Love is analyzed and put into scientific terms. Nussbaum criticizes this view when she says, “… The attempt to grasp to love intellectually was a way of avoiding love” (Nussbaum 270). To put love into scientific terms extinguishes its true meaning. It takes feelings out of love, which is not love at all. Nussbaum uses the story of Marcel and Albertine to expand on this view. In the story, Marcel analyzes whether or not he loves Albertine. Nussbaum calls Marcel’s reasoning a cost-benefit analysis and makes the point that this reasoning creates a facade of “…putting oneself in control by pretending that all loses can be made up by sufficient qualities of something else” (Nussbaum 264). Nussbaum considers this view of love not to be love at all because love is only love when emotions are the prime factor. If you only think of love intellectually, you will never experience real …show more content…
This view finds that the knowledge of love comes from another person. Nussbaum says that “It insists that knowledge of love is not a state or function of the solitary person at all, but a complex way of being, feeling, and interacting with another person” (Nussbaum 274). This view is the one that Nussbaum agrees with. Nussbaum believes that love must come from the heart and not from the brain. Love cannot be analyzed, only felt. We must “learn to fall” like Ann Beattie writes. Nussbaum believes that “…what will happen can’t be stopped” (Nussbaum 278). Love is a natural occurrence that can’t be stopped by intellectual interrogation. Love is knowing, but not forcing a decision. Love only happens when you are open and allow it. You can decide to be open, but you can’t decide when/who to