yuquanchen.com

Most people see the problem of love primarily as that of "being loved", rather than that of "loving", of one's capacity to love. Hence the problem to them is how to be loved, how to be lovable.

People assume that the problem of love is the problem of an OBJECT, not the problem of a FACULTY. People think that to love is simple, but that to find the right object to love -- or to be loved -- is difficult.

Here you are:

If two people who have been strangers, as all of us are, suddenly let the wall between them break down, and feel close, feel one, this moment of oneness is one of the most exhilarating, most exciting experience in life. It is all the more wonderful and miraculous for persons who have been shut off, isolated, without love. This miracle of sudden intimacy is often facilitated if it is combined with, or initiated by, sexual attraction and consummation. However, this type of love is by its very nature NOT lasting. The two persons become well acquainted, their intimacy loses more and more its miraculous character, until their antagonism, their disappointments, their mutual boredom kill whatever is left of the initial excitement. Yet, in the beginning they do not know all this: in fact, they take the intensity of the infatuation, this being “crazy” about each other, for proof of the intensity of their love, while it may only prove the degree of their preceding loneliness.

by Eric Fromm in

彼此心动, 彼此试探, 彼此牵挂的时光
就在最最开始的时候
但每一次我们忙不迭地往下走
总觉得关系进一步, 再进一步
我们就可以紧到再也分不开
结果是我们以最快的速度分开
因为我们已经没有什么，可以再进的了

这段话与FROMM说过的一段话何其相似..下次抄来..

Those paragraphs are cited from Fromm....

Love is an activity, not a passive affect; it is a "standing in", not a "falling for". In the most general way, the active character of love can be described by stating that love is primarily GIVING, not receiving.

what is loving? Simple as the answer to this question seems to be, it is actually full of ambiguities and complexities. The most widespread misunderstanding is that which assumes that giving is "giving up" something, being deprived of, sacrificing. The person whose character has not yet developed beyond the stage of receptive, exploitative, or hoarding orientation, experiences the act of giving this way. The marketing character is willing to give, but only in exchange for receiving; giving without receiving for him is being cheated. People whose main orientation is a non-productive one feel giving as an impoverishment. Most individuals of this type therefore refuse to give. Some make a virtue out of giving in the sense of a sacrifice. They feel that just because it is painful to give, one SHOULD give. the virtue of giving to them lies in the very act of acceptance of sacrifice. For them, the norm that it is better to give than to receive means it is better to suffer deprivation than to experience joy..

For the productive character, giving has an entirely different meaning. Giving is the highest expression of potency. In the very act of giving, I experience my strength, my wealth, my power. This experience of heightened vitality and potency fills me with JOY. I experience myself as overflowing, spending, alive, hence as joyous. Giving is more joyous than receiving, not because it is a deprivation, but because in the act of giving lies in the expression of my aliveness.

It is not difficult to recognize the validity of this principle by applying it to various specific phenomena. The most elementary example lies in the sphere of sex. The culmination of the male sexual function lies in the act of giving; The man gives himself, his sexual organ, to the woman. At the moment of orgasm he gives his semen to her. He cannot help giving it if he is potent. If he cannot give, he is impotent. For the woman the process is not different, although somewhat more complex. She gives herself too; she opens the gates to her feminine center; in the act of receiving, she gives. If she is incapable of this act of giving, if she can only receive, she is frigid. With her the act of giving occurs again, not in her function as a lover, but in that as a mother. She gives herself to the growing child within her, she gives her milk to the infant, she gives her bodily warmth. Not to give would be painful....

The core issue addressed by Fromm is exactly what you mentioned, i.e., the loneliness or separation of modern man and how to overcome it and reach the oneness or reunion with other fellow people and the world out side you. The only sane answer to it is LOVE. But this love maybe not the one you are looking for or talking about, and you may head to the wrong direction... To know more, read Fromm.

He is my GOD, my master. He is the combination of Marx and Freud.

There is a book by Eric Fromm:
The Art of Loving
Strongly recommend to read or listen this book.
Any book by Fromm is inspiring...I collected many of them, such as
Escape From Freedom
Beyond the Chains of Illusion: my Encounter with Marx and Freud

I believe he answers your question toward life and love. He addressed modern man's situation and struggles towards love in special and towards life in general.