The Beatles: Tek İhtiyacımız Sevgi Mi? #sevgililergunu #valentinesday #thebeatles
1 Comments


Basically with Baris The Beatles: Is Love All We Need? First Date: Getting to Know Aah, Valentine’s… That “wonderful” time of the
year when you either frantically… look for a gift or a date… If we were in 1961, a wonderful date
destination would be Casanova Club… in Liverpool, where you could see this small
local band called The Beatles perform live. I really shouldn’t need to
introduce you to the world’s biggest band. You probably heard
at least one of their songs. If you had any teens around who
loved to show how deep they were… by listening to music from 40-50 years
ago, you probably heard them a lot more. I’m being harsh on this
stereotype, because I was it. “Wears round John Lennon glasses”
“Wears weird hippie accessories” Hell, I’m still it. Leaving pretentiousness aside,
it’s obvious that the Beatles left… a huge mark on rock and pop music. Their innovations in instrument
use and melody were so great, that we don’t realise
how monumental they were… simply because everyone uses them now. Similarly, the Beatles’
impact on culture is quite substantial. The band started out as the face of British
rock n’ roll and the first boy band in history. By the mid-60s, they turned
towards psychedelic rock, placing them at the
centre of the hippie movement. This cultural significance allowed
the Beatles to achieve another world first: 6 years after their Casanova Club
performance, on 25 June 1967, the honour of closing the world’s
first international TV broadcast was… given to the Fab Four. 400 million people in 24 countries watched
as the Beatles performed a brand new song: All You Need is Love. As the song started, the camera
panned into a studio decorated… with flowers and colourful balloons,
with “love” graffitied on the walls. As John, Paul, George and Ringo performed
the song, dressed in psychedelic clothes, famous musicians like Mick Jagger
and Keith Richards from Rolling Stones, Keith Moon from the Who
and Eric Clapton accompanied them. In a sense, All You Need Is Love announced
the birth of the hippie culture live on TV. At this point, we need to
take a closer look at the song itself. What wise words were uttered in a
song that 400 million people tuned in to, in a song that became
the anthem of a generation? The first thing you notice
about the lyrics is their simplicity. John Lennon and Paul McCartney
kept the lyrics simple, probably since… they knew their audience
covered 24 different countries. However, despite their grammatical
simplicity, the meaning of the lyrics was… quite cryptic. To give an example: “Nothing you can made that can’t be made,
No one you can save that can’t be saved, There’s nothing you can do/ But you
can learn how to be you in time/ It’s easy
All you need is love All you need is love,
love, love is all you need.” While perusing translations for the song,
I found stuff that completely misunderstood… what the Beatles were trying to say. After all, they tried to say that
even things that seemed impossible… could be done, simply with love. This feeling that the world could
change with love was central to the… hippie culture we talked about. In the summer of 1967,
just as the song was released, a new youth movement
based in the U.S. sprang up. During these three months that
came to be known as the Summer of Love, young people rejected the values their parents
and society at large had taken for granted. They moved into communes where
everyone shared what they had, and tried to experience
love in every possible way. Professor Tim Miller from the University
of Kansas, who worked in hippie culture, explains hippies’
relationship with love like this: “…hippies argued, love was the only
answer to the overwhelming problems… afflicting the world. Applied love
was the only way to human community, to a real solution of the world’s
seemingly intractable ills.” Timothy S. Miller,
The Hippies And American Values, Chapter 5: Forward on All Fronts:
The Ethics of Cultural Opposition When you think about what love
meant to the hippies, you can see… how much All You Need Is Love
reflected its time. Still, we may understand that they
cared so much about love while still… wondering *why* they thought love
could do things other feelings can’t. Which is why we should ask what love means. Second Date: Getting Closer In order to understand the philosophy
of All You Need Is Love, and the hippies… in general, we must
ask that eternal question: What is love? Baby d- OOH NO!
