I think you’re overthinking it. Whats significant about hate is the reasons for it. Most people have recognise it’s ok or good to hate Hitler. Most people couldn’t care less if you hate the taste of Milk.
It’s the basis of hatred that is significant or not, most of the time.

Like many words it is used imprecisely. I am sure most of us have known people who are so resentful and loathing of one thing or person that their whole life is distorted or overtaken by it. I say that I hate lots of things (in music, politics, culture) but the hatred is not visceral - it is more a case of dislike dressed up as a world view.

I often hear people say that "hate" is wrong or bad. But to what extent should we consider this with a concern or with significance, and should we give energy to this on the basis of degree — Cobra

Hatred leads to violence and discord, so, I guess it's reasonable to say it's not good. What I think is definitely true is that it is not useful. Hate leads to actions that are ineffective in addressing the underlying conflict. For example, the war in Iraq started because anger and outrage lead the US to take actions that have killed tens of thousands of people, cost trillions of dollars, and seriously undermined our national security. That's how hate works.

Was that hate or fear?

I go with Dingo Jones, inasmuch as "hate" and "hatred" have been diluted heavily for meaning. Lots of equivocation is possible, and the circumstances are not reflected by the word by itself, yet the circumstances are the essence that make hate meaningful and subject to analysis.

Most people have recognise it’s ok or good to hate Hitler. — DingoJones

Would you say those that "lack hatred" for Hitler are "bad"? What is the purpose of "hating" Hitler?

So, if I have an extreme hate toward fat people, is this unethical? Or is this hate "good" because being fat is unhealthy?

Or, say, if Mike says, "I hate women" as a result to trauma, should this be cause of concern? And should he be labelled a "misogynist".

What I mean is, hate seems to lose significance often, but it's not exactly clear what is determining the degree of significance, even following analysis.

Ex;

"Mike says he hates women, because his mother abused him."

But it seems to be devoid of anything requiring immediate moral action, yet, if Mike was placed in a government position of power, and said, "I hate women," suddenly there is some significance to this, and he will be labelled a misogynist, but not in the former example.

Hmmm, not sure. Having an active hatred isn’t the same as recognising evil so maybe not. You could just be a good person (recognising Hitler as evil) who doesn’t spend enough energy thinking about Hitler that they could be said to “hate” Hitler.

Hatred leads to violence and discord, so, I guess it's reasonable to say it's not good. What I think is definitely true is that it is not useful. — T Clark

Why, would you say, it's definitely true hatred is not useful?

Was that hate or fear? — DingoJones

Either. Or both. Or they're the same. I do think a lot of hatred has fear mixed in.

I always thought that (the war) was more fear based. I agree hatred and fear often show up together or lead to each other...maybe those are two ends of a spectrum.

I always thought that (the war) was more fear based. I agree hatred and fear often show up together or lead to each other...maybe those are two ends of a spectrum. — DingoJones

Maybe better examples would have been Northern Ireland and Palestine/Israel.

Right, or any number of other examples. Good point.
Ok so say in Ireland then. You don’t think the hate was useful? I think it helped motivate, helped justify and helped the general fight. You could probably say the same of both sides, that hate had it’s uses.

So, if I have an extreme hate toward fat people, is this unethical? Or is this hate "good" because being fat is unhealthy?

Or, say, if Mike says, "I hate women" as a result to trauma, should this be cause of concern? And should he be labelled a "misogynist".

What I mean is, hate seems to lose significance often, but it's not exactly clear what is determining the degree of significance, even following analysis.

Ex;

"Mike says he hates women, because his mother abused him."

But it seems to be devoid of anything requiring immediate moral action, yet, if Mike was placed in a government position of power, and said, "I hate women," suddenly there is some significance to this, and he will be labelled a misogynist, but not in the former example. — Cobra

Thank you for agreeing with me.

Could you answer this:

So, if I have an extreme hate toward fat people, is this unethical? Or is this hate "good" because being fat is unhealthy?

Surely this isn't just a matter of circumstance, and whether hate is good or bad isn't determined by the circumstance, but the degree in which hate has significance.

Being fat is almost always detrimental in the long run. Would you say "hate" is good, therefore ethical because it serves a significant role in discouraging fatness?

Why do we then, not support the extreme hatred of fat people, but support the extreme hatred of "Hitler" for example?

Is it because all the fat people claim, "It's wrong to hate fat people,". Is this the case?

