our selves not through their inherent similarity to us but rather through the interpretations they offer of us, both explicitly and implicitly in their responses to us. This is what Badhwar calls the “epistemic significance” of love. [ 16 ]

In addition to this epistemic significance of love, LaFollette (1996, Chapter 5) offers several other reasons why it is good to love, reasons derived in part from the psychological literature on love: love increases our sense of well-being, it elevates our sense of self-worth, and it serves to develop our character. It also, we might add, tends to lower stress and blood pressure and to increase health and longevity. Friedman (1993) argues that the kind of partiality towards our beloveds that love involves is itself morally valuable because it supports relationships—loving relationships—that contribute “to human well-being, integrity, and fulfillment in life” (p. 61). And Solomon (1988, p. 155) claims:

Ultimately, there is only one reason for love. That one grand reason…is “because we bring out the best in each other.” What counts as “the best,” of course, is subject to much individual variation.

This is because, Solomon suggests, in loving someone, I want myself to be better so as to be worthy of his love for me.

Each of these answers to the question of why we love understands it to be asking about love quite generally, abstracted away from details of particular relationships. It is also possible to understand the question as asking about particular loves. Here, there are several questions that are relevant:

• What, if anything, justifies my loving rather than not loving this particular person?
• What, if anything, justifies my coming to love this particular person rather than someone else?
• What, if anything, justifies my continuing to love this particular person given the changes—both in him and me and in the overall circumstances—that have occurred since I began loving him?

These are importantly different questions. Velleman (1999), for example, thinks we can answer (1) by appealing to the fact that my beloved is a person and so has a rational nature, yet he thinks (2) and (3) have no answers: the best we can do is offer causal explanations for our loving particular people, a position echoed by Han (2021). Setiya (2014) similarly thinks (1) has an answer, but points not to the rational nature of persons but rather to the other’s humanity , where such humanity differs from personhood in that not all humans need have the requisite rational nature for personhood, and not all persons need be humans. And, as will become clear below , the distinction between (2) and (3) will become important in resolving puzzles concerning whether our beloveds are fungible, though it should be clear that (3) potentially raises questions concerning personal identity (which will not be addressed here).

It is important not to misconstrue these justificatory questions. Thomas (1991) , for example, rejects the idea that love can be justified: “there are no rational considerations whereby anyone can lay claim to another’s love or insist that an individual’s love for another is irrational” (p. 474). This is because, Thomas claims (p. 471):

no matter how wonderful and lovely an individual might be, on any and all accounts, it is simply false that a romantically unencumbered person must love that individual on pain of being irrational. Or, there is no irrationality involved in ceasing to love a person whom one once loved immensely, although the person has not changed.

However, as LaFollette (1996, p. 63) correctly points out,

reason is not some external power which dictates how we should behave, but an internal power, integral to who we are.… Reason does not command that we love anyone. Nonetheless, reason is vital in determining whom we love and why we love them.

That is, reasons for love are pro tanto : they are a part of the overall reasons we have for acting, and it is up to us in exercising our capacity for agency to decide what on balance we have reason to do or even whether we shall act contrary to our reasons. To construe the notion of a reason for love as compelling us to love, as Thomas does, is to misconstrue the place such reasons have within our agency. [ 17 ]

Most philosophical discussions of the justification of love focus on question (1) , thinking that answering this question will also, to the extent that we can, answer question (2) , which is typically not distinguished from (3) . The answers given to these questions vary in a way that turns on how the kind of evaluation implicit in love is construed. On the one hand, those who understand the evaluation implicit in love to be a matter of the bestowal of value (such as Telfer 1970–71; Friedman 1993; Singer 1994) typically claim that no justification can be given (cf. Section 4.2 ). As indicated above, this seems problematic, especially given the importance love can have both in our lives and, especially, in shaping our identities as persons. To reject the idea that we can love for reasons may reduce the impact our agency can have in defining who we are.

On the other hand, those who understand the evaluation implicit in love to be a matter of appraisal tend to answer the justificatory question by appeal to these valuable properties of the beloved. This acceptance of the idea that love can be justified leads to two further, related worries about the object of love.

The first worry is raised by Vlastos (1981) in a discussion Plato’s and Aristotle’s accounts of love. Vlastos notes that these accounts focus on the properties of our beloveds: we are to love people, they say, only because and insofar as they are objectifications of the excellences. Consequently, he argues, in doing so they fail to distinguish “ disinterested affection for the person we love” from “ appreciation of the excellences instantiated by that person ” (p. 33). That is, Vlastos thinks that Plato and Aristotle provide an account of love that is really a love of properties rather than a love of persons—love of a type of person, rather than love of a particular person—thereby losing what is distinctive about love as an essentially personal attitude. This worry about Plato and Aristotle might seem to apply just as well to other accounts that justify love in terms of the properties of the person: insofar as we love the person for the sake of her properties, it might seem that what we love is those properties and not the person. Here it is surely insufficient to say, as Solomon (1988, p. 154) does, “if love has its reasons, then it is not the whole person that one loves but certain aspects of that person—though the rest of the person comes along too, of course”: that final tagline fails to address the central difficulty about what the object of love is and so about love as a distinctly personal attitude. (Clausen 2019 might seem to address this worry by arguing that we love people not as having certain properties but rather as having “ organic unities ”: a holistic set of properties the value of each of which must be understood in essential part in terms of its place within that whole. Nonetheless, while this is an interesting and plausible way to think about the value of the properties of persons, that organic unity itself will be a (holistic) property held by the person, and it seems that the fundamental problem reemerges at the level of this holistic property: do we love the holistic unity rather than the person?)

The second worry concerns the fungibility of the object of love. To be fungible is to be replaceable by another relevantly similar object without any loss of value. Thus, money is fungible: I can give you two $5 bills in exchange for a $10 bill, and neither of us has lost anything. Is the object of love fungible? That is, can I simply switch from loving one person to loving another relevantly similar person without any loss? The worry about fungibility is commonly put this way: if we accept that love can be justified by appealing to properties of the beloved, then it may seem that in loving someone for certain reasons, I love him not simply as the individual he is, but as instantiating those properties. And this may imply that any other person instantiating those same properties would do just as well: my beloved would be fungible. Indeed, it may be that another person exhibits the properties that ground my love to a greater degree than my current beloved does, and so it may seem that in such a case I have reason to “trade up”—to switch my love to the new, better person. However, it seems clear that the objects of our loves are not fungible: love seems to involve a deeply personal commitment to a particular person, a commitment that is antithetical to the idea that our beloveds are fungible or to the idea that we ought to be willing to trade up when possible. [ 18 ]

In responding to these worries, Nozick (1989) appeals to the union view of love he endorses (see the section on Love as Union ):

The intention in love is to form a we and to identify with it as an extended self, to identify one’s fortunes in large part with its fortunes. A willingness to trade up, to destroy the very we you largely identify with, would then be a willingness to destroy your self in the form of your own extended self. [p. 78]

So it is because love involves forming a “we” that we must understand other persons and not properties to be the objects of love, and it is because my very identity as a person depends essentially on that “we” that it is not possible to substitute without loss one object of my love for another. However, Badhwar (2003) criticizes Nozick, saying that his response implies that once I love someone, I cannot abandon that love no matter who that person becomes; this, she says, “cannot be understood as love at all rather than addiction” (p. 61). [ 19 ]

Instead, Badhwar (1987) turns to her robust-concern account of love as a concern for the beloved for his sake rather than one’s own. Insofar as my love is disinterested — not a means to antecedent ends of my own—it would be senseless to think that my beloved could be replaced by someone who is able to satisfy my ends equally well or better. Consequently, my beloved is in this way irreplaceable. However, this is only a partial response to the worry about fungibility, as Badhwar herself seems to acknowledge. For the concern over fungibility arises not merely for those cases in which we think of love as justified instrumentally, but also for those cases in which the love is justified by the intrinsic value of the properties of my beloved. Confronted with cases like this, Badhwar (2003) concludes that the object of love is fungible after all (though she insists that it is very unlikely in practice). (Soble (1990, Chapter 13) draws similar conclusions.)