We’re not going to reduce this topic… to simple platitudes! Of course these platitudes
have philosophically relevant ideas. But we tend to use them without
paying attention to their deeper meaning. So let’s leave Haddaway aside
for a moment, question the obvious, and try to understand love philosophically. Two different methods
could be used to define love: One would be distinguishing
the different kinds of love we feel… towards different people or things. We won’t be using this method. Here, I recommend a Turkish Youtuber who
explains how the Ancient Greeks defined… different kinds of love. For my lovely
English viewers, PhilosophyTube’s… Overanalyzing Love has
a similar mid-section! The method we will use will be
trying to find what’s common in… all kinds of love, or the essence of love. This method is preferable
because the hippies had a… pretty wide understanding of love. Being a hippie meant adopting views
on spirituality, culture and politics. Since their idea of love served as the
basis of their views on all these different… fields, love for hippies can’t be just
about the love of family or love from lust. In other words, all kinds of love
must have something in common, no matter their quantity
or to whom they’re directed. Dutch Jewish philosopher Benedictus
de Spinoza might give us the answer. In his posthumous work Ethics,
Spinoza builds his entire philosophy… in logical steps, covering everything from
the existence of God to human psychology, or even ethical rules. When discussing emotions and human
psychology, Spinoza starts his account… with basic emotions and needs,
which lead to more complex emotions. Here’s how he defines love: “Love is nothing else but pleasure
accompanied by the idea of an external… cause (…). We further see, that he who
loves necessarily endeavours to have, and to keep present to him,
the object of his love.” Baruch Spinoza, Ethics,
Part 3, Prop. XIII, Note In order to better understand this definition,
we should understand how Spinoza defines… pleasure. Spinoza says that all
emotions come from two basic affects: Pleasure, which we feel whenever
our existence is increased or strengthened, and pain, which we feel whenever
our existence is diminished or weakened. When you think about it, this makes sense: A good meal means that our
body gets more energy to function, so we feel pleasure. A cut on our skin hurts our
bodily integrity and leads to blood loss, so we feel pain. So it makes a lot of sense that love
is defined as the emotion we feel… when something else gives us pleasure. We often say that we *loved* a good meal,
or our family (if we’re on good terms)… strengthens us with their support. We could even say that our love
to a lover increases our existence. Since a child is
technically a part of you… *Let’s Get It On intro* What’s interesting is that the ethical
principles Spinoza arrives at from… these simple and logical definitions
aren’t that far from the hippies. He says that hate can only be
destroyed by love, and goes even so… far as to say that love is the only
ethically appropriate answer against hate. “Prop. XLVI. (…)
All emotions of hatred are bad; therefore… he who lives under the guidance of reason
will endeavour, as far as possible, to avoid being assailed by such emotions;
consequently, he will also endeavour… to prevent others being so assailed. But
hatred is increased by being reciprocated, and can be quenched by love, so that hatred
may pass into love; therefore he who lives under the guidance of reason
will endeavour to repay hatred… with love, that is, with kindness.
Baruch Spinoza, Ethica, Part 4: Of Human Bondage,
or the Strength of the Emotions Of course, this doesn’t mean
that Spinoza is a full-fledged hippie. Personally I can’t
imagine him with Dreadlocks. But knowing how respected Spinoza
is in philosophy, the idea that love… can do anything might
not be so silly after all. Which begs the question: If this idea makes
so much sense, why aren’t we all hippies? Why do hippies seem less like
logical people and more like dreamers? Third Date: Getting Away The simplest answer to the Beatles
saying “All You Need Is Love” is probably… “No, we need other things as well.” Can we really love everyone?
Should we love everyone? Or does… every emotion serve a different purpose? The idea that emotions aim to
meet our different needs is called… functionalism in psychology. When we look at it this way,
we can assign a role based on… fulfilling a specific basic
need to each of our emotions. Like fear increasing our chances of
survival, or anger giving us the necessary… strength and speed to win a fight. If we look at it this way,
love has a function too. We kind of saw this
function in Spinoza’s definition: Keeping the things we love closer to us. A good meal is useful
because it gives us energy. A person we love is useful
(with a very heteronormative assumption)… because the child we’ll have together
will help continue the human race. If we use love in this
definition, it’s really not… that different from other emotions. So we’re not so sure that love
is really the best answer to everything. In this case, other emotions could
be better answers to specific situations. Take for example love’s opposite, hate. If we hate someone who we
think is truly evil, can we really… say that this hatred is wrong or unjust? On the contrary, we’ll probably
think that our hatred is our moral compass, keeping us in the right way. Some social movements who
were popular at the same time… as the hippies and had similar goals
often criticised them for this reason. To quote a criticism
mentioned in Professor Miller’s book: “The philosophy of the ‘hippies’ is a
philosophy of politics that says there… should be love toward everyone.
Love is a good thing, but hatred… of what is hateful is
necessary and important.” Timothy S. Miller,
The Hippies And American Values, Introduction to the Second Edition I think a lot of us
will agree with this sentiment. The idea that hatred can be
as important as love makes us… question the unique
role love is supposed to have. Why should love, which is
only one of our many emotions, be more important than the others? If hatred allows us to see wrongs that
need to be corrected, or if fear protects… us from dangers, aren’t other
emotions just as important as love? We use other names for
the belief that love conquers all: Being an idealist,
a dreamer or polyannaism. As committed as the youth
was in the 60s and 70s to… the idea that they could change the world
with love, we find them just as silly. This marginalisation of radical
love owes a lot to criticism… made after the 70s as well. The accusation of idealism intuitively
makes sense to our modern minds. American legal scholar Robert Bork offers
the harshest version of this critique: “Real human beings do not have any
unfulfilled capacity for love, or at least… not a large one; they simply do not regard
men as infinitely precious, whatever… the homilist may say on Sunday; and they
lack the boundless energy and selfessness… required to will themselves to brotherhood.