So, if I have an extreme hate toward fat people, is this unethical? Or is this hate "good" because being fat is unhealthy? — Cobra

Are you hating obesity or people who are obese? There’s a difference, and I would say reducing a person’s value due solely to their weight is wrong, but hating obesity is like hating pain; there’s nothing wrong with it (I’d actually claim it’s amoral), but that’s because things like obesity and pain are more abstract, so there’s really nothing concrete to direct your anger towards. Hating obesity or pain entails nothing that could affect someone else, at least not that I’m seeing.

Or, say, if Mike says, "I hate women" as a result to trauma, should this be cause of concern? And should he be labelled a "misogynist". — Cobra

This is digging into issues regarding moral responsibility. The implication in your statement is that Mike cannot do otherwise, correct? I think ignorance is also a factor here. Is he ignorant of the cause of his hate? Is he ignorant of methods to address and overcome his trauma, or does he choose to not pursue those methods?

But without getting too far off topic, I don’t see how you can find Mike morally responsible in this example. Now, were he to just be using his past traumatic experiences as justification or an excuse for his hate, then that’s a different story.

What I mean is, hate seems to lose significance often, but it's not exactly clear what is determining the degree of significance, even following analysis. — Cobra

My guess would be the degree of potential harm caused by harboring hate. Hating flying spaghetti monsters is completely benign, for example, because doing so doesn’t cause harm.

Also, I’d like to say that hate, just like every other emotion, evolved with us, so must have been evolutionarily beneficial. So, the idea that hate is somehow inherently bad, or useless, is probably false. It’s more likely that hate is very useful for our survival/wellbeing in certain circumstances. I’ve also always viewed the cause of hate to be love. It’s our love of our selves/country/family/race/etc. that causes us to hate whatever harms or threatens our selves/country/family/race/etc.

I often hear people say that "hate" is wrong or bad — Cobra

I would suggest that hate/hatred is simply an emotion or emotional state. As with most emotional states, the state itself is not a problem. Actions which are a result of said state can be positive or negative. For example: I hate being poor. This hatred in turn motivates me to work hard, save what little money I make, use said money to increase my education and training, resulting in a higher earned wage. I repeat this process until I find I am no longer anywhere near poor. My children do not have to be nearly as concerned as I was about where my dinner is coming from, or where they will sleep. etc. Hatred has motivated me to self improvement.
However, same example: I hate being poor. I look about me and see many others with more than I. This fills me with hatred and envious rage. I proceed to stalk those with more than I have and take it by force. Eventually I am caught, convicted, and spend a lengthy time incarcerated, which further fuels my hate. My children grow up without me, I have not bettered myself, nor those around me (except maybe the guards, they are employed because of people like me). Hatred has led me to self destruction.

Like most emotions, what you feel is far less important than what you do about it.

It's ok to hate evil as long as you recognize that evil is a disease rather than a person.

You have raised an interesting discussion. I am not sure that the feeling of strong dislike and feeling hatred and that of wishing harm is absolute. Perhaps the latter is the exaggeration form of it and most people don't go that far. It could be that the more a person becomes accustomed to the mental state of feeling and thinking thoughts of aversion or hatred, that it becomes a possible starting point is hatred, in its meaning of wishing harm.

I think that hatred, in strong aversion or wishing harm to those with specific attributes is connected to psychological projective processes. Take your example of hatred of the fat person, it may be that specific undesirability of fatness as an aesthetic quality is projected onto the individuals who are perceived as fat. The example of hatred of fat people also raises the connection between hatred of others and hatred of self. I have worked with people who have eating disorders and it does seem that they often have internalised self hatred.

The whole area of self hatred is also of importance in thinking about individuals who self harm. I have heard people who harm themselves in ways such as cutting saying how the cutting is a way of purging themselves of the anger and hatred they have towards themselves. The whole area of self harm was expressed strongly in the culture surrounding 'emo' music culture. I think that emo culture is less strong now, but it is often during adolescence that people experience strong feelings of self hatred, and this is probably related to the sense of identity development. However, many people in adulthood do self harm and experience suicidal ideas in adult life.

You’re trolling. It’s a meaningless distinction, a distinction without a difference.

Why do you think Cobra is trolling? I can't see anything wrong with her discussion, but perhaps I am missing seeing something.

Why do we then, not support the extreme hatred of fat people, but support the extreme hatred of "Hitler" for example?

Is it because all the fat people claim, "It's wrong to hate fat people,". Is this the case? — Cobra

There are different concepts and situations. You cannot compare fatness with a dictator who was responsible for a World War and millions of deaths. Also, nobody teaches you to hate Hitler... their ideas are still there, someone doesn’t like it others support them.
If we want to remove obesity we have to promote healthy programs to avoid it not hating obese people because it is not healthy.

