Abstract
AbstractIn this paper, I will explore love as a universe of meaning constituted at the crossroads of cultural patterns and actors’ biographical experiences. Universes of meaning provide a structure of cognitive pre-selections. While the social in general is composed of a multitude of universes of meaning, they belong to the public. Romantic relationships are private and enable privacy. I will (1) propose a definition of love and a framework that serves to ensure its theoretical validity. I will then (2) analytically deconstruct the unity of communication, interaction, eroticism, and emotionality as love’s different media of experience and explore their self-referential functionality.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference91 articles.
1. Archer, M. 2000. Being Human. The Problem of Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Aron, A., H. Fisher, and G. Strong. 2006. Romantic Love. In The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships, ed. A. Vangelisti and D. Perlman, 579–594. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Baumeister, R., and E. Bratslavsky. 1999. Passion, Intimacy, and Time: Passionate Love as a Function of Change in Intimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Review 3 (1): 49–67.
4. Beck, U. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Polity.
5. Beck, U., and E. Beck-Gernsheim. 1994. The Normal Chaos of Love. Madlen: Blackwell.