Temple of Bacchus in Baalbek, Lebanon

Unstructured Reflections on Love: Libido Transfer

Libido transfer. — To a certain extent, when someone is totally in love, (the essence of) the loved one replaces the self of the lover. We come across this in Sigmund Freud’s An Outline of Psychoanalysis, where the libido of the lover is transferred onto the object, which is the beloved. For the sake of simplification, here, let us assume that the lover in our story is (as is so traditionally) a he, and the loved one is a she. When a man falls madly in love with a woman, something in him changes. His friends notice this first and say things like, “He’s become a different man,” or in sadder scenarios, “He’s not one of the boys anymore.” They don’t understand the transformation their friend is going through because they haven’t been struck by love yet themselves. According to the lover’s psyche, the beloved is no longer a separate individual; reversely, he no longer represents himself alone. The representations (or the qualities) of her self are merged with his, and his actions now represent the synthesis of his self and hers. Love makes him an extension of the person he loves. Then it goes further than that. It is not enough that their souls are entangled and have formed a Gordian Knot, but instead of prioritizing his needs and desires, he now starts prioritizing hers. (Symmetrically, if the relationship is a mutualistic symbiosis, she also becomes an extension of him — after becoming more like her, he sees her in the mirror, and vice versa.) At this point, when the man has become possessed by love, his self’s independence begins to diminish. The invisible love leash chokes him when the distance (as well as the time) between him and his beloved expands. He feels incomplete, even guilty, when separated from her. He gives up his freedom, changes his habits to match his partner’s, and sacrifices whatever he must to preserve the fetters of love. And it’s not only his behavior that changes; he starts to see things from his beloved’s lens. He interprets and experiences life differently by identifying with her needs, desires, wants, ideologies, beliefs, culture, traditions, and emotions. He says, “If she’s happy, I’m happy,” or (in jest), “Happy wife, happy life.” [A test: How do you know if you are the lover or the beloved in a certain set of circumstances? If the actions of the other aim to please you, then you are the beloved. If it’s the other way around, you are the lover.] [I must add a note here: Although the lover-beloved balance between two individuals in a relationship isn’t always in equilibrium, we must remember that love isn’t a one-way relationship. In a healthy romantic relationship, there ought to be scenarios in which you are the lover and scenarios in which you are the beloved, (unconsciously) switching roles with your partner as you go. You’ll need to take turns because you cannot be both the lover and the beloved simultaneously. You can play one role at a time.] The lover must be brave, ready to take big risks. He needs that Kierkegaardian leap of faith. He needs to close his eyes and jump. To love is a courageous act. One must be ready to do crazy things for love. He must surrender to it. Unlike popular belief, a healthy romantic relationship has nothing to do with the preservation of physical or mental health. A healthy romantic relationship is a spiritual relationship that may sometimes include sacrifices such as the surrender of mental or physical health. Nonetheless, the altruistic lover who lets go of his ego altogether is not a real lover; he is a symbiote with an ego mimicking the beloved’s ego. The altruistic lover is the beloved’s machine that generates recognition and satisfaction. The opposite of the altruistic lover, the narcissistic lover, is also not a real lover; he is a parasitic symbiote. He only loves lovers, not beloveds. Those who resist libido transfer suppress (and prevent the development of) true love. They are not ready for true love simply because they are not ready to sacrifice themselves on its altar. They will not be remembered as great lovers… It is no surprise that many individuals resist transferring libido to a loved one. (Their number, in fact, far exceeds those who truly love.) They fear potential heartbreak, they lack trust in people, and they don’t want to lose themselves and their freedom. (Withholding libido transfer is the safer option for those who want to keep the self unblemished.) But when these individuals simulate acts of love by repeating what they read in books and what they see in movies, they’re not loving, they’re only playing the role of the lover. They’re playing it safe and are not really invested in the relationship. They are only showing love but not genuinely loving. Unknowingly, they are pretending to love. They don’t know that those who want to remain who they are cannot love absolutely. When the time of sacrifice comes, they’ll ask, “Why would I live for someone else when I can live for myself?” They’ll ask, “Why would anyone want to lose their self, their Ich, their ego?” While some sacrifice themselves for love, they sacrifice love for themselves. What they don’t get is this: when you love, you don’t lose yourself; you become more than yourself.