Nonetheless, Badhwar thinks that the object of love is “phenomenologically non-fungible” (2003, p. 63; see also 1987, p. 14). By this she means that we experience our beloveds to be irreplaceable: “loving and delighting in [one person] are not completely commensurate with loving and delighting in another” (1987, p. 14). Love can be such that we sometimes desire to be with this particular person whom we love, not another whom we also love, for our loves are qualitatively different. But why is this? It seems as though the typical reason I now want to spend time with Amy rather than Bob is, for example, that Amy is funny but Bob is not. I love Amy in part for her humor, and I love Bob for other reasons, and these qualitative differences between them is what makes them not fungible. However, this reply does not address the worry about the possibility of trading up: if Bob were to be at least as funny (charming, kind, etc.) as Amy, why shouldn’t I dump her and spend all my time with him?

A somewhat different approach is taken by Whiting (1991). In response to the first worry concerning the object of love, Whiting argues that Vlastos offers a false dichotomy: having affection for someone that is disinterested —for her sake rather than my own—essentially involves an appreciation of her excellences as such. Indeed, Whiting says, my appreciation of these as excellences, and so the underlying commitment I have to their value, just is a disinterested commitment to her because these excellences constitute her identity as the person she is. The person, therefore, really is the object of love. Delaney (1996) takes the complementary tack of distinguishing between the object of one’s love, which of course is the person, and the grounds of the love, which are her properties: to say, as Solomon does, that we love someone for reasons is not at all to say that we only love certain aspects of the person. In these terms, we might say that Whiting’s rejection of Vlastos’ dichotomy can be read as saying that what makes my attitude be one of disinterested affection—one of love—for the person is precisely that I am thereby responding to her excellences as the reasons for that affection. [ 20 ]

Of course, more needs to be said about what it is that makes a particular person be the object of love. Implicit in Whiting’s account is an understanding of the way in which the object of my love is determined in part by the history of interactions I have with her: it is she, and not merely her properties (which might be instantiated in many different people), that I want to be with; it is she, and not merely her properties, on whose behalf I am concerned when she suffers and whom I seek to comfort; etc. This addresses the first worry, but not the second worry about fungibility, for the question still remains whether she is the object of my love only as instantiating certain properties, and so whether or not I have reason to “trade up.”

To respond to the fungibility worry, Whiting and Delaney appeal explicitly to the historical relationship. [ 21 ] Thus, Whiting claims, although there may be a relatively large pool of people who have the kind of excellences of character that would justify my loving them, and so although there can be no answer to question (2) about why I come to love this rather than that person within this pool, once I have come to love this person and so have developed a historical relation with her, this history of concern justifies my continuing to love this person rather than someone else (1991, p. 7). Similarly, Delaney claims that love is grounded in “historical-relational properties” (1996, p. 346), so that I have reasons for continuing to love this person rather than switching allegiances and loving someone else. In each case, the appeal to both such historical relations and the excellences of character of my beloved is intended to provide an answer to question (3) , and this explains why the objects of love are not fungible.

There seems to be something very much right with this response. Relationships grounded in love are essentially personal, and it would be odd to think of what justifies that love to be merely non-relational properties of the beloved. Nonetheless, it is still unclear how the historical-relational propreties can provide any additional justification for subsequent concern beyond that which is already provided (as an answer to question (1) ) by appeal to the excellences of the beloved’s character (cf. Brink 1999). The mere fact that I have loved someone in the past does not seem to justify my continuing to love him in the future. When we imagine that he is going through a rough time and begins to lose the virtues justifying my initial love for him, why shouldn’t I dump him and instead come to love someone new having all of those virtues more fully? Intuitively (unless the change she undergoes makes her in some important sense no longer the same person he was), we think I should not dump him, but the appeal to the mere fact that I loved him in the past is surely not enough. Yet what historical-relational properties could do the trick? (For an interesting attempt at an answer, see Kolodny 2003 and also Howard 2019.)

If we think that love can be justified, then it may seem that the appeal to particular historical facts about a loving relationship to justify that love is inadequate, for such idiosyncratic and subjective properties might explain but cannot justify love. Rather, it may seem, justification in general requires appealing to universal, objective properties. But such properties are ones that others might share, which leads to the problem of fungibility. Consequently it may seem that love cannot be justified. In the face of this predicament, accounts of love that understand love to be an attitude towards value that is intermediate between appraisal and bestowal, between recognizing already existing value and creating that value (see Section 4.3 ) might seem to offer a way out. For once we reject the thought that the value of our beloveds must be either the precondition or the consequence of our love, we have room to acknowledge that the deeply personal, historically grounded, creative nature of love (central to bestowal accounts) and the understanding of love as responsive to valuable properties of the beloved that can justify that love (central to appraisal accounts) are not mutually exclusive (Helm 2010; Bagley 2015).

