Two people do what they can do alone. To give each other the message that I can’t accomplish this without you. That is the purest form of exchange.
I cannot live without you.
This is the purest word of love that we can utter. I think how much this “you” can be increased is an indicator of the social maturity of a human being living in a community. For infants, this “you” is only a mother. As children get more mature, the number of “you” increases.
Perhaps most people think in reverse, but the number of “people who you cannot live without that person” is the index of “maturity”. Some people may be wondering why increasing the number of “people who you cannot live without that person” improves the probability of survival, or rather the opposite is true. The ability to “live alone without relying on anyone” may increase the probability of survival. Anyone who believes in economic rationality will think that way. But it’s short-sighted.
The phrase “I cannot live without you” is not a factual statement about the incompetence or lack of “I”. Rather, it is a congratulatory word that wishes you the health and well-being “That’s why I want you to live as long and energetic as you can”.
People who have a lot of people around them who cannot help wishing for their health and happiness are more likely to be blessed with health and happiness than those who do not. That’s because blessings are essentially reciprocal (as you can see from the catch ball example).
A mother who reads the message “I can’t live without you” in the appealing look of a baby who is resting in her pocket will always respond(I hope so) with the message “I can’t live without you too”. This is because the best way to tell the other that you have received a message correctly is to send the same message back.
I am surrounded by many people who have a direct hindrance to my life if I don’t have them. The number seems to increase year by year. But I don’t think it’s a “trouble” at all. The reason is as described above.