Rate this book

Love 2.0: How Our Supreme Emotion Affects Everything We Feel, Think, Do, And Become (2013)

by Barbara L. Fredrickson(Favorite Author)

3.75 of 5 Votes: 2

ISBN

1594630992 (ISBN13: 9781594630996)

languge

English

genre

Nonfiction

publisher

Hudson Street Press

review 1: In a nutshell. This book is about a particular contemplative practice from the Buddhist tradition known as Meta, commonly translated as Loving Kindness Meditation (LKM). Basically, what it entails is intentionally generating kindness and compassion for your self and others.If you're sensing that this would be a very beneficial thing to do. You'd be right. It is. Particularly given how easy it is for many (if not all of us) to slip into unconscious automatic ultra cranky hater mode if we're not carful.In case you didn't know, or failed to notice, mammals (particularly people) are essentially hard wired to focus on the negative shit, and pretty much equally biased blow off, or completely take for granted the positive shit. How often do life's little slights and inconvenience... mores just bug the shit out of you. The salmon is overlooked or the line at Starbucks is kind of slow. And conversely, when's the last time you were overjoyed to have electricity or indoor plumbing. Probably the last time you had to go without it. And what ever joy you felt at having it after an absence was doubtlessly short lived. Don't worry this is absolutely normal. This has to do with our evolutionary conditioning. It's easy to imagine what happened to our less vigilant, more trusting ancestors. Odds are good they didn't ever become ancestors at all.Well, as you may have also noticed. This little trait probably isn't as adaptive as it used to be. In other words, it would probably be safe for most of us to lighten up a little. Maybe even intentionally practice being a little nicer, a little more loving and probably more than a little more compassionate to our selves and each other. That's what LKM is all about. And Barbara Fredrickson's work is all about providing a secular framework and the research data to make this venerable spiritual practice accessible and viable to the contemporary western world. Believe me when I tell you, I'm all for LKM. That is in theory, and some times (more and more all the time) in practice too. I can honestly say I'd be lost without LKM. I'm quite sure I would be (at least) 10% unhappier (probably more) and my poor family members, friends, students and coworkers would probably be ready to banish me from the village if I didn't intentionally (and regularly) restructure some of my more negative cognitions. So that makes my tepid reaction to this book kind of hard to figure. This is a book I wanted to love. I wanted to ya know, like, hashtag love 2.0 it. But I ended up only sorta liking it. It's got some really redeeming moments. But again, I only sorta liked it. Maybe I didn't even like it at times. Maybe it was more like a fart noise 2.0. What can I say. I found it kind of boring and lightweight at times, and ultimately rather unconvincing. I wanted more hard science. Something substantial to anchor all of the claims. There was some stuff about the Vegas nerve but not enough. I think my real beef with the book is that I just didn't connect with the narrative voice. But that's just a guess. Frankly, it's confusing exactly why I'm as lukewarm on it as I am.I have been kicking around Buddhist circles for a long time, and I have subsequently been practicing LKM for years, and at times I actually really appreciate it. But I have always leaned toward the radical acceptance (mindfulness and equanimity) side of contemplative practices and (for some reason) part of me feels kind of fake and new age when I do LKM. Sort of like Al Frankin's character Stuart Smally from SNL.So maybe my mild discomfort with this book is just an expression of this mild discomfort with the whole LKM thing. Or maybe I'm just a hopelessly cranky ol dick (probably that). Or maybe I'm both and more. Or maybe it's just fun as hell to hate on a book called Love 2.0. I don't know, I'm grasping at straws here.Anyway. I think LKM is necessary. I think the whole secular mindfulness thing that's happening right now really needs a dose of LKM as a counterbalance. It's pretty easy to get kind of nihilistic when all you're doing all day is noticing and accepting suffering and impermanence (that's misery and death for those of you unfamiliar with Buddhist euphemisms). But this book isn't going to be my clarion call. Not by a long shot.Perhaps it's just to darn self serious. Maybe someone has to write a similar book in a much less reverent tone in order to get me excited. I love yoga and meditation, but I hate (hella hate) the cliche, wistful, breathy "yoga/meditation voice. I always have. Maybe someone, probably a guy, and not a sensitive new age guy (SNAG) needs to cover this topic in a more sober (more butch) voice in order for me to feel it all the way. And not Noah Lavine please, for gosh sakes. He actually needs to please not write a book on LKM. I can just hear all the tattooed hipster Buddhists spouting off. Just Kill me now please! And if you're about to say read Sharon Salsberg, please just don't. That's worse. Much worse. Much much much worse! Anyway I digress. I'm clearly the one with the issue here. You'll probably love the book. So get it and read it if you're so inclined. Just don't blame me if you feel like you just ate a big nothing burger with heaping healing of fart 2.0 sauce on it. cuz I tried to warn ya!