• Annas, J., 1977, “Plato and Aristotle on Friendship and Altruism”, Mind , 86: 532–54.
• Badhwar, N. K., 1987, “Friends as Ends in Themselves”, Philosophy & Phenomenological Research , 48: 1–23.
• –––, 2003, “Love”, in H. LaFollette (ed.), Practical Ethics , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 42–69.
• Badhwar, N. K. (ed.), 1993, Friendship: A Philosophical Reader , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• Bagley, B., 2015, “Loving Someone in Particular”, Ethics , 125: 477–507.
• –––, 2018. “(The Varieties of) Love in Contemporary Anglophone Philosophy”, in Adrienne M. Martin (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Love in Philosophy , New York, NY: Routledge, 453–64.
• Baier, A. C., 1991, “Unsafe Loves”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 433–50.
• Blum, L. A., 1980, Friendship, Altruism, and Morality , London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• –––, 1993, “Friendship as a Moral Phenomenon”, in Badhwar (1993), 192–210.
• Bransen, J., 2006, “Selfless Self-Love”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 9: 3–25.
• Bratman, M. E., 1999, “Shared Intention”, in Faces of Intention: Selected Essays on Intention and Agency , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 109–29.
• Brentlinger, J., 1970/1989, “The Nature of Love”, in Soble (1989a), 136–48.
• Brink, D. O., 1999, “Eudaimonism, Love and Friendship, and Political Community”, Social Philosophy & Policy , 16: 252–289.
• Brown, R., 1987, Analyzing Love , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Clausen, G., 2019, “Love of Whole Persons”, The Journal of Ethics , 23 (4): 347–67.
• Cocking, D. & Kennett, J., 1998, “Friendship and the Self”, Ethics , 108: 502–27.
• Cooper, J. M., 1977, “Aristotle on the Forms of Friendship”, Review of Metaphysics , 30: 619–48.
• Delaney, N., 1996, “Romantic Love and Loving Commitment: Articulating a Modern Ideal”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 33: 375–405.
• Ebels-Duggan, K., 2008, “Against Beneficence: A Normative Account of Love”, Ethics , 119: 142–70.
• Fisher, M., 1990, Personal Love , London: Duckworth.
• Frankfurt, H., 1999, “Autonomy, Necessity, and Love”, in Necessity, Volition, and Love , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 129–41.
• Friedman, M. A., 1993, What Are Friends For? Feminist Perspectives on Personal Relationships and Moral Theory , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• –––, 1998, “Romantic Love and Personal Autonomy”, Midwest Studies in Philosophy , 22: 162–81.
• Gilbert, M., 1989, On Social Facts , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• –––, 1996, Living Together: Rationality, Sociality, and Obligation , Rowman & Littlefield.
• –––, 2000, Sociality and Responsibility: New Essays in Plural Subject Theory , Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Grau, C. & Smuts, A., 2017, Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Love , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hamlyn, D. W., 1989, “The Phenomena of Love and Hate”, in Soble (1989a), 218–234.
• Han, Y., 2021, “Do We Love for Reasons?”, Philosophy & Phenomenological Research , 102: 106–126.
• Hegel, G. W. F., 1997, “A Fragment on Love”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 117–20.
• Helm, B. W., 2008, “Plural Agents”, Noûs , 42: 17–49.
• –––, 2009, “Love, Identification, and the Emotions”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 46: 39–59.
• –––, 2010, Love, Friendship, and the Self: Intimacy, Identification, and the Social Nature of Persons , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Howard, C., 2019, “Fitting Love and Reasons for Loving” in M. Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics (Volume 9). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198846253.001.0001
• Jaworska, A. & Wonderly, M., 2017, “Love and Caring”, in C. Grau & A. Smuts (2020). doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199395729.013.15
• Jollimore, T, 2011, Love’s Vision , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Kolodny, N., 2003, “Love as Valuing a Relationship”, The Philosophical Review , 112: 135–89.
• Kraut, Robert, 1986 “Love De Re ”, Midwest Studies in Philosophy , 10: 413–30.
• LaFollette, H., 1996, Personal Relationships: Love, Identity, and Morality , Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Press.
• Lamb, R. E., (ed.), 1997, Love Analyzed , Westview Press.
• Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R., 1940, A Greek-English Lexicon , Oxford: Clarendon Press, 9th edition.
• Martin, A., 2015, “Love, Incorporated”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 18: 691–702.
• Montaigne, M., [E], Essays , in The Complete Essays of Montaigne , Donald Frame (trans.), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1958.
• Naar, H., 2013, “A Dispositional Theory of Love”, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 94(3): 342–357.
• Newton-Smith, W., 1989, “A Conceptual Investigation of Love”, in Soble (1989a), 199–217.
• Nozick, R., 1989, “Love’s Bond”, in The Examined Life: Philosophical Meditations , New York: Simon & Schuster, 68–86.
• Nussbaum, M., 1990, “Love and the Individual: Romantic Rightness and Platonic Aspiration”, in Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 314–34.
• Nygren, A., 1953a, Agape and Eros , Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press.
• –––, 1953b, “ Agape and Eros ”, in Soble (1989a), 85–95.
• Ortiz-Millán, G., 2007, “Love and Rationality: On Some Possible Rational Effects of Love”, Kriterion , 48: 127–44.
• Pismenny, A. & Prinz, J., 2017, “Is Love an Emotion?”, in C. Grau & A. Smuts (2017). doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199395729.013.10
• Price, A. W., 1989, Love and Friendship in Plato and Arisotle , New York: Clarendon Press.
• Rorty, A. O., 1980, “Introduction”, in A. O. Rorty (ed.), Explaining Emotions , Berkeley: University of California Press, 1–8.
• –––, 1986/1993, “The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes: Love is Not Love Which Alters Not When It Alteration Finds”, in Badhwar (1993), 73–88.
• Scruton, R., 1986, Sexual Desire: A Moral Philosophy of the Erotic , New York: Free Press.
• Searle, J. R., 1990, “Collective Intentions and Actions”, in P. R. Cohen, M. E. Pollack, & J. L. Morgan (eds.), Intentions in Communication , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 401–15.
• Setiya, K., 2014, “Love and the Value of a Life”, Philosophical Review , 123: 251–80.
• Sherman, N., 1993, “Aristotle on the Shared Life”, in Badhwar (1993), 91–107.
• Singer, I., 1984a, The Nature of Love, Volume 1: Plato to Luther , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd edition.
• –––, 1984b, The Nature of Love, Volume 2: Courtly and Romantic , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• –––, 1989, The Nature of Love, Volume 3: The Modern World , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2nd edn.
• –––, 1991, “From The Nature of Love ”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 259–78.
• –––, 1994, The Pursuit of Love , Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• –––, 2009, Philosophy of Love: A Partial Summing-up , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Soble, A. (ed.), 1989a, Eros, Agape, and Philia: Readings in the Philosophy of Love , New York, NY: Paragon House.
• –––, 1989b, “An Introduction to the Philosophy of Love”, in Soble (1989a), xi-xxv.
• –––, 1990, The Structure of Love , New Haven: Yale University Press.
• –––, 1997, “Union, Autonomy, and Concern”, in Lamb (1997), 65–92.
• Solomon, R. C., 1976, The Passions , New York: Anchor Press.
• –––, 1981, Love: Emotion, Myth, and Metaphor , New York: Anchor Press.
• –––, 1988, About Love: Reinventing Romance for Our Times , New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Solomon, R. C. & Higgins, K. M. (eds.), 1991, The Philosophy of (Erotic) Love , Lawrence: Kansas University Press.
• Stump, E., 2006, “Love by All Accounts”, Presidential Address to the Central APA, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association , 80: 25–43.
• Taylor, G., 1976, “Love”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 76: 147–64.
• Telfer, E., 1970–71, “Friendship”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 71: 223–41.
• Thomas, L., 1987, “Friendship”, Synthese , 72: 217–36.
• –––, 1989, “Friends and Lovers”, in G. Graham & H. La Follette (eds.), Person to Person , Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 182–98.
• –––, 1991, “Reasons for Loving”, in Solomon & Higgins (1991), 467–476.
• –––, 1993, “Friendship and Other Loves”, in Badhwar (1993), 48–64.
• Tuomela, R., 1984, A Theory of Social Action , Dordrecht: Reidel.
• –––, 1995, The Importance of Us: A Philosophical Study of Basic Social Notions , Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Velleman, J. D., 1999, “Love as a Moral Emotion”, Ethics , 109: 338–74.
• –––, 2008, “Beyond Price”, Ethics , 118: 191–212.
• Vlastos, G., 1981, “The Individual as Object of Love in Plato”, in Platonic Studies , 2nd edition, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 3–42.
• White, R. J., 2001, Love’s Philosophy , Rowman & Littlefield.
• Whiting, J. E., 1991, “Impersonal Friends”, Monist , 74: 3–29.
• –––, 2013, “Love: Self-Propagation, Self-Preservation, or Ekstasis?”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy , 43: 403–29.
• Willigenburg, T. Van, 2005, “Reason and Love: A Non-Reductive Analysis of the Normativity of Agent-Relative Reasons”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 8: 45–62.
• Wollheim, R., 1984, The Thread of Life , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Wonderly, M., 2016, “On Being Attached”, Philosophical Studies , 173: 223–42.
• –––, 2017, “Love and Attachment”, American Philosophical Quarterly , 54: 235–50.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Aristotle , Nicomachean Ethics , translated by W.D. Ross.
• Moseley, A., “ Philosophy of Love ,” in J. Fieser (ed.), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

character, moral | emotion | friendship | impartiality | obligations: special | personal identity | Plato: ethics | Plato: rhetoric and poetry | respect | value: intrinsic vs. extrinsic

Copyright © 2021 by Bennett Helm < bennett . helm @ fandm . edu >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2024 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Essay About Love Of Family

Love is one of the most powerful emotions and it plays a very important role in our lives. It is often said that “love makes the world go round.” Love can be defined as a strong and passionate emotion felt between two people. Love is often described as a feeling of strong affection and requires both positive and negative aspects, such as patience and sacrifice. Love is also one of the most important themes in literature.

Many different types of love are portrayed in literature, but one of the most common is motherly love. This type of love is usually very selfless and sacrificial. Mothers are often willing to do anything for their children, even if it means sacrificing their own happiness. In some cases, mothers have even been known to give up their lives for their children. This shows just how powerful and important motherly love can be.

Family love is another type of love that is often portrayed in literature. This type of love is usually very strong and supportive. Families often stick together through thick and thin, no matter what happens. They are there for each other during the good times and the bad times. Family love is very important and it can be a very powerful force in our lives.

“Love is the solution to every problem,” according to someone. “Every heart speaks in love.” Isn’t it funny? Despite the many differences between countries, cities, and people, we all have a single goal. Love is what we want; we just want to feel it once. It’s been said that even though love was never intended to be found with others, it can still be manufactured by people.