As some warn victory, some downfall
Private reasons great or small
Can be seen in the eyes of those that call
To make all that should be killed to crawl
While others say don't hate nothing at all
Except hatred. — Bob Dylan

To hate hatred is to hate oneself. I am full of hate, for cruelty, for lies, for ignorance, for unnecessary suffering, and so on. Sometimes it is so powerful, it even gets me out of my comfy chair to do something about something, or at least to remonstrate with someone. If everything is lovely, nothing need be done; let us therefore praise hatred as the motive to improve things.

Would you say those that "lack hatred" for Hitler are "bad"? What is the purpose of "hating" Hitler? — Cobra

Resentment is a sentiment, in consequence of having observed a detestable motive or act; in and of itself, it doesn't accord any degree of moral virtue. Resentment does, however, constitute a directive to wherein one's moralistic edifices stem from (since they engender the specifics of what one finds reprehensible, and what one doesn't) - and what they imply in practical terms.

For instance, if individual Z doesn't particularly 'hate' Hitler, a spectator (namely Y) would likely have to posit 3 additive questions, before forging a stance on Z's moral constitution:

a) How Z rationalizes a non-contempt, of an individual canonically regarded as a genocidal dictator;
b) Whether Z's presuppositions (in relation to Hitler) are commensurate with Y's (and whether both their preconceptions are corroborated with historical documentations of his life);
c) Whether not resenting an individual is tantamount to either venerating him/her, or remaining passive to his/her transgressions.

I think that hatred, in strong aversion or wishing harm to those with specific attributes is connected to psychological projective processes. Take your example of hatred of the fat person, it may be that specific undesirability of fatness as an aesthetic quality is projected onto the individuals who are perceived as fat. The example of hatred of fat people also raises the connection between hatred of others and hatred of self. I have worked with people who have eating disorders and it does seem that they often have internalised self hatred. — Jack Cummins

Exactly. What often happens (perhaps), is that individuals conflate the aesthetic qualities that they're disinclined to, with the total identity of the individual they're berating (preceding a projection) - which shouldn't be surprising, since it's both inductive, and quintessential of being a cognitive miser (an inadequacy most of us are characterized by, to an appreciable extent).

Hey, thanks for the answers all. You make a lot of interesting points. I will respond very soon!

I’m always skeptical about assigning moral value to how someone reacts. People can hardly choose to hate or not hate. It’s like assigning moral value to eating, or taking a piss. You can’t very well help it.

When people say “hate is bad” I don’t think it is intended as moral condemnation but rather practical life advice.

Are you hating obesity or people who are obese? There’s a difference, and I would say reducing a person’s value due solely to their weight is wrong, but hating obesity is like hating pain; there’s nothing wrong with it (I’d actually claim it’s amoral), but that’s because things like obesity and pain are more abstract, so there’s really nothing concrete to direct your anger towards. Hating obesity or pain entails nothing that could affect someone else, at least not that I’m seeing. — Pinprick

Would you then it is "bad" to hate a baby killer on the basis of their actions then? Do you feel similar about the body positivity movement, that it is also "reducing people down to their weight"? Is it good if it doesn't contain hate/hatred?

Ex; 1

1. It is determined that "fat people" are gluttonous (or weight gained/obesity) is mostly "self-inflicted" aside from medical conditions/exceptions, from disregard from self-care.

2. It is determined that being obese is always harmful or increases harm by substantial amounts, leading to medical and health issues and eventually death.

3. It is then reasonable to harbor "hatred" or "hate" for obese people (for inflicting harm on themselves and others [habits being normalized in children]) that have to deal with them.

Based on this,

From my definitions above, hatred seems to serve the purpose of:

2. Hate: Fleeting reaction or prolonged aversion to something that causes disgust, repulsion, or discomfort.

1. Hatred: "Hate" institutionalized (with power). Prejudices + intent + actions taken to "exterminate" or "eliminate" that which causes hate.


Ex; 2

It seems the "Hatred" of Trump, for example, was only of any utility or in this case, "good" because it was able to be institutionalized through widespread societal stigmas, disapprove, prejudices, with an intent to remove him office.

In this scenario, like fat people, this is not "Hating Trump," (fleeting reaction of disgust, etc..) - but something much more, and even so, "hate" doesn't seem strong enough to remove him from office.

