I’m drawn to deconstruct the opposition between loving who and loving what.
Can we distinguish the one we love from the qualities we love?
Is a person an absolute singularity or an ensemble of relations as expressed by Marx?
Loving a being as a who — a singularity — seems more noble and exalted than loving qualities of a being, but why do we impose this divide?
Because we wish to protect ourselves from the risks of change. Such protection is not possible, change is the only constant.
Do we lose “real love” if we insist that no person is a singularity or that love can be unchanging? No, we lose our illusions about love, about persons, and most of all, about ourselves.
We change, we become more or less lovable with every change. We must risk embracing our transience, our processual character as changing beings in a changing universe.