Love is a drug, the most addicting and hardest to quit. Love is what makes the world go round, it is an emotion that cannot be stopped or tamed. Love gives us hope when we have lost all faith, it’s what make us try again even when we know we will fail. Love can never be found when sought after, but only when one has stopped looking. Love is something so simple yet so complicated all at once.

Love is often described as a feeling, but love is much more than just a feeling. Love is patient and 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 (1 Corinthians 13:4-8a).

This type of love is what we see portrayed in families. The family is the first place we learn to love. It’s a safe place to fall, to make mistakes and to grow. In a family, we learn how to love others despite their flaws and shortcomings because we know that they are just like us – imperfect human beings who are trying their best.

Families teach us that love is not a feeling; it’s a decision. It’s a decision to put someone else’s needs above our own, to sacrifice our time and energy for their well-being, and to always forgive them no matter what they do.

When we love our families, we are loving those who are the most like us. We are loving those who know us best and who have seen us at our worst. And yet, they still love us unconditionally. That is the power of family love. It is a love that transcends all barriers and knows no bounds. It is a love that can change the world.

So today, take a moment to tell your family how much you love them. Let them know that you appreciate everything they do for you. Let them know how grateful you are to have them in your life. Because when you love your family, you are loving the people who matter most.

Simply and solely because, since the dawn of time, every person has been taught that they must have another human being to validate their existence. In past eras, love was a magnificent sensation that everyone longed for; whereas today, love is no longer a feeling but rather an obsession one cannot live without. My sister, my mother, and my father constitute my family.

Love is a feeling of strong or constant affection for a person. In my opinion, Love should be something that is based purely off of actions and not words. From the day we are born we are loved by our parents, they are the people who make sure we are fed, clothed and have a place to sleep every night.

They give us everything we could ever need including their time, patience and undying support. So why is it that as soon as we grow up and move out on our own we forget all about the people who raised us? We take them for granted and only remember them when we need something from them.

I think it is because in today’s society love has become an obsession. We see Love everywhere we look, on TV, in the movies, in magazines and even on social media. Love is constantly shoved down our throats and we are led to believe that we need to be in a relationship to be happy. This couldn’t be further from the truth!

I am happy being single and I don’t need a man to validate my existence. I have a great career, amazing friends and an incredible family who loves me unconditionally. That is all I need to be happy.

So, if you are like me and don’t need a man to complete you, then cherish the loved ones you already have in your life. Don’t take them for granted and make sure to tell them how much you love them every chance you get!

Having a mother is the finest thing that can happen to a person. It’s been said that having a mom is like having God on your side all the time. My Mother is essential to my existence; she gave birth to me without complaint and without fear of suffering again.

My mother is someone I must respect and love. She is the one who brought me into this world, she has always been there for me when I’ve needed a confidante to tell my stories, she has taught me how to walk, how to draw, and how to say words; she has taught me everything; she has instructed me more than anyone else not only molded my confidence in surviving difficulties in life but also inspired it.

Love is everything, Love is what keeps us together. Love is what make a family complete. A mother’s love is unending and incomparable. It’s the one thing that we can always count on, no matter what life throws our way. Mothers are strong, caring, and selfless. They sacrifice so much for their families and always put others before themselves.

A mother’s love knows no bounds and is truly unconditional. Families are built on love and it is the foundation that hold us all together. No matter what life brings, a family’s love will always be there to support us. Love is everything, Love is what keeps us together. Love is what makes a family complete.

More Essays

• Definition Of Family Essay
• Thesis Statement About Family
• Essay On Dysfunctional Family
• Dysfunctional family relationships
• Essence Of Love Essay
• Family Work Interview
• Essence Of Love Meaning
• Loyalty To Family Essay
• Definition Essay About Love
• The Changing Concept of Family in The Grapes of Wrath

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Before You Write a Love Essay, Read This to Get Examples

The day will come when you can’t escape the fate of all students: You will have to write a what is love essay.

No worries:

Here you’ll find tons of love essay topics and examples. No time to read everything? Scroll down to get a free PDF with original samples.

Definition: Essay on Love

First, let’s define what is love essay?

The most common topics are:

• Definition of love
• What is love?
• Meaning of love

Why limit yourself to these hackneyed, general themes? Below, I’ll show how to make your paper on love original yet relevant to the prompt you get from teachers.

Love Essay Topics: 20 Ideas to Choose for Your Paper

Your essay on love and relationship doesn’t have to be super official and unemotional. It’s ok to share reflections and personal opinions when writing about romance.

Often, students get a general task to write an essay on love. It means they can choose a theme and a title for their paper. If that’s your case,  feel free to try any of these love essay topics:

• Exploring the impact of love on individuals and relationships.
• Love in the digital age: Navigating romance in a tech world.
• Is there any essence and significance in unconditional love?
• Love as a universal language: Connecting hearts across cultures.
• Biochemistry of love: Exploring the process.
• Love vs. passion vs. obsession.
• How love helps cope with heartbreak and grief.
• The art of loving. How we breed intimacy and trust.
• The science behind attraction and attachment.
• How love and relationships shape our identity and help with self-discovery.
• Love and vulnerability: How to embrace emotional openness.
• Romance is more complex than most think: Passion, intimacy, and commitment explained.
• Love as empathy: Building sympathetic connections in a cruel world.
• Evolution of love. How people described it throughout history.
• The role of love in mental and emotional well-being.
• Love as a tool to look and find purpose in life.
• Welcoming diversity in relations through love and acceptance.
• Love vs. friendship: The intersection of platonic and romantic bonds.
• The choices we make and challenges we overcome for those we love.
• Love and forgiveness: How its power heals wounds and strengthens bonds.

Love Essay Examples: Choose Your Sample for Inspiration

Essays about love are usually standard, 5-paragraph papers students write in college:

• One paragraph is for an introduction, with a hook and a thesis statement
• Three are for a body, with arguments or descriptions
• One last passage is for a conclusion, with a thesis restatement and final thoughts

Below are the ready-made samples to consider. They’ll help you see what an essay about love with an introduction, body, and conclusion looks like.

What is love essay: 250 words

Lao Tzu once said, “Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength while loving someone deeply gives you courage.” Indeed, love can transform individuals, relationships, and our world.

A word of immense depth and countless interpretations, love has always fascinated philosophers, poets, and ordinary individuals. This  emotion breaks boundaries and has a super power to change lives. But what is love, actually?

It’s a force we feel in countless ways. It is the warm embrace of a parent, filled with care and unwavering support. It is the gentle touch of a lover, sparking a flame that ignites passion and desire. Love is the kind words of a friend, offering solace and understanding in times of need. It is the selfless acts of compassion and empathy that bind humanity together.

Love is not confined to romantic relationships alone. It is found in the family bonds, the connections we forge with friends, and even the compassion we extend to strangers. Love is a thread that weaves through the fabric of our lives, enriching and nourishing our souls.

However, love is not without its complexities. It can be both euphoric and agonizing, uplifting and devastating. Love requires vulnerability, trust, and the willingness to embrace joy and pain. It is a delicate balance between passion and compassion, independence and interdependence.

Finally, the essence of love may be elusive to define with mere words. It is an experience that surpasses language and logic, encompassing a spectrum of emotions and actions. Love is a profound connection that unites us all, reminding us of our shared humanity and the capacity for boundless compassion.

What is love essay: 500 words

A 500-word essay on why I love you

Trying to encapsulate why I love you in a mere 500 words is impossible. My love for you goes beyond the confines of language, transcending words and dwelling in the realm of emotions, connections, and shared experiences. Nevertheless, I shall endeavor to express the depth and breadth of my affection for you.

First and foremost, I love you for who you are. You possess a unique blend of qualities and characteristics that captivate my heart and mind. Your kindness and compassion touch the lives of those around you, and I am grateful to be the recipient of your unwavering care and understanding. Your intelligence and wit constantly challenge me to grow and learn, stimulating my mind and enriching our conversations. You have a beautiful spirit that radiates warmth and joy, and I am drawn to your vibrant energy.

