In this question, I believe that the speaker is trying to persuade the reader to take a better look at true love and the amazing thing that it can offer people. Due to the reason that within the questions, the speaker points out the fact that we see true love as outsiders and that we don't have access to help us understand the "world" that these two people are living in, which shows that our bitter feelings towards true love are there because of lack of knowledge.
The speaker continues to provoke the reader by taking their side and pointing out how true love has not affected the world, but the things that the speaker decides to attack, actually highlight the beauty of true love and how miraculous it is. In stanza 2 the speaker is seeing things from an opposing point of view where they attack true love. However, they use the word "same" when describing how true love is put on "the same pedestal" which questions the reader to which "same" is she talking about? Seeing as things that are usually important are the ones that are put on pedestals, I believe that the speaker here is comparing true love to all the other amazing things that are put on pedestals. Many will argue that the speaker is still against true love, but once again they are taking thing literally and not paying attention to what the speaker is pointing at in the poem which shows otherwise. While the speaker appears to be attacking true love in the second stanza, the way that the speaker attacked true love exposed the fact that true love is in fact magical and magnificent. Which is shown in "drawn randomly from millions" and "the light that descends from nowhere." These quotes show the phenomena that happens when true love occurs. When the speaker states that it's drawn randomly from millions, that means it is something very rare to happen. Also, the use of the word "light" shows that true love is a positive thing, since light is used as the symbol of goodness.
