Love & Friendship
Lecture 13: Love as Perfecting or Corrupting the Lover

Transcript
================================================================================

So, this does not properly happen in those things which are able as a whole to be possessed by many. For no one envies another in the knowledge of truth, which is able to be known as a whole by many, except perhaps about the excellence of such knowledge, right? Because I'm always trying to teach the students, you know, and the original meaning of the word philosopher is a lover of wisdom, right? But I say, if you love wisdom for the sake of the honor of being wise, then you're really a lover of honor, not of wisdom. And so it's easily, and easily, what? Distracted, you might say, huh? Now, the third objection, huh? Back in the third objection there. Jealousy is now without hate, this is not without love. To the third, it should be said that the very fact that someone hates those things which are opposed to the loved proceeds from love, huh? Once jealousy is placed more as an effect of love than of, what? Hate, huh? So I love the girl, and therefore I hate that guy who's coming in and going to take her away from me or something, right? Especially if he seems more suave and, you know, like the nobleman there in that example there from Tobias Mavel, right? So, if I hate this other man, it's because I love the girl, right? So the love is the original us, right? You see how Thomas has ordered the effects so perfectly, right? He gives this effect after the first three effects. Because the first three effects involve just the love, right? But this one here is something that is, in addition to the love, that is impeding one from getting or enjoying it, or that might harm but one must. But now, what's the difference between them and the last two effects, now? These are in the person loving. Yeah, yeah. In other words, the first four, and especially the first three, right? But the fourth one is related to that. It's looking towards the effect this has in reference to the love itself, right? Now, in the last two ones, he's saying, what's the effect upon the lover himself, right? Is he made better or worse by the fact that he loves? Is it better to have loved than lost? Is he made better or worse by love? And Thomas is not going to give a simple answer, right? Because it's going to depend upon what you love, right? So you can be made better or worse by your love. If I love to torture people, my love makes me worse. If I love God, my love makes me better. So it depends upon what I love, right? If I love rock and roll, it probably makes me worse. Love won't set me a little bit better, right? So he's going to talk in the last two articles, the effect upon the lover himself, and then the sixth article on what he does, right? So you might divide the last two articles against the first four, right? In one case, you're looking towards the loved and the effect in comparison to the love. And now you're looking at the lover and the effect that has upon the lover himself and then what he does. That's right, okay? I can add a little bit of text here for myself, I guess. I don't know if it's a good love is a perfection of the lover, right? And perfects the lover. A bad love is a corruption of the lover and corrupts them, right? Now, that's kind of interesting. If you compare knowledge and love, in the beginning of the first book there about the soul, Aristotle says, All knowledge is good. But one knowledge, he says, is better than another. Either because he says it's about a better thing, right? Or because in it you know the object better. Now, in the beginning of the parts of animals, he says, the most important thing is what you know. So one knowledge is better than another because of what you know or how you know it, but most of all because of what you know. And Aristotle will say later on that to know a better thing imperfectly is better than to know an imperfect thing perfectly. Okay? But notice the more general statement. He's saying all knowledge is good as such. All ignorance, and for its area, all mistake or error, as such is what? Bad, right? Okay? Now, sometimes you say this, you know, somebody might say, what about the sex education? Well, no. Most of it. But is the knowledge of such bad? See? No. My knowing the combination to your safe, right? Is that as such bad? If that knowledge as such doesn't make me bad, but if I've got the kind of will or desire that I would want to take what is in mind, right, then perotundance, you could say, right? My knowing that is bad, right? Okay? But the knowledge as such is not bad, is it? And of course, this goes back to something we've read out before. There's the same knowledge of opposites. So if knowledge of a bad thing was bad, then all knowledge would be bad. There's the same knowledge of health and the sickness, of virtue and the vice, right? So all knowledge as such is good, even knowing how to make a bomb is good, right? But by reason of something else, if I have a desire to blow up people like and beg there someplace, then it's bad that I know how to make a