Where Love is Lacking

Where Love is Lacking (A Critique of the Wikipedia) 

Fr Symeon Agiomicheltites 

The Wikipedia article on Robert Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love provides a comprehensive overview of his framework, which categorizes love into three fundamental components: intimacy, passion, and commitment.  This critique, grounded in an Agapic Ontological Personalist (AOP) Philosophy of Agaposofia framework, highlights the article's limitations in addressing love's ethical, spiritual, and transformative dimensions.

Introduction

The Triangular Theory of Love, developed by psychologist Robert Sternberg, outlines love as a combination of three components: intimacy, passion, and commitment (Sternberg, 1986). While this theory has gained traction as a framework for understanding romantic and interpersonal relationships, its psychological reductionism leaves critical dimensions of love unexplored. This critique examines the Wikipedia article on Sternberg's theory, evaluates its theoretical limitations, and contrasts it with the broader, integrative perspective of Agaposofia and its Spectrum of Love.

Critique of the Wikipedia Article

1. Reductionism in Defining Love

The Wikipedia article adheres closely to Sternberg's tripartite model, categorizing love into combinations of intimacy, passion, and commitment (e.g., romantic, companionate, or consummate love). This framework, while useful, reduces love to psychological constructs devoid of deeper metaphysical, spiritual, or ethical dimensions. From a relational ontology standpoint, such reductionism fails to address love’s transformative nature that transcends personal satisfaction and reaches toward the Other in self-giving.

Sternberg’s model omits agape, a central dimension in philosophical and theological discussions of love, which denotes selfless, unconditional love for the Other without expectation of reciprocity (Nygren, 1930). The absence of agape renders the theory inadequate for addressing the full range of human relational experiences.

2. A Utilitarian Bias

The article's emphasis on measurable combinations of intimacy, passion, and commitment introduces a utilitarian framework for evaluating love. This instrumentalization undermines love’s ontological depth by framing it as a means to achieve satisfaction, stability, or fulfillment within relationships. Agaposofia critiques such frameworks, emphasizing that love is not a commodity to be measured but an ontological reality rooted in the divine Logos, directing the human person toward theosis (union with God).

3. Neglect of Ethical Dimensions

The ethical implications of love—central to Agaposofia’s approach—are notably absent in Sternberg’s model and the article’s presentation. In Agaposofia, love carries an ethical imperative, compelling individuals to transcend selfishness and act for the good of the Other. This aligns with Levinas’s (1969) concept of alterity, which sees the face of the Other as a call to ethical responsibility. Sternberg’s model, as discussed in the article, is silent on these dimensions, limiting its applicability to moral or spiritual contexts.

4. Lack of Integration with Broader Philosophical Insights

The Wikipedia article focuses exclusively on Sternberg’s psychological framework, neglecting integration with philosophical and theological traditions. By contrast, Agaposofia integrates relational personalism, Orthodox theology, and existential phenomenology to provide a more holistic understanding of love. Sternberg’s theory could be enriched by engaging with such traditions, particularly those that view love as the foundation of personhood and communion.

Contrasting the Triangular Theory of Love with Agaposofia’s Spectrum of Love

1. The Spectrum of Love in Agaposofia

Agaposofia posits that love exists on a spectrum, encompassing multiple forms and expressions, from eros (desire) to agape (selfless love). Unlike Sternberg’s discrete categories, the Spectrum of Love acknowledges the fluidity and interconnectedness of these forms, situating them within a framework of personal and relational transformation. Each form of love is viewed as an opportunity for upward emergence toward greater simplicity and unity with the divine (Agaposofia, 2024).

2. Relational Ontology versus Psychological Constructs

While Sternberg’s model emphasizes psychological constructs, Agaposofia grounds love in relational ontology. In this view, the person is a being-in-relationship, and love is the dynamic force that actualizes personhood. Agaposofia’s emphasis on divine grace (energies) and the Logos distinguishes it from the purely human-centered focus of Sternberg’s theory.

3. Union Without Absorption

Agaposofia emphasizes union without absorption, preserving the uniqueness of the person while fostering communion. Sternberg’s model, by contrast, focuses on achieving balance among the three components without addressing the deeper unity that transcends psychological states. Agaposofia’s approach reflects the Trinitarian model, where unity exists alongside distinct personhood.

4. Ethical and Transformative Dimensions

The Spectrum of Love highlights the ethical and transformative dimensions of love, viewing it as a path to theosis. Agaposofia integrates practices such as prayer, repentance, and sacramental life to foster love’s growth. Sternberg’s theory, lacking these spiritual and ethical dimensions, remains limited in scope.

Conclusion

The Wikipedia article on the Triangular Theory of Love provides a concise overview of Sternberg’s psychological model but lacks depth in addressing love’s ontological, ethical, and spiritual dimensions. Agaposofia’s Spectrum of Love offers a more comprehensive framework, situating love within the broader context of personal and relational transformation. By integrating insights from philosophy, theology, and relational personalism, Agaposofia enriches our understanding of love as the foundation of human existence and a path to divine union.

References

Agaposofia. (2024). The Spectrum of Love: An Agapic Ontological Framework. St Maximus Centre Journal of Agaposofia.

Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Duquesne University Press.

Nygren, A. (1930). Agape and eros. Westminster Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93(2), 119–135.

❤