This is a kind of "work-book" question for the listeners to this podcast. The issue of romantic love is to the fore again, but the question is other: Why is there general radio silence on the vital point; or rather, why is there not more active concurrence in relation to it?

The point I've been making is this: the dynamic in individual human beings that drives us to want to connect with another human being in a romantic experience of union is the core drive within people. It explains our search for God -- our life as a pilgrimage to know God personally -- and it underwrites almost every important decision, if the truth be known, that we ever make.

That is a strong point, I realize. But it is what I am saying.

My question is therefore this one: while no one is rushing to contest the point, why isn't almost everyone rushing to support the point? Am I saying something embarrassing, or possibly reductionist, by which I mean "people don't want to think of themselves as 'hopeless' romantics". (It is sort of a blow to one's pride to think that, well, "Girls Just Want to Have Fun" (C. Lauper, 1983) or "You're my Everything (you're my everything, you're my everything, you're my everything)" (Temptations, 1967) or "My World is Empty without You, Babe" (Supremes, 1965). I mean, maybe you don't want to think of yourself as that needy. But I beg to differ. I'm that needy!)

So I am asking the question: Does my point shed light on your experience? Does it explains some things? Or is it a downer? Is it a "Light That Failed" (Kipling, 1891)?

Or, maybe, does it amount to a "New Morning" (Dylan, 1970)? LUV U.