An interesting question. With many answers that satisfy some and dissatisfy others.
Perhaps before one tries to attack such a debate that has been raging for thousands of years, one should try to orient themselves into an average or reasonable frame of mind that encapsulates the shared sentiments of most, as far and oppositely opposed as they may be.
What qualities do we associate with someone or something we profess to “love”? What qualities would be impossible for one to associate with said entity or idea?
Has a man ever loved someone or something they have no interest in or no respect for? No, right? So we can draw a base foundation, at least a temporary one for now.
But let’s go further. Admiration and respect seems to be a healthy “reach” from this foundation we’ve established. But what crosses the boundary between admiration and respect to “love” (bearing in mind there are different types of love, allegedly, per wise men before us: “parental love for a child”, “romantic love for a spouse or lover”, “platonic love for a friend”, “personal love for an idea or desire”, etc.).
We have to establish which qualities are absolutely fundamental to each (unless this is a discussion about a certain so-called “type” of love, which others may rightfully suggest is an inaccurate and forced classification that eternally separates us from the truth of such).
Can you love something you do not understand? Perhaps. Or perhaps, we delude ourselves thinking mere fascination (occupying of one’s mind), possibly such that distracts us from a deep pain or suffering, effectively mirrors what “love” is. These two things offer similar qualities. They make the brain, and so the mind and body “happy.” But is this illusion? Do we really want to find out and discover what ancient sages suggest man is not meant to know? That, I suggest, is up to the will and mind of the pursuer. 