Any program for society based on such… vapors is headed for disaster.
The real ideals, perceptions, and interests of humans differ
and conflict, and always will.” Robert H. Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah,
Chapter 1: Vertical Invasion of the Barbarians Many people will probably
agree with Bork’s words, even if they wouldn’t say it as harshly. Even if the modern person doesn’t
reject love entirely, they don’t really… believe that human
nature is based on love either. We tend to think that hatred and conflict
are far more fundamental and permanent. As a result, the idea that
love can solve all of our problems, or that love is all we need, sounds absurd. We should, however,
put Bork’s words into context. 23 years before the publication
of the book I’m quoting in 1996, Bork worked in Richard Nixon’s cabinet. His role wasn’t something simple either:
On the night of 20 October 1973, Nixon orders the US Attorney General Elliot
Richardson to stop the investigation… on the Watergate scandal, which
will reveal all his illegal surveillance. Richardson refuses to comply and resigns. His replacement, the Deputy Attorney
General William Ruckelshaus, gets the… same orders from Nixon,
but he refuses and resigns as well. Robert Bork, the 3rd person to occupy the seat
of the Attorney General at the same night, finally complies and fires Archibald Cox,
the special prosecutor for Watergate. When it becomes clear that
Nixon is trying to hide his tracks, this night starts the chain of
events that will lead to his resignation. The reason I mentioned this small
story is to show that Bork isn’t all… too neutral when it comes to the hippies. The hippie movement of the late-60s and
early-70s was a movement opposed to the… Nixon administration. As a result,
it’s hardly surprising that Bork, as someone who served
under Nixon, would see life… as a neverending conflict devoid of love. When judging someone’s philosophy,
it’s useful to keep in mind what interests… they might have, to make sure that we won’t
be duped in service of those interests. If only somebody offered us the
tools to discuss philosophy without… personal interest getting in the way… Then again, judging by my love for
the Beatles, I’m not very neutral either. So leaving Bork aside, we should
seriously consider why love deserves… a special spot compared to other emotions. Perhaps the problem lies in our definition.
Maybe we can define love in a way that… covers all the meanings the hippies
had in mind, while avoiding functionalism. Fourth Date: Getting Together Since we used psychology to criticise love,
let’s continue with psychology. Psychologists, and especially experts that
work on a field called Attachment Theory, examine all sorts of love: love between lovers, love
between family members, love between friends, and so on. According to these experts,
all kinds of love have one thing in common: emotional intimacy. Psychologist R. A. Lewis defines emotional
intimacy as “the ability for people to… express themselves sincerely
in interpersonal relationships. We can understand emotional
intimacy as those moments when… we can “lower our shields”
with specific people. Friends with whom we can talk with no
filters, parents who understand our… emotions and lovers who know our
deepest thoughts can all be defined… as people with whom
we have emotional intimacy. What’s interesting with defining
love through emotional intimacy… is that such a definition is not
functionalist (unlike the definition of… “being directed towards useful things”), and
it can even explain different kinds of love. When we define love like a functionalist,
we say we love people only when they… provide us with pleasure or utility. Furthermore, such a definition can’t
really tell the difference between love… for family members
and attraction to a lover. Love defined through emotional
intimacy also has the upshot of… not excluding other emotions. If we define love like a functionalist,
we shouldn’t be feeling love when… we’re not getting pleasure or utility. But think of a family member with
weird ideas, who starts an argument… whenever you meet, but whom
you’d care about deeply if… something happened to them. If you can’t imagine such a family
member, *you* might be the person… getting on the entire family’s nerves. If so… Don’t. Please? Do we love this person functionally? Let’s be honest, no. Their existence
brings us no utility, and meeting with… them is actively annoying. But we might still have some
familial love towards this person. We – somehow – care about them,
even if we disagree with what they… say or don’t like being around them. More importantly, we don’t
hesitate to be ourselves in front of them. Even when doing so causes us a ton of pain. But is there a philosophical concept of love
that’s close to this psychological theory? Love as defined by Professor David
Velleman from New York University… is a good fit. Velleman starts his definition
of love from somewhere unexpected: the 18th century German
philosopher Immanuel Kant. Velleman first gives a reminder on
Kant’s theory of how humans are valued. Kant defines something having value
as not causing a loss when it is exchanged… with something of equal value. If you buy a 600$ phone,
you don’t lose anything since… your phone is still roughly worth 600$. But humans, Kant says, are unique
in that they don’t have such a value. When you replace a person
with someone else, you can’t really… say that you didn’t lose anything. The fact that humans have
no measurable value means that… they have a special dignity. According to Velleman, when
we love someone, we actually… see this dignity that they have. For one reason or another,
we can see their dignity more clearly… then we would other people, and so
we don’t activate the defence mechanisms… that we normally use on others. When we act more sincerely
around them, we get closer. This process of getting
closer is then called love, whether it’s between
two friends who trust each other, or two teens who are into each other. Here’s how Velleman explains it: “Love is (…) the awareness of a value
inhering in its object; (…) an arresting… awareness of that value. (…) [Love]
arrests our tendencies toward emotional… self-protection from another person,
tendencies to draw ourselves in and… close ourselves off from being affected by
him. Love disarms our emotional defenses; it makes us vulnerable to the other.”