I love the way you make me feel. When I am with you, I feel a sense of comfort and security that allows me to be my true self. Your presence envelops me in a cocoon of love and acceptance, where I can express my thoughts, fears, and dreams without fear of judgment. Your support and encouragement inspire me to pursue my passions and overcome obstacles. With you by my side, I feel empowered to face the world, knowing I have a partner who believes in me.

I love the memories we have created together. From the laughter-filled moments of shared adventures to the quiet and intimate conversations, every memory is etched in my heart. Whether exploring new places, indulging in our favorite activities, or simply enjoying each other’s company in comfortable silence, each experience reinforces our bond. Our shared memories serve as a foundation for our relationship, a testament to the depth of our connection and the love that binds us.

I love your quirks and imperfections. Your true essence shines through these unique aspects! Your little traits make me smile and remind me of the beautiful individual you are. I love how you wrinkle your nose when you laugh, become lost in thought when reading a book, and even sing off-key in the shower. These imperfections make you human, relatable, and utterly lovable.

I love the future we envision together. We support each other’s goals, cheering one another on as we navigate the path toward our dreams. The thought of building a life together, creating a home filled with love and shared experiences, fills my heart with anticipation and excitement. The future we imagine is one that I am eager to explore with you by my side.

In conclusion, the reasons why I love you are as vast and varied as the universe itself. It is a love that defies logic and surpasses the limitations of language. From the depths of my being, I love you for the person you are, the way you make me feel, the memories we cherish, your quirks and imperfections, and the future we envision together. My love for you is boundless, unconditional, and everlasting.

A 5-paragraph essay about love

I’ve gathered all the samples (and a few bonus ones) in one PDF. It’s free to download. So, you can keep it at hand when the time comes to write a love essay.

Ready to Write Your Essay About Love?

Now that you know the definition of a love essay and have many topic ideas, it’s time to write your A-worthy paper! Here go the steps:

• Check all the examples of what is love essay from this post.
• Choose the topic and angle that fits your prompt best.
• Write your original and inspiring story.

Any questions left? Our writers are all ears. Please don’t hesitate to ask!

• Essay samples
• Essay writing
• Writing tips

Recent Posts

• Writing the “Why Should Abortion Be Made Legal” Essay: Sample and Tips
• 3 Examples of Enduring Issue Essays to Write Yours Like a Pro
• Writing Essay on Friendship: 3 Samples to Get Inspired
• How to Structure a Leadership Essay (Samples to Consider)
• What Is Nursing Essay, and How to Write It Like a Pro

• Essay Samples
• College Essay
• Writing Tools
• Writing guide

Creative samples from the experts

↑ Return to Essay Samples

Definition Essay: Love

Love is something that means very different things to different people. For some, love can be purely romantic, or even purely sexual. For others, real love is utterly unconditional and only truly exists between family members, or between people and a deity. And for some people, love is fluid, ever changing, and everywhere, and is felt for family, friends, partners, pets, and even inanimate objects, dead artists, and fictional characters. None of these people would be right or wrong, but one thing is certain: love is the most powerful force in the entire universe.

Between partners of any description, be they married or cohabiting, boyfriend and girlfriend, straight or gay, young or old, love is a relationship of mutual understanding and respect. Marriages and partnerships are often built on common ground that people find when they first meet; this can be as deep as sharing religious, philosophical or religious beliefs, or as simple as finding that you love the same film, book, or band.

This kind of love is often reliant on some kind of ‘chemistry’: that strange feeling that they give you in the pit of your stomach, and the feeling that nothing in the world is more important to you than enjoying the moment you’re in together. Some people feel that they experience love at first sight, where they know from the minute they set eyes on each other that they want to to be with that person, but something built on common interests and understanding must be stronger.

A parent’s love for a child can also often be described as love at first sight, but this is very strong because it comes from a natural instinct to protect our offspring. This love can often start before the baby is even born: you only have to look at the pride and excitement of many parents-to-be when they have their scans and feel their baby kick for the very first time. This kind of love is also felt by a child for its mother; it is unconditional for at least the first few years of life, and can also be felt between siblings.

It is the strength of this feeling that makes love the most powerful emotion that most of us will ever experience. People can do some dreadful things out of hate and fear, but love can push us to do much, much worse. And it is often love that can cause us to hate, whether it’s out of jealousy, or anger because our loved one has been hurt. Love, ultimately, is a sacrifice, whatever the relationship, and it must be the most powerful force in the universe because as human beings, we make true sacrifices for nothing less.

Follow Us on Social Media

Get more free essays

Send via email

Most useful resources for students:.

• Free Essays Download
• Writing Tools List
• Proofreading Services
• Universities Rating

Contributors Bio

Find more useful services for students

Free plagiarism check, professional editing, online tutoring, free grammar check.

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Love — The Meaning Of Family To Me

The Meaning of Family to Me

• Categories: Children Love

About this sample

Words: 782 |

Published: Sep 19, 2019

Words: 782 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 962 words

2 pages / 804 words

3 pages / 1375 words

3 pages / 1413 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Love

Love of My Life AnalysisLove is an enigmatic and compelling force that has captivated artists, poets, and philosophers throughout the ages. It is a complex emotion that defies definition, yet its impact on our lives is [...]

In conclusion, the Red Lotus of Chastity is a powerful and thought-provoking novel that delves into the complexities of love, loyalty, and sacrifice. Through its exploration of the characters' lives and choices, it challenges [...]

Hurstcote is a novel written by E. Nesbit, published in 1900. The novel revolves around the theme of the impact of social class on individual lives and relationships. The story follows the life of a young woman named Agatha, who [...]

Romantic relationships have long been a topic of fascination and intrigue for researchers, psychologists, and individuals alike. From the complex interplay of love, trust, and communication to the impact of technology and [...]

People have always tried to escape from their reality, and some people find this escape through love. Love might be the escape from reality in 984 for different characters, who are thenselves represented in various ways. We [...]

In conclusion, love is a complex and multifaceted construct that defies rigid definition. It possesses an inherent power that can inspire, transform, and sometimes even devastate. Love's paradoxical nature, as both a source of [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Friday essay: ‘My family are always trying to buy us a house.’ We asked couples how class affects their relationships

Senior Lecturer, Macquarie School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University

Senior Research Fellow, Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University

Disclosure statement

Rose Butler has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

Eve Vincent does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Macquarie University and Deakin University provide funding as members of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

When Patrick first held a driver’s licence, his P-plates, he drove a beaten-up car “almost as old as myself”. If police didn’t pull him over once a month, he’d be surprised.

His older brother’s girlfriend, “an upper-class girl”, was once pulled over while on her P-plates while driving a new car, having forgotten to put her lights on. The officer told her in a friendly voice, “You should probably put your lights on.” She had responded mildly with, “Oh, cool, sorry.” Meanwhile, in a similar situation, Patrick had been charged over an insignificant technicality to do with displaying his P-plates.

“Just the expectation from me of dealing with authorities is … I have to toe the line,” he told us, “my expectations are I’m going to get slammed by them.”

When we spoke to Patrick, he was in his thirties. Now, he was a computer programmer, living a comfortable life. But throughout his childhood, Patrick, who is white, shouldered significant responsibilities amid severe material deprivation – he recalled going hungry, for instance.

His girlfriend, Felicia, grew up in the “upper class end of things” in the quiet south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne. Her dad was a doctor and her mum assisted with the practice. She and her siblings attended the local private school because, Felicia believed, her parents wanted her to associate with “the right people”. She described her family background as Jewish, English and “brown”, and her childhood as a “very happy time”.

Patrick told us Felicia can “talk her way out of” situations with authorities. “She can always explain the situation and get leeway.” He sees a big difference between them around “expectation”: of their treatment in the world and their place within it.