bomb, right? Not because the knowledge of such is bad, but because of my, what, bad will towards people, right? You see that? Now, what about love? Is all love good, like all knowledge is good, as such? Well, it depends upon what you love, right? If I love the good, then my love is good. If I love something bad, then my love is bad. So there's a big difference between knowledge and love, right? All knowledge is good, as such. But all love, as such, is not good. And that's connected with the other thing, as I said. That there's not the same love of opposites, but there is the same knowledge of opposites. Like Socrates points out at the end of the symposium, right? That Aristotle and Thomas bring out more fully, right? There is the same knowledge of opposites. But there isn't the same love of opposites. Do you see that? If I know what virtue is, it helps me to know what advice is, right? If I know what advice is, it helps me to know what virtue is. But the love of one impedes the love of the other. That's very important to see. A love can be bad, either because the object loved is bad, for example, murder, or because the way it is loved is bad. For example, if I love wine or food too much, or before everything else, right? Hence, for a love to be good, both the object loved and the way it is loved must be what? Good, right? Further, one love is better than another, either because the object loved is better. For example, the love of wisdom is better than the love of candy. So I don't think my love of candy made me a better person. It probably made me a worse person. But the love of wisdom probably makes me a better person. Or because the way it is loved is better. It's better to love someone by the love of wisdom. Well, then by the love of what? Wanting. Now, the two gentlemen of Verona, Proteus. He's one of the two gentlemen of Verona. And his friend, the other gentleman of Verona, Valentine, his old friend, has gone to the court for his finishing of his education, right? So he's going to what? More prestigious than having been to court. He, after honor, hunts. I, after love, right? He's in love with Julia. He leaves his friends to dignify them more. The guy going off to school, right? He's going to leave his friends for a while, but he's going to dignify them more, right? Coming back educated and so on. I leave myself, my friends, and all for love. There's that effect of love, ecstasy, right? I leave myself, right? He's gone out of himself in some way. He's so much in love with this Julia. Thou, Julia, thou hast metamorphosed me. And also, what we said love was, let's say, what? Transformation of the heart, conformity of the heart with its object, right? Metamorphosis means a change of what? Form, right? So Julia, thou hast metamorphosed me. Very well said. But now, as the effect of this intense romantic love has been good upon him, right? Made me neglect my studies. Lose my time. War with good counsel, huh? Set the world at naught. Made wit with musing weak. Heart sick with thought, huh? What's a made wit with musing weak? Well, his mind is weak now, huh? His mind. Made wit. Yeah. The essence of wisdom of the mind. Oh, with musing. Of course, it's a musing. Okay. Made wit weak with musing. Now, let's see, the effect of this is upon Romeo. If you know, the game is a play that Romeo is in love with, what? Rosalind, right? And she won't give him the time of day, right? And he warns around at nighttime, and then the day comes, he goes to his room, and he closes the shutters, and it stays there in the dark, and so on. And his father is concerned about his son, right? And so he asks the friend of Romeo, Benvolio, see if he can find out what's bothering Romeo, right? Now, Benvolio is well-named. Benvolio means what? Goodwill. Yeah. What wishes well, right? And Twelfth Night, you have another character called Melvolio. So Benvolio says, Good morrow, cousin. Romeo says, Is the day so young? If I shut his clothes, you know what time of day it is. But new struck nine. A me, sad hours seem long. Was that my father that went hence so fast? It was, says Benvolio. But sadness lengthens Romeo's hours. It was all said, Sadness lengthens one's hours. In love, Benvolio says, Out. Benvolio, of love. Out of her favor, who I am in love. Alas, that love so gentle in his view should be so tyrannous and rough in proof, right? And notice there, metaphorically, Benvolio is speaking of some love, the love that Romeo has at this time, as being tyrannous, right? As being a tyrant, huh? Now, a tyrant is someone that rules, not for the good of those he rules, right? But for his own good, right? So if love is tyrannous, if one is being ruled by love, and this love is a tyrant, then is one benefiting from the love? No, no more than the city benefits from being ruled by a Stalinist, or the tyrant, huh? You see the idea? That's a good metaphor, right? Based on proportion, really, isn't it, huh? He's saying this love is to Romeo like a tyrant is to the, what, city, huh? And you have that all the way back to Plato, if not before, that particular proportion there. When he compares the republic, the