A word ...

I've noticed a friend's headline change throughout the day. One in particular that didn't stay long I, of course, was compelled to comment on.

Is the purpose of life to evolve to a place where love exists? Do we all somehow equate "love" to a person (women likely more so than men)? And, if someone doesn't have "a love" in their life and really doesn't ever hope to, does that mean we're less of a person as a whole? Is "love" simply the validation we need to carry on, the showing of kindness, an ever-changing emotion, a passionate act towards someone or something meant for some purpose, or is "love" action? All of this is rhetorical of course, because personally I haven't got a clue.

I suppose I'd like to think of love as action; which makes me terribly jaded indeed because that would mean there's not a whole hell of a lot of love in the world. But if love were an action and we all lived according to this mindset, wouldn't we all be doing more to share the best of what we have with others? This too rarely happens.

Reading back on my words it sounds far too innocent of a notion for "love" to be an action. Perhaps a bit of innocence remains in the profoundly jaded; perhaps not. Maybe without this wee bit of innocence (or ignorance, if you will), there would be no place for tears to come from.

Taking this mess of ideas one step further, if we're capable of tears, does that mean we're capable of hope, even if we've lost the will to hope? Again, simply rhetorical questions ... I suppose I prefer them to ones with answers due to my lack of trust for the spoken word.