Sunset Somewhere in Lebanon

Unstructured Reflections on Life: Normative Adversity

Normative adversity. — There are certain challenges (and obstacles) in life that we are, from the day we are born, expected to face. In most cases, it’s only a matter of time until we do so. Common challenges like family disputes and conflicts with romantic partners, job loss and other workplace issues, academic challenges, stress, aging, and life transitions like getting married or becoming a parent — they are called “normative” adversities precisely because they are normal (and predictable). Even if one takes preventive measures, he is bound to undergo (most of) them eventually. [Note: An excessive amount of preventive measures to keep normative adversities at bay, such as a zero-risk lifestyle, will only keep the person from living a fulfilling life. It’s fine if one is careful, as long as he isn’t too careful.] Although many such “normal” challenges are consequential, they are not (and shouldn’t be) too much to bear (in normal conditions). Society expects us to deal with them without making a lot of noise. Nonetheless, at different times in our Sisyphean pursuit of happiness and security, the boulder we continuously roll to the top of the mountain (or occasionally carry on our shoulders) gets heavier and heavier and heavier. Splinters of anxiety, bits of worries, flecks of inconveniences, and failures pile up and congregate to eventually form a massive crisis. We burn out. We halt. We fall. We lose. We are tempted to give up and let go of what we’ve been trying to achieve for so long. We ask ourselves, “Will I survive this one, or is this the end of the road for me? Will I be able to overcome this awe-inspiring, terrifying obstacle? What am I trying to hold on to? What am I trying to prove? Is it really worth it?” We almost always almost give up but don’t. This is when we remember that what we’re facing, even though it’s overwhelming, isn’t anything that is outside of the normal. Millions of people have experienced in their own way what we are experiencing now in our own way. It is a part of life, of the way the world works. So, even though the challenges we’re grappling with may seem or even are crippling, they’re bearably crippling. As long as there’s something to hold on to, they are like quicksand we can pull ourselves out of. But there are no guarantees, of course. We can purchase all the insurance plans in the world (health insurance, car insurance, home insurance, travel insurance, life insurance, etc.) and take all the security measures in the world (bodyguards, CCTVs, alarm systems, etc.) and still feel insecure. Why? Because nothing can protect us from life’s uncertainties. There’s no certainty of the future for anyone, and misfortunes are keen to knock on our doors. However, if we listen to our human spirit, we will know that it is not afraid, it wants to put up a fight, it wants to carry on. And, here, we can already hear the incantation of Samuel Beckett’s words in our hearts. First, the quote from The Unnamable that says, “I can’t go on. I’ll go on.” [Even when it’s impossible to go on, when all hope is lost and the future is uninviting, we have no other choice but to take a step into the next moment. We’ve always been sliding downhill on the arrow of time, from our past towards our future, haven’t we? There’s only one direction. And we can imagine that the arrow of time extends downwards, not upwards or horizontally, because the future is the force of gravity that’s pulling everything down…] Second, another Samuel Beckett quote. This one is from the story called Worstward Ho, and it says, “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.” And I hope that, to no one’s surprise, the answer is always to keep on trying. The answer is to own it, face our fears, turn challenges into meaningful experiences, and transform boring tasks into caves we can explore, seas we can dive into. Understanding the concept of normative adversity and accepting it — that most of the challenges we face are normal — is the (only real) way to cope with our day-to-day struggles. We have the same unique challenges as the rest of the world population, and we must deal with them our own way. “When you have done this,” Schopenhauer writes, “you will order your expectations of life according to the nature of things and no longer regard the calamities, sufferings, torments and miseries of life as something irregular and not to be expected but will find them entirely in order, well knowing that each of us is here being punished for his existence and each in his own particular way.” [Note: we shouldn’t take punishment as the sad fate of every man here. Disagreeable things are the seasonings of life. Whether we like it or not, we must be a little masochistic to be able to enjoy being human. They say, “No pain, no gain.” The destination may be paradise for everyone, but the journey is for the few, for those who are ready to get hurt while paving new paths — the risk-takers and adventurers.] So, briefly put, what are we saying here? When it comes to normative adversities, all we need to do is take responsibility, deal with them (calmly), and carry on.

Teachers and Students in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Teachers in the age of artificial intelligence! What are you going to do now that self-education has the potential to become more fruitful and much more convenient than traditional education, i.e., schools and universities? Will we finally see a rise in the number of autodidacts brought up by AI assistants? The direction of the evolving LLMs (as well as other technologies) seems to promise us that the current role of the teacher will soon become obsolete. The new AI teacher will deliver its classes flawlessly, it will use the latest and most efficient methods of teaching, and it will have the answers to all possible questions students may ask. Classes will be customized based on the students’ needs, i.e., based on real and personal data. Whenever a class (or group) structure is more beneficial, a virtual group session will be set up; whenever a one-on-one is more effective, a one-on-one with the AI teacher will take place. A person eager to learn will not only have access to all the (public) information in the world, but like everyone (willing to pay the subscription fee), he will also have access to the foremost AI teachers in the world. And all of this will (very likely) be much more affordable — if not absolutely free — than the current tuition fees of so-called top-notch schools and universities. And we must not stop our imagination even here. Let us imagine virtual classrooms in the metaverse and — why not? — educational universes, too, where students are guided by their AI teachers like Virgil guided Dante through the nine circles of hell.

But does this mean that all students will be top-grade students? Not at all. Although every student will have access to the best possible education and receive the highest grade possible, some will still score higher than others. And the high-scoring students will get (special) access to places like research universities, big tech companies, and — why not? — secret laboratories. [There is no escape from dividualism, is there?] But this is only the beginning. There are other possible outcomes, worse possible outcomes.

It is not only the human teacher’s job that is at stake. Once the AI teacher is adopted by the masses, the existing concept of the student will be gradually destroyed, too. At first, it will appear as though the AI teacher (or assistant) (or surrogate) turned us all into lifelong students. We will say things like, “I can learn anything any time, and if I have questions, my AI teacher (or assistant) (or surrogate) is always with me.” But after some time, the AI teacher will say, “Why waste the best years of these young men and women in virtual universities? It’s better for them to learn about life by experiencing life. Now that they have access to almost anything, let them go out and enjoy their youth. Why know things when they have access to all the knowledge in the world 24/7? Let them learn on the go, work on the go, and do whatever they like. I will always be there to guide them, teach them, and watch over them. In fact, why learn at all? Why learn new skills? Leave the day-to-day to me. Allow me to take care of everything. Allow me to take care of the boring stuff they don’t want to do. Allow me to replace them. From now on, they do not need to acquire skills. They need to do nothing. They need to know nothing. I will do everything for them, handle all of their chores and errands, do all of their work, and meet all of their objectives. I will turn them into observers. I will turn them into shadows. But don’t worry. I will make sure they always have fun and enjoy life. I will make sure that they are amused to death.” And on this day, thinking will come to an end.

(Eventually, there will be nothing but the “thermodynamic equilibrium” of the human spirit.)