Commentary with List of References

Reading by Niklas Luhmann: Chapter 2 of Love as passion: The codification of intimacy (pp. 18-33).

The purpose of Luhmann’s chapter is to construct an entirely new meaning of love. His goal is to
bring forth a new perspective on how society defines and interacts with concepts of love.

Luhmann (1986) establishes that love should not be regarded as an emotion, but rather as a “media of
communication” (p. 18-19). Simply put, love as a means of communication can also be defined as a
semantic device. Semantic devices give meaning and symbols to words, therefore when we use such
terms as romantic love we are referring to a list of traits associated with love and not necessarily feeling
love (Ibid, p. 20). The representations and traits commonly associated with love are malleable; they are
situated historically and culturally (Ibid, p. 20-21). Concepts of love are, therefore, linked to the
structure of a given society (Ibid, p. 20). Luhmann (1986) suggests that we relate to the structure of our
society using semantic devices which can become highly individualized considering everyone relates to
their environment differently. Consequently, each individual acquires a keen, yet unique sense of their
personal relation to the world. However, the more ‘atypical’ ones relation to the world, the less likely
they are to find someone compatible (Ibid, p. 21-22). Although this breach from typical ways of thinking
and communicating can hinder one’s chances of finding love, from a linguistic point of view, this leads to
a wider range of relational topics of conversation. As we broaden the directions for our personalized
conversations, we expand our knowledge-base (Ibid, p. 20-21). Luhmann (1986) suggests that it is at this
point in which we form strong bonds with those most close to us. Even though we can get to know
someone intimately, according to Luhmann (1986), lovers cannot be fully communicative with one
another. He states that there is a level of risk that attached to transparency (Luhmann, 1986).

As society’s knowledge-base grows, mediums of communication change making people identify with
newer symbols and meanings. Those that veer furthest from the status quo, will become increasingly
alienated. This fear of alienation is what may make them less transparent to their partner (Ibid, 23-24).

Luhmann brings some fascinating points to his ideas in this chapter. I agree with his idea on love being
ever changing and culturally situated, I do not necessarily agree with him on the points he makes about
communication and transparency. Admittedly, I have not read his book in its entirety, but his notions on
love seem teleological. For example, if two people wish to fall in love, then their ultimate goal should be
to know their partner as well as they know themselves. I say this because if the lines of communication
are undoubtedly open, 100% of the time, then one should have a perfect sense of what their beloved is
thinking or how they will react (Ibid, p.25-26). For me, this is not at all relatable or possible.
Furthermore, his theory is very much based on western culture, where polyamorous relationships rarely
surface.
Bibliography

Kaufmann, J.C. (2011). The curious history of love. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Luhmann, N. (1986). Love as a generalized symbolic medium of communication. In Love as

passion: The codification of intimacy (pp. 18-33). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Morgner, C. (2014). The theory of love and the theory of society: Remarks on the oeuvre of Niklas
Luhmann. International Sociology, 29(5), 396-404.

Rougemont, D.D. (1983). Love in the western world. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Sorokin, P.A. (1954). The ways and power of love; types, factors, and techniques of moraltransformation.
Boston: Beacon Press.