Love Advice from Darwin
The purpose of love is to pass on our genes.
Now that we got that sobering and un-romantic fact out of the way, let’s take a step back.
Scientific revolutions have this annoying habit of constantly forcing us to reexamine everything we know. First we learned that the world doesn’t revolve around us (thanks Copernicus) and then we learned that in addition to the millions of organisms around us that we can see, there are trillions of organisms surrounding us that we can’t see (thanks Louis Pasteur). As we plunge deeper into space, we’re currently confronting just how small our species actually is in the grand scheme of things. And one day we may discover that we aren’t as alone in the universe as we think.
But one revolution that has yet to penetrate humanity’s collective psyche is how we think about ourselves.
Two hundred years ago we believed that humans were forged by a supreme being(s) in their likeness. We concluded that our species was blessed with uniquely human attributes — consciousness, emotions, logic, morality — that separated us from animals. Philosophers debated our true purpose for existing but their arguments all centered around lofty ideals such as justice, happiness, or goodness.
But starting with Darwin and accelerating in the last fifty years, our conception of human nature has fundamentally changed. We now have a better understanding of our evolutionary roots and the mechanical processes in our brain that guide us.
We weren’t deliberately designed by a supreme being, but molded generation by generation through the sieves of evolution. Everything we thought that defined us as humans are just biological processes; our consciousness, rationality, morality, and entire range of emotions are simply chemical reactions in our brain. Pills can now trigger nearly any emotion that we want. The research is perfectly clear — we’re no better than animals, we are animals. And the science also shows that we aren’t even close to being as logically or morally pure as we think.¹
Perhaps the most paradigm-shifting realization is that we weren’t put on this Earth for any ultimate purpose other than to pass on our genes. We are just living vehicles for our DNA to be transported into future generations.
Of course, we’re not consciously compelled by this objective. Evolution was sneakier than that. Rather than directly telling us to survive, mate, and continue our lineage, evolution developed nefarious motivations in us — the desire for love, resources, and status — to accomplish the same end goal. So it’s not surprising that we lived in blissful ignorance of our real objective for most of history.
But science has finally revealed the true nature of human nature. And how have we responded?
Our reaction has been surprisingly quiet.
Perhaps it’s because the information is too new and this novel understanding of human nature hasn’t reached the broader population yet. Or perhaps it’s because we’re appropriately cautious given that the last time someone tried applying “evolutionary” and “scientific” principles to life, sanctioned racism and one of the biggest atrocities in humanity occured.
These reasons certainly make sense. But my personal opinion is that we also do not want to accept the truth. No matter how much we rationally understand that the attributes we consider human are just mechanisms to propagate our species, in our heart-of-hearts I believe we still think we’re special.
What is love?
But let’s return to love. It’s cliché to say that love is the most important thing in the world, but from an objective point of view, it is.
Desire for love is what pushes us to swipe right on Tinder and falling in love is what compels us to have a physical and emotional relationship with someone. This leads to the continuation of our genes through what is commonly referred to as making babies. And then familial love kicks in, a bunch of oxytocin is released, and then we get suckered into raising a newborn sack of flesh for the next 18 years. Love is truly the most important thing in the world because love is what keeps our species going.
Romantic, huh?
But if we accept this evolutionarily-based view of love, what does that mean for the idea of love we were brought up to believe? I’m talking about love as it’s portrayed in Hollywood movies, romance novels, and cheesy Valentine’s Day greeting cards.
In the mainstream representation of love, love is this all-powerful, mystical, and spiritual force that can’t be analyzed or explained. We are told that our only goal in life is to find that soulmate who gives us butterflies in our stomach and makes choir groups sing in the background. Only when we find that person do we get our happily ever after. According to every romantic comedy ever produced, there is never an obstacle that can’t be fixed with more love, a grand romantic gesture, or an uplifting soundtrack.
So how do we resolve these two outlooks on love? How can we rationalize the view of love as this magical, inexplicable, universal force with its mundane, scientific, and biological purpose?
We can’t.
At least not all of it. Just like when we found out Santa Claus isn’t real, we can’t hold onto fantasies about what we wish love would be when we know what love actually is.
We have taken the red pill and we have no choice but to see how far the rabbit hole goes. Once again, science has cursed us by taking another mystery out of life.
But it’s not all bad news. Now that we are aware of our evolutionary wiring, we can use that knowledge to our advantage. For love specifically, understanding the true basis of love helps us have a better chance of finding it.
Let’s start by better defining love.
We grow up with certain expectations about what love should feel like: continuous thoughts, constant attraction, intense emotions.
But that’s not what love is. Or at least that’s not all that love is.
To return to the first sentence of this article, the purpose of love is to pass on our genes. To accomplish that goal, love is the emotional bond that brings people together usually with the purpose of raising kids. The children are better supported by the resources and attention of two parents and hence are more likely to successfully grow up and further the genes even more.²
The initial spark — often referred to as lust or limerence — can lead to love and is needed for the physical intimacy that creates children. But love is more than this initial phase. That’s why back in our caveman days (and to be honest, even sometimes today), if there was no love, one parent would often leave after the initial attraction fades and babies are born.
So love is not the short-term intense emotional and physical attraction you see featured in Hallmark movies, but a more durable bond that keeps two people together for the long-term.
What this means is that while attraction and chemistry are important to create the initial spark, they shouldn’t be the only attributes you’re looking for when searching for love.
Instead we should be prioritizing stability, mutual respect, and partnership. We shouldn’t just be looking for someone based on whether we want to tear their clothes off, but also whether that person would make a good lifelong companion to help us get through life’s obstacles.
