Quote Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
No, I think it's much more than that, I would die for those I truly love in the way I would die for my principles, I cannot simple asign that to "affection", now can I explicate the feeling of peace which I have only in their presence as "solicitude".
Here you describe what love means to you or what effect love has on you or how important it is to you, like 'makes me want to dance' or 'is the only thing that makes my life worthwhile'. What love does for you, money may do for others. Yet nobody would define money as 'something I would die for, makes me want to dance, something that puts me at rest when I possess it'.

On the one hand you profess a inability to define the thing you are talking about, on the other you profess to know all sorts of things about this definiendum: it is one, yet is has two natures, and it sits at its own right hand side. Such statements literally mean nothing. If a psychiatrist encounters them in a patient, he will regard them as 'word salad', a notorious symptom of schizophrenia.

The parallels are striking. There is primary and secondary gain in religion, just as there is in psychiatric disorders. And there is similar resistance to treatment. Many a patient is dismayed, shocked or even insulted if a psychiatrist tells them, however diplomatically, that they are stark raving mad and should get treatment lest they harm themselves and others. They have usually 'invested' a lot in their illness, their whole life may have come to revolve around it, so they are very reluctant to accept their disorder.