The Greek philosopher Empedocles wrote that the universe was characterized by conflict between two cosmic forces, Love and Strife. In his view, the universe originally existed in a state of perfect love and unity, with no distinct elements or separate life forms. However, the force of Strife emerged and began to destroy this unity; separate parts broke off from the whole, forming the elements of matter. The attractive force of Love exerted its remaining influence by bringing the elements together in different combinations, creating animals and humans. But these beings were mortal, as the force of Strife gradually pulled the elements apart again, leading to disintegration and death.
There are obviously fascinating parallels between Empedocles’ philosophy and Christianity in terms of the centrality of love, though in contrast to Christianity, Empedocles viewed cosmic history as cyclic. But whether we accept Greek philosophy or Christianity, or both, is it helpful in understanding the order of the universe If we think of God as Love?
From a purely scientific standpoint, the notion that particles come together to form larger structures, including life forms, because of love sounds ridiculous. Do hydrogen atoms really come together with oxygen atoms to form water because of love? It makes no sense, many would argue, to anthropomorphize mindless matter and attribute human desire and emotion to particles. However, I would argue that it makes sense to think of love as a broader phenomenon of attraction, with attraction between humans being a highly complex and sophisticated type of love, attraction between animals being a less complex type of love, and attraction between particles being a very primitive type of love, but love nevertheless.
Although it used to be thought that animals had no real emotions, we now know that animals do have emotions, that they are capable of love between their own kind and love of those from other species. The question of whether insects have emotions is less settled, though some scientists who study the issue argue that at least some insects have primitive emotional responses originating in rudimentary brain structures.
It seems unlikely that there would be emotions in lower life forms, such as cells and bacteria. However, even though we can’t know exactly how lower life forms “feel,” scientific studies have demonstrated forces of attraction and repulsion even in these lower life forms. Paramecium will swim away from unfavorable environments (such as cold water), but remain in favorable environments (containing warm temperatures and/or the presence of food). Egg cells in both humans and animals will exercise choice in determining which sperm cells with which to join, weeding out bad sperm cells from good. In fact, the human body itself has been described as a cooperative “society of cells.”
Given that forces of attraction and repulsion exist in even the lowest life forms, is it really absurd to posit such forces as affecting even atomic and subatomic particles? I believe that the general principle is the same, if love is defined simply as an attractive force that brings separate entities together to form a greater whole. The only difference is that the principle is expressed in a very primitive form among lower forms of order and in a more sophisticated form among higher forms of order, such as animals and humans.