David Velleman, Love as a Moral Emotion A love that’s defined like this is probably
a lot closer to what the hippies had in mind. Seeing other people as invaluable
beings and becoming more open, more trusting and more loving
as you appreciate their dignity. Quite the hip philosophy, in other words. What’s more, love as Velleman understands
it can withstand the criticisms that… functionalist love couldn’t. Take for instance the criticism
that we need other emotions besides love. It’s not wrong, but love as
emotional intimacy doesn’t… exclude other emotions anyway. Quite the opposite. Our emotional
intimacy with someone demands… from us to be honest about any
negative emotions we have about them. Here’s how Velleman explains
the way love can include other emotions: “The responses unleashed by love for a
person tend to be favorable because… they have been unleashed by an awareness of
value in him, an awareness that is also… conducive to a favorable response.
But these responses need not be exclusively favorable. Love also
lays us open to feeling hurt, anger, resentment, and even hate.”
David Velleman, Love as a Moral Emotion With all that said, we can now
say that love is a feeling that includes… other emotions, that can be felt
towards anyone and that forces us… to act according to the
infinite dignity of the person we love. But maybe you still think the Beatles
got it wrong and Robert Bork got it right. Maybe you doubt that anyone can be loved. Honestly, I’m not sure if
anything I say could convince you. In the end, we’re talking about an
emotion and I can’t make you feel… an emotion with facts and logic. Turkish philosopher Nermi Uygur
explains what I mean more clearly: “I don’t argue with those that
disregard love. My day’s full, my time’s short, let them think
I’m wasting time on platitudes, my day’s full, my time’s short,
I keep my mind on loving.” Nermi Uygur, Love, Love, Love Then again, I feel uneasy doing
away with them like this as well. Because regardless of what Nermi Uygur – Who happens to be an
alumnus of my high school, by the way says, I kinda get their sentiment.
Today the world feels increasingly… cold, cruel and scary. And when we’re scared,
it makes sense to hide ourselves away… and repress our emotions
as a defence mechanism. We may think that we can avoid getting
hurt if we stick to logic and calculation. But the problem is
precisely logic and cold calculation. The only way to diminish the
world’s cruelty and fear is to… dare to love and to show ourselves
to others as we truly are. Maybe the hippies failed to change
the world, and maybe John Lennon… was wrong in saying
that love was all we need. But love is our biggest need. If you don’t believe me, believe
famous mathematician and philosopher… Bertrand Russell, who spent
his life working on logic. In an interview he gave at the
age of 87, Russell is asked what… moral advice he’d give to
future generations. Here’s his answer: Thank you for watching all the way to the end!
I hope you enjoyed it. I’d recommend keeping the video running for
a bit, as my friend Deniz’s cover is amazing! There’s also a small endnote on the topic. If you’d like to see an account of love and
consumerism, I suggest you check that as well. The link should be in the comments down below
(it’ll also show up in the last 20 seconds) Which also allows you to listen to the song
all the way through! Also, here are some puns
I had trouble translating: The point where I mention What Is Love is
actually from a famous Turkish movie. The female protagonist asks “What is love?
Love is labour, love is friendship.” It’s a dead horse in terms of getting
referenced in Turkey at this point. BUT! I think both the movie and the song
“What is love?” can tie into Velleman’s idea… of love. After all, Velleman’s conception
of love is based on vulnerability. Vulnerability does create the risk of
getting hurt, so it’s natural to say: “Baby don’t hurt me!”
Similarly, vulneability is a lot of work… So love *is* labour!
Anyway, that’s me geeking out. I hope you enjoyed the video, and see you
in next month’s essay! Baiii!

One thought on “The Beatles: Tek İhtiyacımız Sevgi Mi? #sevgililergunu #valentinesday #thebeatles

  1. Bu bölümde prodüksiyon bakımından yeni şeyler deneme fırsatım oldu, umarım hoşunuza gider!

    Bu videoda değinmediğim alakalı yan bir konu hakkında da daha kısa bir dipnot hazırladım, ona da göz atmayı unutmayın: https://youtu.be/FwKgyEV6Kds

    Sizce sevgiyi nasıl tanımlamak daha makul? Sevgi her şeyi yener fikrinin felsefi bir altyapısı var mı? Yorumunuzu buraya bırakın!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *