“An alibi is only as good as its details.”
Love is nothing but a collective play of ego, intuitive senses, alibis and somewhat a desire for physical intimacy in the modern era. These concepts are condemned by certain intellectuals, but realists do pressurise upon these bold conceptions which are somehow inseparable from the wide interpretation of “true love”. Should we discard our carnal instincts for the sake of proving our love to be true? Should we make decisions considering our intuitive senses when in love or should we focus upon the statistical dimensions that alibis provide while we witness the “internal transformation” in our lover?
Milan Kundera in his book, “The unbearable lightness of being” provides us with a positive insight about infidelity. Through the novel, he draws a distinction between public and private traits, by taking considerations based on our carnal instincts. He asserts every individual has their own set of public and private traits. Public traits are somehow easily accessible and generally portrays the way we interact when in public. On the contrary, private traits are not easily accessible which generally portrays how we behave when we are erotically connected to someone. In order to access these private traits, we need to conquer the person. This has two dimensions to it; firstly, he asserts that we, humans are “curious creatures”. We tend to access these traits more and more, prioritising these over the public ones. Secondly, accessing these traits gives us with a sense of superiority, possession and achievement. In a nutshell, he asserts instinctual senses which are primal to the human nature is responsible for “infidelity”. So, if we assess the dimension of fidelity in betrayal, this is the rationale behind it! Is it immoral to follow our carnal instincts for the sake of moral obligations we have when in love?
While reading one of the best selling novels by Daniel kahneman, who is a Nobel laureate in the field of behavioural economics, called “Thinking, fast and slow”, I came across the difference between intuition and statistical analysis. He clearly stated the idea of intuitive senses as flawed containing biases and emphasised upon the importance of statistical analysis in assessment of situations. Daniel clearly stated the fact that during the assessment of certain situations, we tend to get inclined towards intuition while completely ignoring the “facts and figures” that we need to take into consideration. He cited different psychological research papers and examples to back up the claim and stated this assertion to be true in wide range of circumstances. The question what we need to ask is if this theory is applicable when we notice the “internal transformation” in our lover. Do we trust our “intuition or intuitive senses” or “factual alibis”?
It is quite evident that we recognise even the minute changes in our partner when we truly have a connection with him/her. What we lack in these situations is acceptance. We tend to be blinded by ignorance and discard our primal instinct of intuition. There is a possibility that these intuitive senses are biased and this creates mistrust in the relationship. It is also possible that our intuitive senses are guiding us towards the truth which we all deny. Trust remains a major dimension in these circumstances. Fidelity and infidelity is always separated by a thin line of what we call morality and conscience.
Our denial gets even stronger when “biased or false alibis” are being produced by our partner. Though these alibis (falsified or not) are statistical evidences but can be biased and can easily be manipulated. The acceptance of these alibis are much more biased than our intuition due to our sense of “denial or ignorance” in the name of “true love”. This proves that “facts and figures” are more prone to manipulation than our primal instincts. Though the possibility of these alibis to be true can not be discarded completely but more than often we tend to ignore seeking authenticity to these “statistics” blaming it all upon the trust we vested upon them.
Isn’t it our fault that we ignored all the indications being provided by our senses and chose to live in complete denial? Isn’t it our fault that we failed to comprehend the beauty of “internal transformation”? Aren’t we the one who failed to recognise it in the first instance? Didn’t we emotionally restricted our partner in the name of moral obligations and expectations, so much that he/she chose to choke on a lie rather than liberating themselves with the truth? Aren’t we responsible for the betrayal upto certain extent? Most importantly, have we ever loved anyone? I guess, I’ll never know!