Sure you can love others without first learning how to love your own self. This type of unfounded, unintuitive psychobabble bullshit really irritates me. — god must be atheist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LIb22-5Lwg

I don't know if you saw this link above.

As you can see, it is not unfounded psychobabble.

Regards
DL

So, I maintain my conviction. Love can exist without hate; hate can't exist without love. One is essential; the other isn't. — javra

The link I put up shows otherwise. Dualism exists in our emotions, like it or not.

Regards
DL

except perhaps vote for Trump or Brexit! — iolo

I do not recognize these as equivalent.

Trump is in a vile class all of his own and if the poor want help, they are voting the wrong way.

Brexit, FMPOV, is wanted for a different reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq_lhlIn1e0

Regards
DL

Anyone who doesn't know what hate is is a moron. And anyone who says they haven't ever felt hatred is a liar. — S

Accurate.

Regards
DL

I can't see any hate in this girl. She's just stating facts. — iolo

I'm not sure just what facts you are referring to, but when I read of any love bias, I automatically read in a hate bias for all that would jeopardize that which is loved.

Regards
DL

The link I put up shows otherwise. Dualism exists in our emotions, like it or not. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I haven't once denied that there is both love and hate in the world, nor that these two emotions stand in opposition to each other. That said, the video - nice contents, btw - only evidences, at worst, an innate bias toward self and against other. But this bias can be maintained in the absence of hate for other - and none of the babies or children exhibited signs of hatred in their choices. So the video doesn't illustrates that hate is as an essential aspect of our constituency, much less that it is as essential as is love. It does illustrate that self-love is innate from the get go, however.

Unless one equates hate to a mere dislike of something, but this denotation doesn't seem right to me.

Unless one equates hate to a mere dislike of something, but this denotation doesn't seem right to me. — javra

Ditto as well as with like versus love.

But this bias can be maintained in the absence of hate for other - and none of the babies or children exhibited signs of hatred in their choices. — javra

They do indeed by not liking the evil puppets.

In duality, Yin does not exist without Yang.

Regards
DL

Anyone who doesn't know what hate is is a moron. And anyone who says they haven't ever felt hatred is a liar. — S

:up:

Is there a difference between knowing what hate is and feeling hate? Maybe I was being [i[too[/i] analytical about something so instinctual.

Yet wasn't it Socrates who said "the unexamined life is not worth living"? Understanding your feelings, their origins and ramifications, is an important part of this self-examination isn't it?

If you go Zen on it then some might even be able to use hate to accomplish the good. How could slaves have achieved emancipation if they hadn't hated oppression and if their oppressors hadn't hated treating their fellow human being like animals?

On the other hand we have things like hate crime that are senseless and have far-reaching effects on the collective.

I don't understand why you framed your question like "what triggers hate?". It implies that you know what is hate.
— TheMadFool

I think I know what creates or triggers hate and do know what it is, but I did not want to divulge it from the get go. I wanted to see what you guys thought first.

that trigger your hate are rather obvious truths about reality. Don't you hate it when you can't find the keys
— TheMadFool

No. I do not hate such trivia. I just get annoyed and move on.

Psychology and sociology may be able to help us understand the origins of hate, what abets and perpetuates it. Presumably most explanations will invariably point the finger at human nature.
— TheMadFool

From what I think I know, science has already shown that hate is born from love and we are born with a human nature that defaults to love. Love seems to create and trigger hate as a response to anything that might jeopardize what we love.

Should you embrace it? Do you like truth that much?
— TheMadFool

I do as I prefer to be led by truth than lies.

Regards
DL — Gnostic Christian Bishop

There's a certain feature of this topic that interests me - that the more we become aware of our emotions, their origins and consequences, the more we're in control of them. This process is echoed in how we grow up from children to adults. First, when young, we're in the backseat of the car - we can't control our emotions - very much like animals and then we mature and take the wheels in the driver's seat, so to speak.

The whole idea being to switch the role of emotions from controlling us to us controlling them.

Unless one equates hate to a mere dislike of something, but this denotation doesn't seem right to me. — javra


Ditto as well as with like versus love. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Ok, each to their own takes. So I clarify why my take is different than yours, one will risk and sacrifice for givens that are loved, but not for givens that are merely liked. Than one loves ice-cream is an aberration in other languages, ancient Greek being a well known one. Unless one believes that languages create our core emotions, this is then sufficient evidence that the English term love conveys emotive states of being that, while including that of intense liking, also consist of sentiments that are other than liking. One can, for example, deeply love someone whom one at the same time thoroughly dislikes.

