Amelie Rorty on The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes - Assignment Example

Amelie Rorty on the Histori of Psychological Attitudes A constant unyielding love is a kind of love that stands the test of time and is consistent and persistent. It is different from a dynamically permeable love which fades away slowly with time. Amelie Rorty suggests that love is dynamically permeable because the lover is transformed by the affection he is offered by her partner. When a person changes, the love they also have changes. Love can change the character of a person because it transforms the inner feelings of a person and control his thoughts.

It assumes that the changes brought about by this kind of love helps the two lovers to become successful. Dynamically permeable love is precarious because once it changes the character of a person; their affair may terminate prematurely (Grau, Para. 22). According to Rorty, dynamically permeable love is distinct from constant rigid love in a number of different ways. Constant rigid love is a kind of love that is consistent and does not change due to circumstances two parties. Amidst difficult times, constant rigid love has the potential to prevail and stand the test of time.

Although the character of friends may change due many factors such as growing wealthy or one becoming successful, their friendship will always remain unchanged. Even though the attributes that brought the two friends together initially changes, the love for the two parties remains unshaken. Other contributors of the topic such as Nozick and Kraut also came up with similar description for this kind of love. However, Rorty contends that this particular kind of love does not can grow to higher levels and flourish unlike dynamically permeable that has a high potential.

Dynamically permeable love seems to enjoy the support of some groups because it considers changes as a means of guaranteeing consistency whereas constant love fails to do so. It accommodates changes in a partner’s traits for the sake of securing the friendship unlike constant love that is very rigid and protects the status quo (Grau, Para 23). In some instances, Rorty comes out supporting constancy of love as the best kind of love which creates confusion about her actual position on these two kinds of love.

However, she fails to point out precisely on what entails constant love. Two definitions of constant love by Kraut leave her confused about the composition of constant love. The first views entail constant love, and the undying love that two friends may have despite character changes. The second one describes it as a love that does not undergo via dynamism given that the character of either partner does not change (Grau, Paras. 23-30). The two forms love that might be present in friendships is very attractive.

It is crucial to acknowledge that peoples character is dynamic because of events that are beyond human control their reach or control. On the hand, such changes either may harm either of the partners or can bring in new and exciting experiences between two friends. There is always need to accommodate those changes because perfection only exists in an ideal world. Character is a variable that is always unpredictable and influences the relationship between two friends in a particular direction.

However, the best form of love is constant love because it overcomes the weaknesses of dynamically permeable love. It is very predictable and reliable and can sustain itself for a longer period (Grau, Para.37).Work citedGrau, Christopher. Love and History. Web. 16. November 2014.