review 2: The book has two parts: first deals with concepts and theories of love, and second focuses on practical tools, like meditation, to improve our biology of love and relationship with our intimate circle. By adopting a scientific approach, Dr. Fredrickson attempts to upgrade the concept of love. The major aims of this book are to explore love in terms of biology, emotional and interpersonal science and, to further demonstrate how love can expand our ways of perception and can ultimately improve relationships and health. In return, being healthier and happier would enable us to experience more love and become more resilient and wiser. Dr. Fredrickson uses the term “upward spiral” (p.60) to describe this continuous circular process. According to Dr. Fredrickson, love is a “mirco-moment” of interpersonal positivity resonance that encompasses shared positive emotions, biological and behavioral synchrony, and mutual care for each other’s well-being (p.17). Love has two prerequisites: feeling of safety and “true sensory and temporal connection. (p. 20)” Therefore, true love does not happen solely inside someone’s heart or mind; it’s not a one person’s private matter. Nor does unconditional love exist. Because positivity resonance lasts temporarily (usually seconds) and our body is made to crave for it, we have to frequently nurture it (p. 36). Love is something subject to changes. We need to work on it in order to maintain its top quality. I especially appreciate practical tips like sharing our good news and celebrating our partner’s good news (p.75). For instance, when we lose touch with someone (say that we don’t make eye contact), our love for that person weakens over time even if we think we still care for him or her. This is a human condition; we do need physical contact or some concrete expressive forms to renew our affection and positive feelings toward each other and to cement our bonds. This definition of love applies very well to intimate kinds of love that we have with our family, close friends or a close-nit community. However, in my view, the book overemphasizes interpersonal physical connections and overlooks the spiritual source, intention or reasoning of love. In general, Asia people are less expressive about love, but this does not mean that they love less. Sometimes, some distance or physical absence actually facilitates love and respect. We continue to love our loved ones and feel their love even if they are decreased. Moreover, unconditional love indeed exists - whether it is our instinctive urge to relieve someone else’s suffering, sitting in the dark with them, or wishing good things for them. Parents naturally love their children no matter what. Too many stories have shown that parents risk their lives to protect their children even in dangerous situations when their own safety is threatened. The author indeed briefly touches upon the interplay between love and spirituality in chapter 8. She even quoted from George Vaillant, “Love is the shortest definition of spirituality I know.” I see this as a potential sequel to this book. Love is not always mutually shared positivity. True love does not always produce positivity resonance. You can truly care for someone, while that person hates you and vice versa. In this case, the intention to love overrides the biology despite the care is not reciprocated. Not all love can produce positivity resonance when you truly love and we need to be equipped to deal with the potential negativity. Parents often find our loving action to be met by children’s negative reaction. Parents may feel that they’ve made a wise decision while the children may see it as unjust. So, which is true love? To go with your wise decision which expresses your true love? Or, to go with a micro-moment of positivity resonance? The real challenge is how we can still love despite negativity, which is missed in this book.The focus on physical connections is likely to lead to attachment. Dala Lama the 14th once mentioned how a husband loved his wife until he realized she decided to leave him. This kind of love is bound to lead to suffering. True love goes beyond physical connections and attachment. The intention to love and the reasoning to love are more important than physical connections in determining what love is. This is the major reason why the loving-kindness meditation and other practices -mentioned in the guidance part of this book- are efficient. The heart is the root of love. Not the physical connections.I’m quite interested in Dr. Fredrickson’s claim that our “awareness narrows with negative emotions and broadens with positive ones.” (p.82) Feeling good helps us to see the big picture, to be creative and to be good at problem-solving. My question is how this applies to education and, more specifically, how a loving environment or an affective education program facilitates teaching and learning experience. less

Download links for: Love 2.0: How Our Supreme Emotion Affects Everything We Feel, Think, Do, and Become

Advertising