Hate is not the same. I can't imagine how one could deeply hate someone whom one at the same time thoroughly likes. To earnestly hate can, and most often does, convey some measure of visceral disdain for that which is hated. Hence, I can greatly dislike earthworms without hating them (not that I dislike earthworms).

So, the way you're using the words, their referents could be conceptualized as a dyadic relationship. But not in the way I'm using them. Still, I'll skip on "what is love" debates.

Trump is in a vile class all of his own and if the poor want help, they are voting the wrong way.

Brexit, FMPOV, is wanted for a different reason. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Like Trump, Brexit was something that nobody had any thought of before a tiny minority of extreme-right oddoes pushed for it, and, as with Trump, millions voted for it out or resentment at others and all sorts of other odd reasons, though, compared with the American voter, they were lied to much more hugely. As with Trump, but much faster, the result is deep division and looming disaster.

The whole idea being to switch the role of emotions from controlling us to us controlling them. — TheMadFool

Emotions are responses to stimuli.
Usually intelligent responses, although they can produce irrational responses as well.

We do need self control, but, for instance, with our eco system, our lack of emotion for the Earth, has likely doomed us to extinction, if the U.N. stats are sound.

Most emotions are spontaneous. Can you control your thinking enough to control your emotions?

I don't think I can.
When I see one of the kids heading for a fall, I cannot help but have my emotions feel for him.

Empathy and altruism are instincts.
I do not think we can control our empathy and altruism as well as we would like. In fact, our lack of control might have let our emotions go too far to the point that we should tone it down to help save the planet. We may be too nice to each other and go for nice instead of practical. That is not intelligent.

Regards
DL

looming disaster. — iolo

Not to the Brexit crowd who voted to take the hit for the benefits of having control of their borders, immigration and governance unhampered by yet another one of our way too many controlling body.

We all already pay too much for the garbage governance that our politicians are producing.

Regards
DL

[reply="Gnostic Christian Bishop;334434"


@ Not to the Brexit crowd who voted to take the hit for the benefits of having control of their borders, immigration and governance unhampered by yet another one of our way too many controlling body.

We all already pay too much for the garbage governance that our politicians are producing.'

Who cares about the nutters? It's our families the sane are worried about. Why should we let a drunken mob destroy their futures?

Who cares about the nutters? It's our families the sane are worried about. Why should we let a drunken mob destroy their futures? — iolo

I don't know who you are referring to with your "nutters" and "drunken mob".

At present, in both the U.S. and England, I see all sides as nutters who put their affiliations ahead of their moral and social responsibilities.

I believe in a unified world but it has to be so voluntarily and without pressure.

Regards
DL

If you go Zen on it then some might even be able to use hate to accomplish the good. How could slaves have achieved emancipation if they hadn't hated oppression and if their oppressors hadn't hated treating their fellow human being like animals?

On the other hand we have things like hate crime that are senseless and have far-reaching effects on the collective. — TheMadFool

Yes, very good point. Indeed, how could slaves have achieved emancipation if they hadn't hated oppression? I think that that was glossed over by the kind of things that Swan was saying.

Yes, very good point. Indeed, how could slaves have achieved emancipation if they hadn't hated oppression? I think that that was glossed over by the kind of things that Swan was saying. — S

Why hate when you can mate? :joke:

Hate grows on inequality. There's an imbalance in the relationship between individuals or groups. Why should the stronger hate the weaker if it's the existence of the weaker that makes them stronger? Why should the weaker hate the stronger if the stronger exist only because they're weaker?

Hate is, it seems, either silly or foolish.

Hate is, it seems, either silly or foolish. — TheMadFool

If you walk in on your wife being raped, is it silly and foolish for you to hate the rapist?

Regards
DL

Hate is, it seems, either silly or foolish. — TheMadFool

I don't agree with that, although it can be.

Hate grows on inequality. There's an imbalance in the relationship between individuals or groups. Why should the stronger hate the weaker if it's the existence of the weaker that makes them stronger? Why should the weaker hate the stronger if the stronger exist only because they're weaker? — TheMadFool

This is interesting, though. Thinking outside of the box. Good as a way of getting someone to think about personal responsibility in the case of the weak who hate the strong, and good as a way of getting the strong to realise the importance of those weaker than them in a way that they'd have to acknowledge.

If you walk in on your wife being raped, is it silly and foolish for you to hate the rapist?

Regards
DL — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Good question. I really like it.

I'll ask you a better question. How about the rapist raping someone else's (not yours :joke: ) wife. Would you hate that rapist? If I understand enough about human nature I'm willing to bet that your answer will range from a little bit to who gives a rat's ass?.

