Amor Fati, pt. 2

Dr. John Vervaeke, someone I admire deeply, talks about knowing by loving rather than loving by knowing.  I’m not sure, but I’m guessing he’s at least, in part, influenced by “Loving to Know: Covenant Epistemology” by Esther Meek, who casts a wide net of philosophy about the topic.  This kind of loving is unconditional; it’s a heart-open-wide loving that allows for a full knowing – even of that which you might not like.

Loving by knowing is conditional – once I “know” you (whatever that means for you in a given circumstance), *then* I’ll love you.  In this way, as I know you more, I may deepen or withdraw my love.  Knowing can be based on actions and words (or a lack thereof!) and will, guaranteed, change over time.  There’s a lot of pressure to continue to “know” someone/something and then make a corresponding decision to love or not.

Knowing by loving can open us to different perspectives and possibilities; there’s a post-tragic assumption of goodwill, innocent yet devoid of delusional naivete, an inner trustworthiness informing our own hearts about whether we’re truly sensing good faith engagement and prompting us to course-correct accordingly.

Unconditional love doesn’t mean unconditional relationship, as a wise friend once told me.  Course-correcting might be ending a relationship, or withdrawing an active expression of love. It might be asking more specific questions, or giving a hug. But it doesn’t (have to) mean love withdrawal.  Amor fati – love of fate, i.e. love of everything.  

What do you think about knowing by loving?