How Do I Know I Love You?

I was engrossed in my book while a painfully mundane old school love song came up on the radio. The first two lines went: "Don't know much about history, don't know much about biology". I rolled my eyes at the degree of cheesiness and predictability of the song which was very much reminiscent of the cheesy and predictable sandwich I just stuffed my face with. As I attempted to reacquaint myself with the intellectually engaging entertainment I had in hand which I so obnoxiously believed that would set me apart from people represented by whomever had sung the song, it suddenly hit me that the lyrics of the song actually delivers a message that, much to my surprise, resonates with the chapter I was reading in "Love's Knowledge by Martha Nussbaum". 

In celebration of my rare Eureka moment and for your readers' entertainment, I'm going to shortly summarize this chapter in "Love's Knowledge" through a scrutiny of the song that, under blithe research, is titled "Don't Know Much about History" (I know, as if the corny musicianship and lyrics doesn't already do the song justice). The lyrics of the song:

"Don't know much about history
Don't know much biology
Don't know much about science book
Don't know much about the French I took

But I do know that I love you
And I know that if you love me too
What a wonderful world this would be"

involves two kinds of "knowledge", the intellectual knowledge which we learn from history and biology, and the impressional knowledge which the immediate reality afflicts upon us. The song suggests that even though one knows nothing about the scientific method of approaching subject matters, he/she is still able to know where his/her own heart lies. How? The Stoic philosopher Zeno explains that what composes any of our knowledge of the outside world is a bunch of perceptual impressions. Because these impressions are brought about by reality itself, one can be certain that they are veracious. This certainty enables us to know our own heart, and it serves as the basis of the development of sciences.

Why is knowing the distinction between intellect and knowledge important? I'll share one of my own experiences: last week my friend told me that he was struggling with his relationship, in which he wasn't sure whether he should give up on his girlfriend who always blew hot and cold. I advised him to "do a cost-benefit analysis"on staying with his girlfriend. I now realize the problem with what I suggested was that the use of the cost-benefit analysis, one of the most commonplace assessment methods in our intellectual tradition, is a form of self-deception. It distances us from feelings we're afraid of, and makes us think that we're in control of a situation we're not. We often fail to recognize that these very feelings, unquantifiable under the lenses of reasoning, are the gateways to knowing our own heart. In fact, the Stoics explain that it is not only the gateways to knowing, it is knowing. Love is not waiting there to be revealed, it is in fact constituted by the emotions and sufferings that we have to go through. Especially that of suffering, since it is simply the most overwhelming.

In other words, my friend can know whether or not he loves his girlfriend enough to be with her, even if he's illiterate, by simply being susceptible to the depth and significance of his own feelings.