Eros's Inclusiveness

Being inclusive goes far beyond just loving all humans that are around you. Which Eros tends to leave out in its meaning. The love found within Eros tends to be all consuming, it is fixed around one person. Eros is thought of as desire, often in the physical sense, which does in some ways take beauty into account, yet this recognition of beauty is more selfish and based off of what the lover finds intriguing and less of a respect for the beauty itself. There is self-fulfillment all throughout Eros desire. This makes this very exclusive in the way of being tailored toward someone’s own desires. The appreciation of beauty is not being understood equally it’s specific and unique to the lover’s desire.

Philia also fails at being inclusive for the sole reason that the lover decides who they deem fit to love (Cowley 18). People who have Philic love actively search out people who have similar interests to them and who can benefit them the most as a friend. By narrowing down their option these individuals risk missing out diversity in their life. If one I to only search for people who complement them, they have the possibility of missing out on all the wonderfully, different

Eros as described above is a love that is seen not only as sexual desire, but a “general, unspecified pre-occupation with her (the beloved) totality (Lewis, 133)”. Although the positive side of Eros is experiencing passionate love, individuals are indulging in their own desires, the end goal to please themselves. This mindset is selfish therefore Eros is no longer able to be morally correct. Eros requires is that the lover has some initial interest in the beloved that gave them some sort of self-gratification or pleasure. This does not make Eros any less of a form of love, but this does inhibit Eros from being considered honest in the lover’s true intentions for loving the beloved. This dishonestly goes against my definition of