These divergent expectations reached into various aspects of their shared lives. “Dealing with things like real estate agents or businesses or whatever, she’s always got the expectation that something can be worked out.” Put another way, Patrick felt Felicia’s view of the world was, “What she wants can be got.”

Patrick, conversely, described how he couldn’t “shake” the feeling he needed to always have “everything in line”. If he was submitting a rental application for a house, for example, he took care to have all the documentation watertight and in hand. This is much easier to accomplish now he is earning a high wage as a programmer and living a settled life. Yet he still carries a somewhat amorphous anxiety, steeped in his class experience. “If I have one thing wrong, that one thing’s going to trip me up.”

Love across class

We spent two years interviewing 38 people about their experiences of love and class: members of 15 couples, plus eight women whose partners declined to take part.

When we asked about our interviewees’ cultural backgrounds, their descriptions included “white”, “mixed race”, “brown”, Aboriginal, Jewish, Vietnamese, Sri Lankan, English, Māori and Turkish.

What happens, we wanted to know, when people form a romantic relationship across class?

We were attracted to this question after a project where we’d interviewed parents about the changing multicultural dynamics of their local public schools and neighbourhoods. We noticed it was relatively easy for white, middle-class parents to recognise, feel positive about and know what to say about forming connections across “ethnic” difference in their school communities.

But they felt differently about their children forming friendships across class: this was far less appealing and more actively avoided. Many struggled to find a vocabulary to talk about the nature of class differences. These were communicated using other words, like “values” and “rough”.

We decided to embark on new research together, with “class” as an explicit focus. We interviewed people who perceived their class background, or “class origin”, to be different to their partner’s.

Many interviewees expressed relief and even catharsis in discussing class and its significance to their partnership – and their relationship to the world more broadly. We also talked with couples who felt confused about the role class difference played in their relationship, but sensed it was something they were grappling with. This was especially the case when people hailed from migrant or transnational backgrounds, or had experienced upward social mobility.

Two of our interviewees were hesitant to use the language of class: they worried it involved judgement and betrayal of their faith in meritocracy and individual character.

Class, we learned, manifests in subtle and not-so-subtle ways in these partnerships.

A similar place ‘from very different directions’

Patrick had spent his childhood moving up and down the east coast, “just random places”. His dad did “manual labour of various sorts” before a car accident wrecked his left arm. He did work “every so often” throughout his childhood, but was “mostly unemployed”. In his adulthood, Patrick’s parents separated and his mum started working in aged care.

Felicia told us Patrick was not a “man child”, unlike “so many of the people that I grew up with”. His maturity was very attractive to her, and she described him as “very emotionally intelligent”. As a child, Patrick’s family visited op shops to buy clothes, books and old computers. He talked about slowly building a nourishing life as he recovers from the psychic pain caused, in part, by abject childhood poverty.

Felicia says she and Patrick have arrived at a similar place “from very different directions”. She has come to feel increasingly “alienated” from “a lot of assumptions about lifestyle and money” she grew up with.

While her old school friends have mortgages and expensive cars bought with the “equity from those mortgages”, she rents in a lively, friendly neighbourhood and engages in just enough locum work as a doctor to sustain her lifestyle. She greatly values her spare time.

Felicia and Patrick’s close bond and respect for each other was clear to us. Yet Patrick also emphasised that his wounds remain raw, as he delved into the dynamics of their cross-class relationship.

Class is ‘one of our biggest issues’

Another couple, Caleb and Jacinta, described the class dynamics of their relationship in ways that echo Patrick and Felicia’s. However, they described a more pointed, building tension.

Jacinta, who grew up with far fewer opportunities and choices than Caleb, described class as “one of our biggest issues”.

Caleb is a white university student in his thirties from inner-city Melbourne, the sole child of “two detached lawyers”. Jacinta, who works as a TV producer, described herself as being from a “mixed” ethnic background. Her mum was a cleaner and her stepdad a security guard.

Caleb is “pathologically indifferent” to money, he told us. In their spacious inner-city apartment, Caleb appreciated both minimalism and quality. He enjoyed shopping at the local, pricier shops, rather than the supermarket where things were cheaper, and his approach to paying bills on time was relaxed. He explained with self-deprecating humour that he was “raised in the lap of luxury”, “firmly ensconced in the most comfortable class”.

“The class thing” had been at the forefront of Jacinta’s mind for a while, she told us. Despite Caleb’s family’s affluence, their wealth hadn’t been apparent to Jacinta in the early days of their relationship. Of course, she’d known Caleb’s family had money: their “nice house” was in “a very fancy part of town”, with “libraries of books on the walls”.

But they also actively obscured the advantages their wealth afforded them, and they loathed obvious displays of wealth. For Jacinta, who grew up under very different financial circumstances, this contradiction was difficult to grasp. Her in-laws lived a seemingly understated life, but one that was expensive to sustain.

Jacinta’s mum was 16 when Jacinta was born and later partnered with a man who also had a child and who already owned a house. Jacinta lived out the rest of her childhood with her mum, stepdad and three siblings in suburban Melbourne. Her mum was a primary carer and worked as a cleaner when she could. Her stepdad was a security guard. The family “sacrificed” so Jacinta and her siblings could play netball and gymnastics, although things like school camps were too expensive. Jacinta left school at 17, but eventually found her passion working as a producer in TV.

Once they moved in together, Caleb and Jacinta’s very different day-to-day approaches to financial matters became a hindrance and they found themselves frequently clashing over things “as basic as the food shopping every week”. On the one hand, Jacinta budgeted and planned. Caleb, on the other, reflected that he had “been kind of coasting” through life and wasn’t worried about money or accumulating it. “I’ve never really given a shit about that because it’s always been drummed into me that I don’t really need to.”

Different views on home ownership

It was the question of home ownership, and its relationship to growing wealth inequality , that really illustrated to them both how their differently classed childhoods had shaped their different relationships to money as adults – or their “different views of its possibility”, as Jacinta expressed it.

The role of intergenerational wealth in securing access to home ownership is frequently discussed in Australia. Owning assets today can pay more than working for wages, making intergenerational transfers of wealth a key mechanism in the 21st-century logic of class, centred on access to finance.

Jacinta and Caleb grappled with this painful new reality within their relationship. Renting had been a necessity for Jacinta since she left home – she now wants the security afforded by home ownership. Jacinta told us she was saving money and keeping a close eye on the housing market, as buying had become a very real possibility due to Caleb’s parents’ wealth.

“My family are always trying to buy us a house,” Caleb told us, laughing. His parents have even researched places and options, and stand ready to bear much of the financial burden. Caleb remains disengaged but felt that he and Jacinta will likely buy something in the end. “I don’t really care if I’m getting into the wrong part of the market,” he told us. “I don’t want to think about it that much.”

In sum, Caleb conveyed a cool disinterest that Jacinta could not entertain about this crucial question.

Realities of class

Our research shows that being in a cross-class relationship brings the realities of class more sharply into view. Couples like Felicia and Patrick, and Caleb and Jacinta, could not avoid conversations about class, as they grappled with possibilities, tensions and hurt that were in some way connected to their very different formative experiences.

Class proved a clarifying – and in some cases liberating – vocabulary to discuss some of these things. It provided our interviewees with a way to analyse the unequal distribution of advantages and material assets in our society.

Money is only one part of this picture.

Class can play a role in shaping our expectations, anxieties and confidence, as both Patrick and Caleb pondered, from very different ends of the class spectrum, in their interviews with us. Sometimes, the class-based priorities and values we are raised with in childhood might come to repel us as adults, as Felicia explored.

And for Jacinta, access to material assets, including housing, could not be seriously discussed without recognising the significance of class-based wealth. It was her romantic relationship across class with the wealthier Caleb, more than her trajectory through school, mature-age study and work as a TV producer, that had brought home ownership within reach. And ironically, Caleb’s own ease of access to the money to buy a house produced an indifference to the home ownership she wanted.

