Philosophy of love

I've been thinking various things about this, and it's all very watery so I'm putting it on here to try and solidify it.

I'm talking about love in a romantic sense, but also a 'love for the world.'
Bertrand Russell once said, 'love is wise, hatred is foolish.'
I'm wondering what relation this has to 'the self'. (Fresco/JL!)
Surely, if you think of yourself as a unified whole, separate from others and separate from the world, then to 'love' extends this self outwards, whereas to hate re-enforces a one-sided, 'subjective' position.
Does this concept of love relate to non-attachment?

If this 'love' for the world is as profound as I think the implications are, then could love between two people (who think dualistically) in the romantic sense be this profound realisation 'manifest' or 'objectified' thus why it is so important to most human life?
How would a non-dualist 'love' in a romantic sense? Surely phrases such as 'I love you' or more importantly 'I do' are rendered meaningless.

I have read/been told on numerous occasions about love being central to wisdom, and each time thought it was pure sentimentalism and instantly dismissed it until I thought about it in this sense.

Despite its popularity, NLP has been largely ignored by conventional social science because of issues of professional credibility and insufficient empirical evidence to substantiate its models and claimed effectiveness. It appears to have little impact on academic psychology, and limited impact on mainstream psychotherapy and counselling. However, it had some influence among private psychotherapists, including hypnotherapists, to the extent that some claim to be trained in NLP and apply it to their practice. NLP had greater influence in management training, life coaching,and the self-help industry.

Love as the bond between you and your environment or the other, is the independent confirmation of what is Good on the one hand (hers) and what is True on the other (his), imho. Her intuition tells her whether reality is good or bad when he tries to realize that, so his realization tells him whether intuition is true or false. His true and her good happen simultaneously, if they happen.

Roles in those relationships seem to mirror the regular ones (man-woman), so maybe they develop similarly.

If that was how my thoughts had formed, I would agree with you and never have said that. However, I assume that there is nothing besides reality and intuition. To realize intuition is one thing we can do, and develop our personality around, mainly by trial and error, while to intuit reality is the other thing, not by trial and error but from an intuitive source that tells us whether it is good or bad, so that we want to keep- or reject it.

Your belief that it is unobtainable may be single greatest bar against it ever being a reality.

In the world we have created for ourselves competition is the supreme ideal. Through competition we shall excel and elevate ourselves and find our worth. Who can be selfless under such conditions? Only the crazy man who has no regard for his own health or well being.
But it is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society, to quote Krishnamurti.
So we cannot find the solution to how to act selflessly in the world as it is today. We have to reinvent and redefine our valuesystem, and in so doing, collectively and socially reinvent and redefine ourselves.

What I think it means is that a reality consisting only of attraction, of goodwill, of agreement, would end up stagnant, dead.