Religious and spiritual sorts tend to bang on about love.1 God is love, some say. Practice the art of loving-kindness2, others commend. And I’ve found it hard to know what sense to make of these sentiments3. They can so easily lose weight4 and meaning in a thousand repetitions. Then there is the claim that love reveals and is the fundamental truth of reality.5 What can be made of that in a scientific age?

Then, I started to read up on developmental psychology6. It seems to me that the modern science illuminates7 the older, religious claims.

Psychologists and psychotherapists as diverse as Jean Piaget and Sigmund Freud, John Bowlby and Donald Winnicott seem to say that we learn about love in roughly three stages.8 Our first love is narcissistic9—not an entirely pleasant thought, though behaving as if we were the only creature of importance in the world is necessary for our early survival. Freud talked of His Majesty the Baby10.

Neonates are lovable and tyrannical.11 Winnicott showed that the good-enough parent is not perfect but is capable of being devoted to their child, especially in the early weeks. The aim is to instil a feeling that life can be trusted because, on the whole, it delivers what the child needs, physically and emotionally.12 A sense of wellbeing13 grows in the young body. It provides the basis for the kind of self-love that enables you to get over yourself and feel comfortable in your own skin. The myth of Narcissus conveys a similar insight.14 The problem the beautiful youth had was not that he loved himself too much, but that he couldn’t love himself and drowned seeking reassurance15.

Narcissism might be called the love of one. Next follows love between two. It is a step into the unknown. It’s frightening to awaken to16 the realisation that you are dependent upon another—a parent, in the child’s case; a partner, in the adult equivalent17: romantic love. But the upside18 is that life expands. To be one of two promises deeper delights and wider horizons than narcissism can embrace.19

There is an assumption that dyadic love, also called falling in love, is the pinnacle of lovely experiences.20 But it is only the midpoint21 of the story according to developmental psychology. The next step comes with a secure-enough attachment22, as Bowlby put it. Equipped with such trust, the child is able to explore the world—to take tentative steps away from the cosy twosome.23

Then there’s me, there’s Mum or Dad, and now there’s something else—a third dimension known in the reality of siblings, friends, interests, goals, a current of life that runs independently of me, though I’m somehow part of it.24 Again, taking that step is alarming, possibly traumatic.25 However, if negotiated OK, life becomes richer again, and more risky, and the individual’s perception26 of reality grows.

At each transition—from one to two, from two to the triangular space—the individual realises that love was already there waiting for him or her. Narcissistic self-absorption27 relaxes with the realisation that I am held in the love of another. Lovers move from falling in love to standing in love, to recall Erich Fromm’s phrase.

The life of faith detects28 that there is a fourth dimension to add to this third, a divine love that is there waiting. It holds all because it is the source of the love that flows through all. Fear and uncertainty do not cease29. Human love always feels a bit like that. But faith is the felt sense that love can be trusted because love is, in truth, the ground of reality.

（兼職編輯：楊帆）