three parts of the soul to the three parts of the city, right? And then he tries to know one by the other, right? So when you're ruled by your emotions, you're ruled by a tyrant, in a sense. Whether it be love or anger or some other emotion. So these passages indicate that love makes you worse sometimes. Now, the next passage here is dealing with the second thing I was pointing out, that the love, what, to be good has to be not only have a good object, but also to be, what, measured by reason, right? Or in a good reason. So Julian is very much in love with Proteus. And the set is trying to moderate a bit. And Julius says, Did thou but know the inward touch of love? Thou wouldst as soon go kindle fire with snow, as seek to quench the fire of love with words? Well, the set says, I do not seek to quench your love's hot fire, but qualify me to what? Modify, to moderate, right? But qualify the fire's extreme rage, lest it should burn above the bounds of what? Reason. Okay? So that's what the romantics won't admit, huh? That love should be moderated by reason, huh? Of course, Shakespeare talks about that, you know, when the character says in another play, Love and reason keep little company nowadays. They used to use some of those texts in saying, Well, how can the philosopher who uses reason then talk about love, see? How can you have a reasonable discussion of love, see? Of course, students are a class, No, you can't, you can't, it's unreasonable. Of course, if you're thinking of romantic love, maybe a lot of times there's something unreasonable about this, right? Something excessive or disordered about it, huh? One girl went out and was just telling me about getting up from the top of the school building when she was in high school, you know, and going to jump off because her steady boyfriend had dropped her, right? Finally found the boyfriend to talk into coming down. So, maybe that's a fun example, but... Okay? Now, another thing that's said about love is that love is blind, right? Common saying, huh? Must be some truth to it, huh? That is, it makes the lover blind. But it's bad to be blind, isn't it? Therefore, love makes the lover worse. Right? Sherlock Holmes. You know, when Watson is falling in love, right? Right. And Sherlock Holmes says that love is destructive of the logical penalty. And it's commonly said that the lover is made foolish by love, huh? I mentioned how the English word fond, F-O-N-D. In Shakespeare it often means, what, foolish, right? It's not a fond thing to say, it's a foolish thing to say, you know? But then it came to mean, what, you kind of like the girl, right? You're fond of the girl, right? Right. But the original meaning was, you're acting kind of foolish about this girl, right? And that's the original meaning, huh? So that love makes you, what, foolish. And so often does love make you act foolishly that it seems to be, what, an effect of love, to be foolish, huh? But a fool is love. That's kind of a common saying, right? Well, it's not good to be a fool, is it? No. Well, so if it's destructive of the logical faculty of reason, right, and makes one a fool, man is man by his reasoning. How can this be a good thing, love, right? Now, the merchant of Venice, you know the story, you know, Portia has to marry the man who chooses the right casket. You know the story, isn't it? It's a famous story going way back in literature. And, of course, the psalmist is about to make the right choice, right? She's overwhelmed, right? She wants him. Oh, love be moderate. Because the love is almost too much, right? Allay the ecstasy, right? You couldn't fall inside yourself so much. In measure reign thy joy, scant the success. I feel too much thy blessing. Make it... It lasts for fear I surf it, huh? Now, the next reading here from the one of the first novelists of America here, a famous novel at the time called The Spy, and one of the later editions there, Fenimore Cooper has an introduction where he says, people have often asked me, was there any original for this character I had, huh? He says, the author has often been asked if there was any foundation in real life for the delineation of the principal character in this book. He can give no clearer answer to the question than by laying before his readers a simple statement of the facts, connected with his original publication. Many years since, the writer of this volume was at the residence of an illustrious man. Of course, we've now identified that man, John Jay, one of the three authors of the Federalist Papers, right? We did other things during the War of Revolution. The discourse turned upon the effects which great political excitement produces on character and the purifying consequences of a love of country when that sentiment is powerfully and generally awakened in a people. He who from his years, his services, and his knowledge of men was best qualified to take the lead in such a conversation who was the principal speaker. After dwelling on the marked manner in which the great struggle of the nation during the War of 1775 had given a new and honorable direction to the thoughts and