Schopenhauer sees in amorousness an individualized sexual impulse. The growing affection of the two lovers is, in reality, already the will for life of the new individual, which they could and might beget. The species has a prior, nearer and greater claim upon the individual than the frail individuality itself. The exact destiny of the individuals of the future generation is a much higher and worthier end than the extravagant and transient bubbles of the enamored. The beauty or the ugliness of the mate has nothing to do with the gratification itself, so far as it is a sensual pleasure depending upon a pressing necessity of the individual. Yet beauty is a matter of great consideration, because it represents the will of the species. Every lover finds himself deceived after the accomplished great work. For the delusion has vanished by which the individual was deceived by the species. In defining human love, Schopenhauer says that every individual exercises a sexual attraction proportionate to the moral and physical perfection it possesses which we attribute to the ideal of the human species. The attraction of two individuals will be the more energetic the more the deficiencies of the one will be counterbalanced by the virtues of the other, and the union of the two promises a child more conforming to the type of the species. Thus the greater the disparity the stronger will be the attraction. Danville, on the other hand, finds that alliances are more generally concluded among individuals of the same education and of a similar intellectual development. He, therefore, claims that love is the most differentiated modality of the instinct of reproduction. Intellectual development, education and culture, however, have carried it so far away from its origin as to be entirely hidden. Rousseau says: The physical desire is the one which drives one sex to unite with the other. The moral one is that which determines the desire and fixes it upon a single object exclusively, or at least gives a greater degree of energy for this preferred object. Now it is easily seen that the moral element in love is a factitious sentiment born of the usage of society and glorified with assiduity and care by women to establish their dominion. Delboeuf looks for the basis of love in the chemical action by which the female sex cells or ova exercise an attraction, magnetic in nature, upon the spermatozoa, and vice versa. Spinoza defines love as “laetitia concomitante idea externae causae,” a pleasure accompanied by the thought of its external cause. Bain finds the cause of love in the charm of dissimilarity. Mantegazza defines love as a desire for a particular beauty.