So by understanding what love truly is, we have a better idea of what love should look like. But how do we actually find love?
As a society we are obsessed with the idea of finding true love. We constantly hear stories about how fate brought two people together — a serendipitous bump in the street or an accidentally spilled drink at the bar. Even the language, “soulmate” and “love of our life” implies that there is only one person out there who completes us.
However, for most of human history we didn’t have many choices when it came to who we were spending our life with. There wasn’t Bumble to match us up with eligible singles in our area. If we go back to our evolutionary roots, humans existed in small tribes. This means that other than the people within your tribe, and any other tribes you happened to run into, you didn’t have a ton of options when it came to choosing a mate.
Yet humans still found love.
This tells us that finding love shouldn’t be hard. There isn’t one and only one individual out there for us. We can be in love with a lot of people in fact. “Settling” is a word that comes with a lot of negative connotations, but in the past, we always settled when it came to love. We reviewed our limited options for potential mates and we settled for the best one with the intention of making love work.
It’s only due to recent technological advancements (e.g. dating apps) that we now have seemingly limitless dating prospects. Our expectations have transformed from love developing in a relationship to one where love feels almost like a prerequisite for a relationship.
Don’t get me wrong, having more options can certainly be a good thing. We have more chances to find someone physically, mentally, and emotionally compatible with us leading to greater happiness. So I’m not implying that we should force ourselves to be with the first person we meet, even if they make us miserable.
However, we do need to recognize that having an unlimited dating pool isn’t what our brain was originally programmed for. Technology has given us a buffet when our brain was built for a menu. As a result, it’s easy to constantly feel like our perfect match is just the next swipe away, rather than putting in a genuine effort to spark a relationship with the person we’re with. We need to come to terms that the perfect person doesn’t exist and at some point, we need to “settle” and focus on developing the perfect relationship. That’s how we truly find love.
…it’s easy to constantly feel like our perfect match is just the next swipe away, rather than putting in a genuine effort to spark a relationship with the person we’re with.
Baby don’t hurt me
But perhaps the biggest benefit from an evolutionarily-based view of love is that it allows us to confront some uncomfortable internal tensions.
If you’re like me, you’ve struggled with the idea that we’re supposed to spend our lives with just one person. Especially if we abandon the idea that we only have a single soul mate, monogamy can easily be interpreted as an outdated concept. Are we really supposed to believe that one person can completely fulfill our emotional, intellectual, and physical needs all the time?
The statistics agree with me — infidelity has occurred in an estimated 15–20% of marriages. And this is just from people who have admitted to cheating! The real number is likely much higher.
No matter how much we may love our significant other, I would guess all of us have had fantasies about being with other people. But because we live in a society that prizes monogamy, such thoughts feel wrong and taboo. So we bury those feelings deep inside us or take them to mean that there’s a problem with our relationship.
The truth is that humans weren’t designed to be completely monogamous. Our evolutionary roots (e.g. sexual dimorphism, genitalia size, ancestral roots) all indicate that, at worst, we are programmed to have affairs, and at best, designed to have serial monogamous relationships (e.g. lots of long-term relationships one after another).
So our fantasies about other people doesn’t mean there’s an issue with us or our relationship — it just means that we’re human.
Does this mean I’m advocating for affairs or making excuses for cheating? Or that I’m suggesting a return to the free-flowing love of the 70’s?
No.
I still recognize we live in a society that expects monogamy. And while we can debate what the expectation should be, the reality is that when you enter a serious relationship with someone, you implicitly agree to only be with that one person.
So unless two people discuss beforehand about the guidelines for their relationship, I am by no means saying it is okay to stray.
What I am saying, however, is that extramarital thoughts can be natural. We shouldn’t believe there’s something’s wrong with us just because we have the occasional fantasy about someone who isn’t our partner. Thinking about other people also doesn’t mean that there is something wrong with our relationship.
We have to keep in mind that evolution designed us to pass on our genes, it didn’t design us to be happy all the time. So occasionally feeling not quite fulfilled or having the urge to want something more is just evolution’s sneaky way of trying to push our genes even further. And while we can’t necessarily resolve our internal tension, at least we can recognize it for what it is.
This is also true for love in general. Understanding how love works doesn’t change how we act day-to-day. Just because we now know that love is caused by electrical signals and chemicals in our brain doesn’t mean we feel love any less strongly.
What our knowledge does allow us to do is recognize the sources of our baser emotions and rise above them. We now know what love has programmed us to feel, it’s up to us to decide how to use that information to act. We can use our understanding of love to make choices that go against our urges in the short-term (such as hooking up with an ex because we’re lonely) and instead make choices that make us happier in the long run (such as having realistic expectations of what love is and how to find it).
In many ways, understanding love deepens our appreciation for it. It is truly one of the most powerful forces in the universe because it is the reason we are all here in the first place.
[1] If you haven’t heard about this book by now, I highly recommend Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
[2] I think now is a good time to put a few caveats. First, the majority of the article will focus on romantic love though I recognize other types of love exist (familial, friends, country, etc.). Also, this is usually the point in my article where some people will bring up phenomena that seemingly contradict an evolutionarily-based view of love (e.g. “What about gay people?” “What about people who don’t want to have kids?”). Here are articles on some theories regarding those phenomena but what I will say is that just because science hasn’t figured everything out yet doesn’t necessarily mean that the theory is disproved. The vastly generally accepted point of view in the scientific community is that evolution is how we are the way we are.