As you can see you don't hate because there's a good reason to hate. You hate only because something bad's been done to you. It's an important distinction to make Separates the subjective from the objective - a bitter truth we must all face.

That said I don't want to belittle people who have a just cause for hate. Hate away but please don't forget to hate to the same degree for others in a similar situation. In a sad way I guess this exposes a lot more than I wanted to about human nature.

Thanks again for your question.

'I don't know who you are referring to with your "nutters" and "drunken mob".

At present, in both the U.S. and England, I see all sides as nutters who put their affiliations ahead of their moral and social responsibilities.'

By 'nutters' I mean the brainwashed persons who vote against their own interest to benefit a very few, very nasty capitalists. By 'drunken mob' I mean those who howl down any attempt to tell the truth. I don't live in England: here the Brexit voters were voting against total misgovernment and to spite immigrants who they read about in their captitalist English newspapers and never meet here - only English immigrants who come here in vast herds.

You hate only because something bad's been done to you. — TheMadFool

Not if, like me, you try to live by the Golden Rule. I do accept that if done to me, I would likely have a higher degree of hate.

Regards
DL

By 'nutters' I mean the brainwashed persons who vote against their own interest to benefit a very few, very nasty capitalists. — iolo

In oligarchies, that is the way of things.

Regards
DL

The link I put up shows otherwise. Dualism exists in our emotions, like it or not. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

LInks are always right. This is the first order of truth in the cosmic order of the universe.

Not if, like me, you try to live by the Golden Rule. I do accept that if done to me, I would likely have a higher degree of hate. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Hate, as you might have already guessed, has something to do with morality. In a very loose sense what we hate are morally prohibited. Do you think this leads to anything in
particular?

Hate, as you might have already guessed, has something to do with morality. In a very loose sense what we hate are morally prohibited. — TheMadFool

We also hate wrongdoing or harm done to us. Or to someone we care about. Regardless of morality. I think hate is a general dislike, and as such, you can dislike acting against morality, but I see no special function of hate due to morality.

We also hate wrongdoing or harm done to us. Or to someone we care about. Regardless of morality. I think hate is a general dislike, and as such, you can dislike acting against morality, but I see no special function of hate due to morality. — god must be atheist

Please read the comment below

Not if, like me, you try to live by the Golden Rule. I do accept that if done to me, I would likely have a higher degree of hate. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

As you can see hate can be caused by injustice. Injustice has moral implications. It's this I'm referring to.

Hate is a strong, negative emotional reaction to a fear one cannot avoid.

When we love, we often fear losing what we love, and then resolve to hate what we fear could take it from us. But a love that generates hatred, that gives way to fear, is not a healthy love. To love another is to risk losing them, to risk being hurt, and to accept that we are incomplete in ourselves, that we are more with them than without them.

We are afraid of losing so many other things that are important to us, and of experiencing a lack, just as we are afraid of pain and humiliation. We reserve our hatred for those people, actions and institutions that threaten to, or actually, inflict this suffering on us - individually, socially, nationally, ideologically, etc.

Why? Because we don’t believe we should suffer. Because that’s what happens only to other people.

When we have the courage to risk loss, lack, pain or humiliation, there is no need to hate - that’s just fear talking.

As you can see hate can be caused by injustice. Injustice has moral implications. It's this I'm referring to. — TheMadFool

Thank you. Injustice is harm done to you also, no? So who is to say it is the moral implication that heightens the response?

I am not denying your point, I am only saying that it is not necessarily true.

You'll hate someone who calls you a liar, but hate him even more if he kills your wife or kids. You get morally hurt in the first instance, but not morally hurt in the second, yet your hate will be stronger in the second instance.

Thank you. Injustice is harm done to you also, no? So who is to say it is the moral implication that heightens the response?

I am not denying your point, I am only saying that it is not necessarily true.

You'll hate someone who calls you a liar, but hate him even more if he kills your wife or kids. You get morally hurt in the first instance, but not morally hurt in the second, yet your hate will be stronger in the second instance. — god must be atheist

You're absolutely right. What I find is relevant, morally speaking, isn't the hate itself but the sorrow that causes it. The pain is morally relevant because causing pain is, well, prohibited or, if you prefer, discouraged. We could say that hate is just sorrow in disguise or transformed just about enough to appear as something independent but is actually not. It's something like an object being reflected off a mirror. In your example, the killer's reflection is the hate - it's just an image of the killer. The reality is the suffering - the process by which the killer's image is reflected.