practices of multitudes, whose time had formerly been engrossed by the most vulgar concerns of life, he illustrated his opinions by relating an anecdote, the truth of which he could attest as a crystal witness. That's the man he tells about. The man who's, you know, is willing to sacrifice his life for his, what? Country, right, huh? So you see a man being ennobled, in a way, by a love of his country, right? A love of the common good, huh? Now, the opposite of that, huh? Silas Monner, right, this novel, George Eliot's, that's a woman, as you know. He had clung with all the force of his nature to his work and his money. And like all objects to which a man devotes himself, they had fashioned him into correspondence with themselves. His loom, as he wrought in it without ceasing, had in its turn wrought on him and conferred more and more the monotonous craving for its monotonous response. His gold, as he hung over it and saw it grow, gathered his power of loving together into a hard isolation like his own. So he's being kind of narrowed and lowered by the, what, imperfection, the defect of the good that he loves, right? By the other man here, the spy, right? You know, I regret that I've got one life to give for my hunting, you know, the people like that. So they're raised up, right? By loving something. There's a nice quote from Greta there. We are shaped and fashioned by what we love, right? So if I love noble things, I'm in a way ennobled by that, right? If I love disgusting things, I become disgusting myself, right? So one is contaminated, you might say, by the goodness or the badness of the thing one loves, right? If I know disgusting things, that doesn't make me disgusting, right? Because I know about them. But if I love them, that makes me disgusting. You see that? If I love wisdom, I'm already a bit wise. I love foolishness. I'm a bit of a fool already. You see? And that's because love goes out to the thing in itself, huh? As Aristotle says in the sixth book of wisdom, huh? Good and bad are in things. Truth and falsely are in the mind. And so you're joined to the goodness or the badness of the thing in itself when you love it. So it's very well said by the poet, huh? We are shaped and fashioned by what we love. Julia, thou hast met her more foes than me, he says, right? He's been shaped, right? By his love of Julia. Much to do about nothing, huh? What in the love and friendship plays, huh? Here I have six. Love it. Friendship Plays of Shakespeare, right? You have the three earlier ones, which are The Merchant of Venice and The Two Gentlemen of Rona and Midsummer Night's Dream. And then the later ones, The Much Ado About Nothing, As You Like It, and Twelfth Night. Twelfth Night is the last one. Claudio. That's as much as to say the sweet use in love. Don Pedro. The greatest note of it is his melancholy. It's good to be melancholy. It's kind of sad. She loves him with an enraged affection. It's past infinite of thought. It's an excess. So Thomas raised the question now, whether love is a passion harming the lover, right? That's a common opinion. One goes forward to the fifth thus, it seems... Do you want to take a little break or not? I didn't... I didn't... I discussed him before. Okay, break now. I take a little break and... Okay, go back now. Okay. So, with the love is a passion harming the lover, right? Making you worse. One goes forward to the fifth thus, it seems that love is a harmful passion. For weakness signifies a certain harming of the one weakened, right? But love causes weakness. For it is said in the Song of Songs, chapter 2, verse 5. Now he's quoting scripture, right? The devil can quote scripture, right? Stay me up with flowers, compass me about with apples, because I faint with love, right? We saw Proteus speaking about him being made weak by his love, right? Therefore, love is a harmful passion that weakens you, huh? Makes you soft, huh? Moreover, melting is a certain, what? Dissolution. That's a way to destroy something, right? But love is a melter. It melts you down. For it is said in the Song of Songs, chapter 5, verse 6. My soul melted when my beloved spoke. Therefore, love dissolves. It is therefore corruptive and, what? Harmful, right? Moreover, raging or boiling, right? Signifies a certain excess in heat, which excess is corrupting. But raging or boiling is caused from love. For Dionysius puts in the 7th chapter the celestial hierarchy. Among other properties pertaining to the love of the seraphim. It's an acute and boiling order, huh? And in the Song of Songs, chapter 8, verse 6. It is said about love that the lamps thereof are fire and flames. Therefore, love is a harmful and corrupting passion or emotion. And notice in those scenes where St. Teresa of Avila, right? It receives, you know, a great increase of love, right? But she has, for example, the angel there, right? Piercing her heart, right? I guess they actually, you know, found the effects of this on the physical heart, even, huh? See? In the same way with, what? St. Teresa of Avila, you know? The wound of love that we talked about in the earlier passages on the nature of