Cross-class relationships demand facing class honestly. And in an increasingly unequal Australia , class is something many of us should think about more often. The personal reckonings we have documented, we hope, will stimulate a more honest, society-wide conversation about class in the midst of this growing inequality.

This essay draws on research and interviews from Love Across Class (MUP) by Eve Vincent and Rose Butler.

• Relationships
• Real estate
• Housing affordability
• Working class
• Middle class
• Friday essay

Chief Operating Officer (COO)

Technical Assistant - Metabolomics

Data Manager

Director, Social Policy

Head, School of Psychology

I'm 53, single, and child-free. But I still love having kids in my life.

• I always thought I'd have kids, but it just didn't end up happening.
• Now, I'm 53 and child-free, and sometimes, people assume I don't like kids.
• But I love spending time with younger people, including my friends' children.

Several years ago I was standing in line for drinks at an event and an acquaintance said "Oh, you came! I was going to invite you but since there would be kids there, I didn't think you'd enjoy it."

This comment caught me off guard and offended me a bit at the time. Unless it's a child- and parent-centered event like a playdate or a kid-focused birthday party exclusive of family and friends, this thought had never occurred to me. I wondered if I somehow gave the impression that I didn't like children, or if there was some universal rule I didn't know about it being inappropriate for a non-parent to attend a mixed-age event.

The oldest child and grandchild in my family, I grew up with lots of kids around, plus family members and friends in every kind of relationship and parenting status. It never occurred to me to exclude anyone based on age or whether or not they had kids, except at specifically adult-only events. I also worked with teenagers as a counselor and teacher for many years — still the best job I ever had.

It makes some sense, though, that people would assume that childless people are anti-child, although I think this is more of a cultural myth than a proven fact. Many people absolutely don't have kids on purpose, a completely personal and valid choice. Some child-free folks do vocally oppose the idea of hanging out with children and only participate in events and social groups populated mostly or entirely by non-parents.

This is not my reality, however, and I find there are a lot of people out there like me, whose path to parenthood didn't materialize, but the draw to an extended chosen family — including people of all ages — remains.

Related stories

And while I don't believe you can like every kid any more than you can get along with everyone of any age, I generally feel comfortable around and enjoy kids, often even more than I enjoy the company of adults. Children are learning and growing so rapidly, and much of the time, they're fascinating. While I know it isn't true for everyone, parent or not, I'd honestly rather sit next to a crying child than a loud, complaining adult on an airplane or in a restaurant . At least I know a baby doesn't know any better.

I thought I'd have kids, but that didn't happen

I always expected I'd have children. Then, life happened, and kids didn't. My romantic relationships in my 20s and 30s weren't solid or well-matched enough for parenthood, and I didn't feel equipped emotionally or financially to give birth to or adopt a child on my own.

I also followed a circuitous, late-blooming path in career and life, achieving sobriety and then coming out as queer in my early 40s. Still single as I learned to live life in recovery and navigate building community, I came to fully grieve the road not taken and accept that whatever family I had would likely not involve children of my own .

I don't have to be a parent to care about children

I was a godparent for the first time at 18 years old. Most of my close friends have children, and so does my only sibling. Involvement in their lives and in extended family and friend events and activities has always brought me joy, and the kind of connection that I'm increasingly aware that I need.

Study after study warns us that loneliness is a societal epidemic , worsened by the pandemic, political divides, and physical distance from family and friends. Close community connections are among the best cures, reported to improve everything from blood pressure to dementia risk, and certainly mental health. I'm grateful that my earliest memories are intergenerational, and that is how I choose to live today, whenever I can. Closing off entire groups of people based on age seems like an unwise move. As many introverts have said over the years, just because I might not come doesn't mean I don't want to be invited.

Some of my best days have been driving my nephew to activities, when we can talk about music, and I can pretend to be cool again for 20 minutes. I've been a first call — or a call at all — when a friend learned of a pregnancy, and then I've gotten to watch them grow up.

I've had the privilege of editing college application essays and first-job cover letters for my friends' kids, advising on class choices, and listening to struggles small and large — roles I would never have had if I hadn't hung out with them from a younger age and earned some trust, from them and their parents.

I would trade none of these experiences for a kid-free life, even though they're not my own.

• Main content

Recommended

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to copy URL

Selena Gomez says she chooses to be friends with ‘levelheaded people’: ‘Girls are mean’

• View Author Archive
• Get author RSS feed

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Selena Gomez has revealed that she develops close friendships with “levelheaded people.”

The “Love On” singer, 31, admitted that the people she’s closest to don’t “give two f–ks” about her level of stardom.

“It’s a cliché, but girls are mean,” Gomez told Time . “It’s a very weird competition, being in the cool girls area — and then I’m just kind of like, there. I don’t know where I’m meant to belong.”

The “Only Murders in the Building” actress revealed that her closest friends include a casting director, a producer and real estate agent.

“I love having levelheaded people around that couldn’t give two f–ks about what I do,” she added.

Gomez also briefly touched on loneliness, admitting that it’s “hard” to go through it.

“You could be in a crowd of people and still feel alone. I still deal with that,” she said, adding that the feeling of heartbreak is often something she finds herself dealing with.

“You can distract yourself and you can deny and deny all you want, but it’ll still be there,” she said. “I just allow myself to have those days,” she said.

Elsewhere, Gomez revealed that she had already been planning her path to motherhood before getting into a relationship with Benny Blanco.

The “Same Old Love” singer revealed that she had made plans to adopt a baby at 35 when she was single.

“I was alone for five years and I got really used to it,” she told the outlet. “A lot of people are afraid of being alone and I probably tortured myself in my head for like two years being alone, and then I kind of accepted it.”

Gomez said she “came up with my plan,” which was for her to adopt at 35 if she “had not met anyone.”

Once Gomez’s romance with the music producer, 36, became serious, her plans changed.

“It just happens when you least expect it,” she shared.

Gomez said her new beau, whom she  began dating in 2023 , has tuned out the “noise” when it comes to “hurtful” things people, including her own fans, say about her.

“I know what people can do to people I love. My own fans, who I adore and feel like have shaped who I am, will say the most hurtful things to me about how I live my life. But he has the strength in him that none of that noise fazes him,” she told the magazine.

“It’s really impressive, and I just cherish every moment with him. I don’t know what the future holds, but I do know that he’s not going anywhere anytime soon.”

Share this article:

Advertisement

Here's What Angel Number 444 Is Trying to Tell You

In numerology, this number mean big things for your relationships, career and health.

Every item on this page was chosen by a Woman's Day editor. We may earn commission on some of the items you choose to buy.

What does it mean when you see the number 4?

Love and relationships, finances and career.

Angel numbers take various forms, each carrying its unique significance. For instance, the number 2 signifies connection , while 8 symbolizes achievement and balance . If the number 5 appears, it may indicate a readiness for adventure or change . However, when you encounter specific numbers like 4, 44, or 444, Berry advises against dismissing them.

Laura Widney, Chief Innovation Officer for Soaak , a private health clinic and mindfulness, mental health, and wellness app, explains that spiritually, the number 4 implies the presence of your angels, who are guiding, encouraging, and providing you with positive energy, confidence, and inner strength. As Widney emphasizes, when a number consistently reappears in your life, it's a clear sign from the universe, urging you to remain open and receptive to its meaningful message.

Number 4 spiritual meaning

In the spiritual sense, the lesson the number 4 can bring to you has to do with dreams, goals and aspirations. To achieve what you want, you have to be willing to serve, be dependable, and put in consistent hard work, according to our astrological experts.

The number 4 can represent the four elements: air, fire, water, and earth. These signify the importance of working together to achieve our goals, Widney says.

The number 4 can also represent the four sacred directions: north, south, east, and west, Widney explains. This reminds us that “we are all connected and need to respect and care for others to achieve our goals and aspirations.”

According to Berry, the number 4’s purpose is to build something of real value by being practical and hardworking. “It shows the need for security and structure, being motivated by things of a practical nature and being responsible for achieving what is wanted and understanding the value of self-discipline and rules,” Berry adds.

