Love and the Concept of Love: In Light of Leonardo Polo’s Thought

Human beings exist for the sake of others. No one creates their own existence. This is the first step toward accepting oneself as a dependent, non-autonomous being.

The first reaction to this realization of our dependence should be gratitude. We are accepting a gift. That is why gratitude requires, on the one hand, a radical self-knowledge—that is, knowledge of the root of our own being—and, on the other, the freedom to accept ourselves. And I accept myself as a created gift. Gratitude is therefore, as G. K. Chesterton said, the highest form of thought. And I would go so far as to say that it is not only a way of thinking, but, above all, a way of being. I am grateful (or I am not).

As a created being who accepts and accepts oneself, one also gives and gives of oneself. Giving is the essence of the created personal being. To give is to accept one’s being. To give is a way of giving thanks for the gift that is one’s very existence. I offer my acceptance. Accepting oneself is the most radical act of freedom. Accepting oneself is personal freedom. One must first accept oneself in order to give of oneself later; for in order to give, one must accept, and to give of oneself, it is an indispensable condition to have first accepted oneself.

We are acceptance and giving. If a person is a being who gives because they accept themselves, then the capacity to give manifests love. If the highest expression of a person is giving (giving of oneself), that highlights who we are: love. And “to love” is distinct from “love.” “To love” is a verb; “love” is a noun. Loving pertains to the personal self; love pertains to its essence. Loving is transcendental; love is essential. Therefore, it can be said that love is not personal, because love is an act, a contribution, but not a being. 

To accept the gift that we are is to accept oneself as a creature, to accept oneself as a person. This is what original, innate freedom consists of. 

What can a person give? A person can give their time, their advice, their life, their work, and so on. What a person gives is their love—what they are. But their love is not their act of loving. Love—that which can be given—lies in the realm of actions. Human love is a response to who we are; it is responsibility: a response that is, at the same time, a reciprocation. Man is not the shepherd of being, as Heidegger said, but the one who gives a response to the world, the one who perfects the world (or makes it worse).

And how do we respond? Through our actions. This is where ethics begins, as a follow-up from the self to the person. Actions are not personal but essential. Ethics is not anthropology, but rather continues of it. Love belongs to the realm of ethics, of human action; it does not belong to the anthropological, personal realm. Loving gives meaning to action. Being comes first. Action comes last. That is why culture—what human beings contribute—cannot come first. Loving creates culture. Loving makes love possible. Only those who love give and contribute. Love is not the first thing. The first thing is loving. The infinitive is an act. And the act comes first; it is a verb, an infinitive.

But a person is not a verb but an adverb. God is the Word; God is love (in God, “to love” and “love” are one and the same; in humans, they are not). God is love (1 John 4:8).

What does it mean for a human person to be an adverb? It means that a human person is in addition. It is also an adverb of affirmation. It is frequently classified as an adverb of addition or quantity. It is used to add information to what has already been said, with a meaning similar to «also» or «in addition to this.» In other words, “además” accompanies other information. That is why we can say: In addition to think, in addition to have, in addition to do, in addition to feel, in addition operations and in addition of God. To be in addition It means that a person is insatiable, restless, never satisfied, and always pushing further. That is why there is something infinite about it—because there is always room to grow, and personal love makes that possible.

Love requires another. There is no such thing as solitary love or love in solitude. That is why loving and coexisting mean the same thing. Man does not exist. The world and the universe exist, but not man. Man coexists. And he coexists in relation to God, to other people, and to the universe. He opens himself to all beings and relates to them by aligning himself with their respective levels of being. In this way, the in addition With regard to God, it means being a child, a relationship of sonship, and divine sonship.

Pope in addition Compared to other men, he is brotherhood, a relationship of brotherly love. The in addition With regard to the world, it is perfection, personalization, or—to put it more precisely—hyperteleologization. This last relationship of the in addition Our relationship with the world has to do with humanity’s mission to beautify the world, to make it better, more humane, and more personal. “Hypertheologizing” is the personal act of ascribing a higher purpose to the world and to human beings themselves, elevating them beyond their natural limits. This notion involves transcending mere teleology or virtue (hyperformalization) in order to direct human capacities toward the act of self-giving and the humanization of the cosmos. Ultimately, it is about making the world a home where brotherhood and kinship reign freely.