love, the undergoing, right? But if one is wounded by love, well, it's not good to be wounded, right? Just talk to any soldier. I mean, it's, you know, I couldn't be wounded. I always joke, you know, when the soldier marries a nurse, you know, like my son Paul is married to a nurse. I say, that's the right woman for a soldier to marry. Well, it's not good to be wounded, is it? See? See, you're wounded by love, huh? But again, this is what Dionysius says in the fourth chapter about the divine names, that individual things love themselves in a containing way, that is, in a conserving way. Therefore, love is not a harmful passion, but more a conserving and perfecting one. Thomas says, I answer that it should be said, as has been said above, that love is not a harmful passion, but more a conserving and perfecting one. Signifies the fitting of the desiring power with some good, right? It's a conformity or agreement of the heart, the desiring power with some good. Nothing, however, which is fitted to something which is suitable to it is harmed from this. But rather it advances and is made, what? Better. But what is fitted to something that is not suitable to it is harmed and made worse from this. Like if your shoes don't fit you, right? Not good for the feet, right? Love, therefore, of a suitable good perfects and makes better the lover. Love, however, of a good which is not suitable to the lover harms and makes worse the lover. I say you could also say that in this way that I was saying that. Love goes to the thing itself, right? It unites you with the thing in itself. If the thing in itself is good, then you're being perfected by being united with that thing. But if the thing in itself is bad and you're loving the bad, then you're being, what? Contaminated in a bad way by that object, huh? Whence man is most of all perfected and made better the love of God. Because he's goodness itself, right? Sometimes our Lord will say, you know, God alone is good, right? Why call me good in my human nature. But he is harmed and made worse by the love of sin, according to that of the prophet O.C. chapter 9, verse 10. They are made abominable just as those things they have loved, right? You're not made abominable if you know what is abominable and avoid it, right? But you're made abominable if you love something that's abominable. Now, the next paragraph, though, Thomas is going to make a distinction, right? Because in the case of emotions, there's something else to be considerate, right? Meaning that there is a bodily change, right? Involved in emotions. And that bodily change, if excessive, can be what? Destructive. And this has been said about love as regards what is formal in it, which is from the desiring power. But as regards what is material in the passion of love, which is some bodily change, it happens that love is harmful because of the, what? Excessive change. And he makes a comparison. Just as happens in sense, in every act of a power of the soul which is performed through some change of a bodily organ. So if you get snow blindness, right? Okay? Or you get a sound that, what, deafens the ear, right? The change is too great for the organ, huh? Okay, now he comes to some things that would be necessary for answering those objections, right? To those which are objected contrary-wise. I mean, in this paragraph, he's just given, he's given a sense of the solution, right? To them, right? Okay. To those which are objected contrary-wise, it should be said that four proximate effects can be attributed to love. That's kind of interesting. See, I think some more idea about effects here. Melting, enjoyment, faintness, and raging. Now, among which melting is first, which is opposed to hardening. Now, if you've got a hard heart, a heart of stone, your heart is not apt to, what, love, right, huh? And the love softens the heart, right? Because loving is a, what, undergoing, right, huh? And it's a soft that undergoes, right? The heart resists, huh? Among which melting is first, which is opposed to hardening. Things which are hardened are drawn together in themselves so that they are not able to admit easily the entrance of another. So in the stone, right? But it pertains to love that the desiring power be fitted to the reception of the good loved insofar as the loved is in the lover, as has been said. Love is basically an undergoing, right? That's the first thing we learned about love. Whence the freezing or the hardness of the heart is a disposition which is opposed to love. So the scripture of God says sometimes I'll take away their heart of stone, right? And give them a heart of flesh, right? That's referring to this melting, this softening of the heart, huh? So it can love, huh? Whence the freezing or hardness of the heart is a disposition which is opposed to love. But melting signifies a certain softening of the heart by which the heart shows itself as suitable for the love to enter into it. This is Andrew Jackson had kind of an irascible nature, huh? And sometimes you really let people have it, you know? But other times he assumed this, right? Just to be tough, right? What's