According to Vincent Genna , psychic therapist, spiritual teacher, and author of The Secret That’s Holding You Back , “If the angels need to send you a sign regarding the number 4, it means you are in need of important guidance.” It may mean that you’re off your ultimate life path, and you need to get back on track.

.css-zjsofe{-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;background-color:#ffffff;border:0;border-bottom:none;border-top:thin solid #CDCDCD;color:#000;cursor:pointer;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;font-style:inherit;font-weight:inherit;-webkit-box-pack:start;-ms-flex-pack:start;-webkit-justify-content:flex-start;justify-content:flex-start;padding-bottom:0.3125rem;padding-top:0.3125rem;scroll-margin-top:0rem;text-align:left;width:100%;}@media(min-width: 64rem){.css-zjsofe{scroll-margin-top:3.375rem;}} .css-jtmji2{border-radius:50%;width:1.875rem;border:thin solid #6F6F6F;height:1.875rem;padding:0.4rem;margin-right:0.625rem;} .css-jlx6sx{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;width:0.9375rem;height:0.9375rem;margin-right:0.625rem;-webkit-transform:rotate(90deg);-moz-transform:rotate(90deg);-ms-transform:rotate(90deg);transform:rotate(90deg);-webkit-transition:-webkit-transform 250ms ease-in-out;transition:transform 250ms ease-in-out;} 4

Do you find that your life is a little chaotic? Or, do you keep hitting dead ends as you try to pursue a goal? If you see the number 4 during these trying times, it may mean that your angels are trying to get you to stop and chill out. You should ground yourself, be still, and re-evaluate. On the other hand, if you are achieving your goals and you see the number 4, your angels are validating your journey, says Genna.“You might see or hear the number everywhere you turn,” Widney points out. “For example, you might see 4:44 on the clock, the number 4 on your receipts, or hear the same number repeatedly on the radio and in conversations.” What should you do when this happens? What does it mean if the number four being presented repeatedly becomes your reality? According to Widney, “the practicality and responsibility represented by the number 4 encourages us to work hard and harmoniously towards achieving our goals. The stability and solid foundation of the number 4 reminds us to stay focused and productive to achieve our aspirations.” To Berry, the number 4 signifies that the universe is offering support and angels are helping you with truth and self-worth. “It tells [you] to trust in feelings and heartfelt thoughts and continue with emotional strength and dedication in a positive direction,” she adds.  

When it comes to double 4s, that’s double the angel involvement, Berry points out.  “The number 44 shows angels surrounding with love and protection, ensuring safety. Also receiving help to share truth to the world with loving self-guidance and direction.” Widney believes that,  “The angel number 44 encourages you to pay special attention to your intuition and to stay on your current path because your drive and determination will lead you to success.”   

Now, the number 4 in a series that appears as “444” signifies that there are legends of angels lending assistance, Berry says.  “Miracles are happening now. The tables are turning in a favorable position and obstacles are being lifted.”  Berry reminds that for the person who sees 444, hard work is in order to overcome a challenge or to see changes for the better.  “This number is a reminder that processes have to be followed to reach the desired goals.” “The angel number 444 tells you that your connection with the angels and the angelic realm is powerful and that you can trust the guidance they are giving you,” Widney adds. “The number 444 is also a sign of love and wholeness. It represents your deep love for something or someone.”

When it comes to your love life, when you see the number 4 repeated three times, the universe is telling you to establish a stable foundation for that relationship. “I’m always telling my clients, male and female, that even though we are sexual beings, in order for any love relationship to truly work and develop into a soulmate or twin-flame-like relationship, you must develop an emotional foundation before a physical one,” Genna cautions.

While a physical connection is also important, stability will give your relationship longevity. When you see the angel number 4, it could mean that you need to find peace in your current love life. “It's important to create a sense of peace when making decisions and establishing the direction of the relationship,” Berry explains.

Likewise, Genna says, if you recently began a new love interest and relationship, seeing any of the combinations of the number 4 means you should establish a stable foundation for that relationship to work. "Remember, a strong foundation will withstand the winds of life — the natural and unnatural stressors that come along throughout one’s life," Genna advises. "The highs and lows, the good times and bad times, in sickness and in health can all be faced between a couple when a strong, stable foundation has been created." Seeing the number 4, 44 or 444 are a good reminder.

In case you’re not familiar, a twin flame is your soul split in half . “It is an exact mirror of the soul that supposedly each soul created for itself in a lifetime,” says Genna. “The idea upon splitting the soul is that if you get to meet up with your twin soul and partner with it in love, this will allow you to evolve and grow faster. In this way you have the chance to see your weaknesses and strengths outside yourself.”

According to Berry, a "twin flame" friendship or romantic relationship is the kind of soulful union in which each person reflects the best part of the other and reminds them of their true worth. Through this, both individuals in the situation can live their lives to the fullest — truthful and free from obligations where there are no secrets, and there is positive feedback and constructive criticism.

So when you see the number 4, 44, or 444, it’s a sign you’re on the right path and are heading in a positive direction with that partner. “Trusting inner instincts is the foundation of this number when involved in moving forward in the relationship,” Berry reminds.

Knowing your twin flame means you get the opportunity to see your weaknesses and strengths outside yourself.

If you follow this concept, your twin-flame relationship might actually prove to be the most difficult kind. Think about it? "If you have a hard enough getting along with yourself, how much more difficult would it be to get along with yourself as a partner?" Genna asks. "Whatever issues and weaknesses you carry would be doubly difficult to resolve and heal."

“The number 444 can help keep you focused and determined to reach your career goals and boost your finances because of your drive and determination,” explains Widney.

Remember that the number 4 gives off the energy of dependability and being practical. As it relates to your finances and your career, seeing the number 4 could be a sign that you need discipline, structure, and to be more conscientious when it comes to your money matters or job. “This number values excellence in work and career, so when it appears, more attention should be directed toward persistence and precision in areas of work and business,” adds Berry.

Genna says that the number 4 can sometimes be a message from the angels for you to either keep going (and that they’re going to be helping you!) or that you may actually need a new job. Continue to look for the signs, so you can be directed towards the right path.

When it comes to your health and wellness, you can factor in discipline too when the angel number 4 presents itself to you. It’s a sign you need to prioritize your health. Seeing the number 4 can be the angels telling you to ground yourself, slow down, and have a sense of calm, especially if the surrounding energy is chaotic. Genna suggests trying meditation among other things. “A better lifestyle may be necessary for you to regain your wellness and strength,” he says. “In order to heal the physical body, the angels know you must heal the mental body first and foremost.”

Writing or journaling about your thoughts and emotions when you experience an angel number is a great practice says Widney. “Taking the physical action of journaling during your angel number experience helps you make the most of these powerful moments.”

Ysolt Usigan is a lifestyle writer and editor with 15+ years of experience working in digital media. She has created share-worthy content for publishers Shape , What To Expect , Cafe Mom , TODAY , CBS News , HuffPo , The Bump , Health , Ask Men , and Best Gifts . A working mom of two, her editorial expertise in parenting, shopping, and home are rooted in her everyday life. 

.css-2lr79s:before{top:1.4rem;left:calc(-50vw + 50%);width:100vw;height:0.0625rem;z-index:-1;content:'';position:absolute;border-top:0.0625rem solid #CDCDCD;} Faith and Religion

The 80 Most Inspirational Bible Quotes to Read

If You Keep Seeing 1144, Read This ASAP

We All Have a Life Path Number — What's Yours?

13 Summer Blessings for Vacation

40 Mother's Day Bible Verses That Are Full of Love

110 Inspirational Buddha Quotes on Love and Life

50 Bible Verses About Mothers

25 Powerful Prayers for Healing and Strength

30 Graduation Bible Verses for Faithful Graduates

What Is the Hamsa — And What Does the Symbol Mean?

What Angel Number 717 Is Trying to Tell You