The word "Love"

I analyse the lyrics of songs. Ben Lee is often found wanting in such inquiries. First there was his song WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER, which unpersuasively argued (What is a song but a statement of emotional "logic"); "ask a scientist, it's quantum physics....We are all in this together", which totally misinterprets Quantum Physics. Harmless in comparison to the imploration in his "Gamble everything for love!".

Gamble EVERYTHING. Woooooow. Gamble your education, gamble your sanity, gamble your health. Quite a subersive idea, although practically, I can understand why it passed censorship, whereas 'fuck' wasn't so fortunate.
OK, Ben Lee is really wealthy and doesn't have that much to do, so perhaps he can afford to sacrifice everything for some ideal. People do the same thing for "God". Perhaps Lee doesn't care if he loses all of the above, or perhaps he isn't currently sane, so he can't lose his sanity. More likely, he just hasn't examined the concept of love very hard.I think it's a peculiarity of language. The existence of "Love", like "God", is to many people, what has accurately been termed "the sacred". Some people find it harder (emotionally, or cognitively), to make sense of life without such a concept. When lack of evidence or reflection refutes or challenges an element of "the sacred", the sacred retreats to lower ground. When reality forces people to re-examine their beliefs about love, "love" tends to undergo a paradigm shift, as people constantly re-define love as they age, rather than excise it from their lexicon.

For a teenager, it is one of those irrational, reality-overpowering emotions and obsessions, a willful blindness, a deep illusion about another person that one is under. To somebody old, it probably means for them a feeling of comfort and companionship, a dedicated support structure, a human being that you can admire,respect,trust,complement, and somebody compatible. Depending on how much a person re-examines their idea of "love" and constantly re-defines it, will determine the frequency of times that they say they are in "love", and the importance that they place on "love" existing in their relationship(s). It'd be interesting to do a survey of people of different ages and chronicle how their ideas of 'love' have changed.
At the opposite extreme is matching based on compatibility alone...although this process is itself fraught with errors (and people sometimes grow apart)! I am taking this to be some englightened selection of an acceptably compatable marriage partner for your son/daughter, based on matching of personality, hopes, flaws, intelligence, attractiveness, wealth/class etc. Or, more accurately, on the perceived closeness of the trajectory that the word "love" will assume for the two people for the intelligent matchmaker.
Like all such ideas involving a tension of misinterpretation, "love" has a dubious connection to reality, which is apprehended and interpreted by people with varying intelligence/skills, perspectives. More critical, I think, is the choice of how to modulate the everyday interactions between our rational and emotional brains. Fuck, that in itself I think determines so much about a person. when is the right time to convey the strength or type of your emotions, and hope that the other understands what you mean. The word, I think, is important. In Lee's case, the reflection of the feelings and how much in control of his emotions he is will also determine whether he will "be alright" if his love finds itself disappointed.