that other guy, huh? And I remember one of these accounts of General Patton, you know, after the war there in Germany. And there was some dispute with the Russians there about the use of some boat there, I don't know, something like that. The Russian gentleman came over to protest to Patton. And Patton got down, he took his gown, he sat on the table like that, and he just, you know, went into a rage, you know. And the Russian, you know, Patton, how are you? And as soon as the Russian had left, they kind of turned to the American, you know, subordinate who was there and he says, how was that? You know, I never thought of that guy's dead, you know. You know, you think that's a madman, you know, what are you going to do, you know? That's what Jackson was to some extent, you know. He said, Steve, can I get right there? You know, he's got the pants off, you know, I'm used. Now, if then the loved is present and is had, right, it causes delight or what? Enjoyment, right? Okay. So you're soft so you can receive the thing, right? Have joy if it's good. If, however, it is absent, there follows two passions, namely sadness over the absence, right? Which is signified, and it's kind of metaphorical, these ways of speaking, right? Which is signified by faintness or weakness, right? Whence Tully, meaning Cicero, in the third book of the Tusculent questions, most all name sadness as a kind of what? Sickness, right? Okay. So the lover is made melancholy, that's the speaking properly, right? But made what? Faint or sick, that's kind of what? A metaphor, right, for the sadness, huh? But isn't that true, that sadness makes the man kind of what? Weak, huh? You know? If you're bored with what is being said in class, huh? Then you don't apply your mind very intensely, do you? See? Or if you're reading something and it's boring, you know? Boredom is a kind of sadness, right? Okay? If you don't enjoy doing what you're doing, right, then you don't do it very, what? Intensity or strong, yeah. So sadness gives you a kind of what? Weakness, huh? But this is an effect of love when you don't, what? Have what you love, right, huh? Okay. An intense desire of obtaining the love, which is signified by what? Raging, right? Okay. So read that description in Roman Juliet when Julia's waiting for Romeo to come that night, huh? She's raging. Okay. And these are effects of love taken formally according to the relation of the desiring power to its object. But in the passion of love or the emotion of love, right, the bodily love, there follows some effects proportional to these according to the change of the, what, organ, right, huh? As I see, I was reading the life there of Henry Clay, you know, and a lot of sadness in his life, right? I think he lost the presidency election three times, right? But he had a lot of problems in his family, right? He had six daughters. Five of them died before the young, you know, cholera and other, that was a common thing in those days. And he was always losing, the one who lived to be about 28, you know, she died in childbirth, you know, they were always dying in childbirth in those days. And his daughter-in-law, his friends, you know, like very much died in childbirth, you know, or a result of this, you know, they didn't know as much as they know now. And one of his sons, you know, got a head injury and went mad and had to be confined in a mental asylum, you know, for most of his life. And another one was a drunken in a sod, you know. One was successful, went to West Point, was second in his class, but he got killed in the Mexican War. It's one thing after another, you know. Well, sometimes, I mean, just too much almost, you know. And he's so sad, he just, what, can't do anything, right? That's a kind of weakness, right? See? But you're what? In the absence of these people you love, right? Of course, he ended up with a lot of grandchildren because, but it's why they'd be, you know, be taking care of the grandchildren because the mothers are gone, right? It's terrible, but. But you see that weakness there, right? Where a man's just kind of, you know, you have to do something for some period of time, right? Just. So you can take these expressions more metaphorically when they're referring to the formal aspect of love, right? Because there can be sadness even in the will, right? Sadness or the sin is in the will primarily. But then there can be something in the emotions too, huh? And then there can be the bodily change, which would be proportional to these things. So even bodily one feels, what, weak, huh? Okay. My godmother, you know, one of her little boys was killed in a train accident, huh? And I just remember, I was quite young at the time, but then we were, you know, out burial there in the cemetery. You know, she's kind of just collapsed. And there's an arm, yeah. You're weak, right? You know, just, just. So that sadness makes one weak. So, I know all about melting and, you know, the basic thing there is there's not a simple answer. Does love make you better or worse? It depends upon what you, what? Love. Love, yeah. Does love of money make you good? Does the