"Hate" must have power, meaning institutionalized with intent in order for it to be effective, "good", or "reasonable".

--
Considering that we know "obesity" is harmful, is it the good then to harbor or influence hatred against obese people to eradicate obesity? If no, what is the difference here? What "action" is best appropriate?

How Hatred against obese people on large scale, society wise, less good than Hatred against Trump (not in terms of eradication).

I would suggest that hate/hatred is simply an emotion or emotional state. As with most emotional states, the state itself is not a problem. Actions which are a result of said state can be positive or negative. For example: I hate being poor. This hatred in turn motivates me to work hard, save what little money I make, use said money to increase my education and training, resulting in a higher earned wage. I repeat this process until I find I am no longer anywhere near poor. My children do not have to be nearly as concerned as I was about where my dinner is coming from, or where they will sleep. etc. Hatred has motivated me to self improvement.
However, same example: I hate being poor. I look about me and see many others with more than I. This fills me with hatred and envious rage. I proceed to stalk those with more than I have and take it by force. Eventually I am caught, convicted, and spend a lengthy time incarcerated, which further fuels my hate. My children grow up without me, I have not bettered myself, nor those around me (except maybe the guards, they are employed because of people like me). Hatred has led me to self destruction.

Like most emotions, what you feel is far less important than what you do about it. — Book273

With all this said, if hate or "hatred" is just an emotional/feeling, is it reasonable to remove a leader from office, if they say, "I hate America" ... on the basis of feeling/emotions, with no actions to follow?

In the same case:

Is someone with extreme hate for women, and communicates this openly electable, even if they have demonstrated no harmful actions toward women?

Why would hate be "OK" in this case, but bad/wrong in another situation? Or is it just completely arbitrary?

You have raised an interesting discussion. I am not sure that the feeling of strong dislike and feeling hatred and that of wishing harm is absolute. Perhaps the latter is the exaggeration form of it and most people don't go that far. It could be that the more a person becomes accustomed to the mental state of feeling and thinking thoughts of aversion or hatred, that it becomes a possible starting point is hatred, in its meaning of wishing harm.

I think that hatred, in strong aversion or wishing harm to those with specific attributes is connected to psychological projective processes. — Jack Cummins

But is it just psychologically projective processes or is there really no external or objective basis that we can determine the strong aversion, wishing harm towards, etc.. is reasonable and good?

Take your example of hatred of the fat person, it may be that specific undesirability of fatness as an aesthetic quality is projected onto the individuals who are perceived as fat. The example of hatred of fat people also raises the connection between hatred of others and hatred of self. I have worked with people who have eating disorders and it does seem that they often have internalised self hatred.

See, this is where I get lost. Is it not a fact and known that being fat (obese and overweight) is harmful? Are you saying that obesity and it's effects are just matters of perception?

How is this merely an aesthetic problem just because Susan encourages hatred of fat people that go around eating McDonalds for "fun", but not for say, a man that goes around slapping babies for fun?

Would you say it is wrong to hate the man that goes around slapping babies for fun, and just a matter of some kind of self-hatred..? Doesn't seem the case:

Ex;
1. John hates practicing/active pedophiles.

2. John starts a "movement" fueled by hatred to eradicate practicing/active pedophiles from practicing.

3. This is "good".

--

1. Susan hates practicing/active people practicing gluttony.

2. Susan starts a "movement" fueled by hatred to eradicate practicing/active people from practicing.

3. This is "bad".

What would you say is the difference or factor here that caused hatred to lose it's significance?

Could you answer this:

So, if I have an extreme hate toward fat people, is this unethical? Or is this hate "good" because being fat is unhealthy?

Surely this isn't just a matter of circumstance, and whether hate is good or bad isn't determined by the circumstance, but the degree in which hate has significance.

Being fat is almost always detrimental in the long run. Would you say "hate" is good, therefore ethical because it serves a significant role in discouraging fatness?

Why do we then, not support the extreme hatred of fat people, but support the extreme hatred of "Hitler" for example?

Is it because all the fat people claim, "It's wrong to hate fat people,". Is this the case? — Cobra

This is a philosophy website, with general freedom of styles. I hardly ever answer questions, unless it's information-seeking. If you want me to provide you with my opinion, please make a case in the affirmative. Replying to questions is, I am very sorry, not my style.

This is not to disrespect your questions, or to dismiss the validity of your enquiry. I am not here to tell you what to do. Ask questions, but I am here to tell myself what to do, and I don't answer questions, I only give opinions on nominative statements.