love of God, most of all, right? But the love of wisdom, right? Love of justice, huh? Things of this sort. Okay. What time do you want to go to, by the way? We used to do 4.30 or something like that. Okay. Whatever. Okay. We'll look at the sixth effect of lover then, okay? Now, this is the effect of love not upon the lover, like the last article, but the effect of love upon what he does, right? Okay. Now, I said about Cleopatra here. Her passions are made of nothing but the finest part of pure love, huh? It's interesting, huh? Because he's speaking as if love is that out of which your other feelings are made, right? And, of course, strictly speaking, love is not a cause in the sense of matter, out of which something is made. It's a cause in the sense more of a, what? Of a mover, right? A producer, huh? But you go back to the most known cause. It doesn't matter, right? Okay. So it's like my fear for my children is made out of my love for my children, right? My hatred of those who oppose the things I love is made out of my love for these things, huh? Okay. Now, look at these words here, Romeo. You know, the beginning of the play there, you know, where the houses of Capulet and the Montague are feuding and, you know, getting some blood and so on, right? Oh, me, what fray was here, what fight was here, right? Yet tell me not, for I've heard it all, right? It's the old story again. Here is much to do with hate, right? because they're fighting each other, because they hate each other, the adherence of the House of Montague and the House of Capulet. Here's much to do with hate, but more with law. Why does he say that? Because it's the cause of the hate. Yeah, yeah. Because I love the House of Capulet. I want the House of Capulet to be the supreme household in Verona, right? Then I hate the pretensions of the House of Montague, right? So the cause of the cause is more the cause, right? You know what he says that? Here's much to do with hate, but more with what? Love. Why then, oh, brawling love, huh? See, imagine the objection that Thomas had with his zeal and so on, and fighting even, right, is an effect of love. That's the effect of hate, not of love. Yeah, but more with love, right? So when he says brawling love, the adjective again is, in some sense, the effect of the cause, which is signified by the noun, right? Okay? But now in the next phrase here, oh, loving hate, see? Which is the cause, which is the effect? The hate is the effect. Yeah. Loving is the cause. And now he's got, what? The cause is the adjective, grammatically speaking, and the effect is the noun, right? You see Shakespeare will say sometimes, you know, proud contempt or proud scorn, right? Where proud is, grammatically speaking, the adjective, and scorn or contempt is the, what, noun, right? But in terms of cause and effect, is the adjective the cause or the effect? Yeah. I guess other people speak the way sometimes, too, but I know Shakespeare does it very consistently, right? So I think what's interesting here is, in this last line here, why then, oh, brawling love, oh, loving hate, it's just the reverse, right? In brawling love, the noun is the cause and the adjective is the, what, effect, but oh, loving hate, the cause is the adjective and the effect is, is grammatically the noun, right? Okay? But the line before that really kind of explains why this is so, right? There's much to do with hate but more with love. But as far as cause and effect, if you look before and after, in the sense of cause and effect, well, love is the cause of hate and the hate is maybe the immediate cause of the brawling or the, the fighting, right, huh? You see that? But Romeo realizes that love is the original cause. Okay? But they can't both be that, huh? They're building Juliet's house down there in case you want to go see it, you know. When you're in Verona, my wife and I, you know, you see the house of Juliet and it's got a nice statue in there of her and so on. Uh-huh. But, uh, you go to the place where she's supposed to be buried and so on. But, uh, I told you that, my dad was with us, so, I said, Maria, get up in the balcony there. Uh-huh. And Romeo said, her mother and I, we'll take a picture of you, you know. Because maybe she, nobody goes to school on the balcony, right? My dad was on the balcony and the Italian guys down there, you know, who are you over there? That's kind of funny. I was like, I just had a picture of you, you know, on the balcony there. Red face. Yeah. The effect of love. Yeah. Now, Trois and Cressida. Cressida here now is being carried away with her romantic passion and love of Trois, but she's kind of a loose woman that she found in the play. I will not uncle. You know how it is, the story. Cressida is in, what, Troy there, right? And her father's over in the Greek camp and he wants to get her back, right? She's going to be separated from her, what, lover, right? I will not uncle. I have forgot my father, right? I know no touch of consanguinity. No kin, no love, no blood, no soul so near me as the sweet twirless. O you gods divine, make Cressida's name the very crown of falsehood.