Not all those that want to / try to kill you, hurt you, “punish you”; hate you.
Those that want to control you DO.
You can sense it, but you can’t always see it. It is intentionally done in a way that is more difficult for you to identify in your present condition. When you think “cold and calculating” do you feel that this is a trivial statement about the lack of “love”?
Try to first approach these things without logic. How do these things FEEL to begin with?
The function of the human mind is to effect human will.
It cannot produce will when it cannot reason-study Gorgias by Plato.
The purpose of human will is to sustain and promote the life of the body.
Now, there is one, and only one right way to add human will. One must have will to begin with, and those whom they want to add will with, in order to achieve our own definition and purpose.
When will is not present in a group of humans, there is are alternative means of efffecting human expression (which is often not will), for good or ill-- control.
To improve the lot of mankind then, involves finding ways to teach one’s fellow humans how to attain to self-will. in other words, reason, and truth.
One can see how far we are on the evolutionary scale of getting to that point when I doubt that you can find a human being who can tell you, and tell you in truth, why one or more words may or may not be predicated of another. This knowledge is the foundation of reason itself.
If “love” and “hate” were simply “feelings” then they would have no significance. Some people realize that there is a correlation between word and deed.
Are you serious? It has no significance to you if you are feeling intense pain? Bliss? Anger? Love? Rage? I think that these ‘feelings’ would be of considerable ‘significance’, even to the very basic ‘significance’ of survival and replication itself!
'Some people think, from their Perspective, that there is a ‘correlation between ‘word’ and ‘deed’.’
That would make it ‘true’ for them.
I belive that if language is conventional, the reference of “perspective” is illigitamate. And I believe that with some or considerable effort, you might be able to demonstrate it to yourself.
Ah, a ‘belief’…
And thats a BIG ‘if’! Language is only ‘relatively conventional’ (to one extent or another).
“A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and time in which it is used.” -Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
And so, you prove the recently discovered; First Law of Soul Dynamics; “For every Perspective, there is an equal and opposite Perspective.” -Book of Fudd (1:1)
It was never my nature to attempt to engage in the unlikely art of ‘self deception/delusion’ (‘beliefs’).
But, I can certainly understand the Perspective. I just do not ‘share’ it. (See; ‘The First Law of Soul Dynamics’)
Your “Well Defined” terms are the background blah, blah of the mundane, got any more nachos, croud. For the deeper concepts, ‘Consciousness’, for example, have nothing even remotely like a 'clear and concise ‘definition’.
Don’t hand me that nebulous “go research why you are incorrect and leave me alone” crap.
Show me your ‘first principle’, and I’ll show you it’s refutation. (See; ‘The First Law of Soul Dynamics’) The ‘law’ of identity has been ‘downgraded’ to a ‘local phenomenon/pragmatic tool’ from the eroneous position of 'law". Same with the ‘law’ of non-contradiction, etc…
(See; ‘The First Law of Soul Dynamics’)
Grammer? Which regionalism? Local society? Which 'culture? Formal? Colloquial? Vulgar? Dialectic? Genetic?
I have just finished revising my above post if interested.
You seem to have more ‘beliefs’ than ‘facts’. ‘Facts’ are only ‘facts’ for the moment, locally, for you.
With due respect, I see no reason to think that there is anything that I can gain from such a search. I have heard nothing interesting or original yet, and you simply sidestep the validity of my replies.
So… (see; ‘The First Law of Soul Dynamics’!)
Peace
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
dis·cur·sive [di-skur-siv]
–adjective
passing aimlessly from one subject to another; digressive; rambling.
proceeding by reasoning or argument rather than intuition.
"Thank" you.
I am assuming that you refer to the second definition, hence my response.
(No one likes to be ‘pecked’.)
If you were referring to the first definition, then we can insert something else between the quotes. *__-
Well, I am glad you found a dictionary. Now see if you can use it to determine if it is possible for truth to be relative. Look at is as a homework assignment.
And if you still maintain that language is always relative, then why speak at all since you just claimed to be a living example of the liars paradox? Perhaps it is your display of brilliance that dazzles me.
Perhaps it is your display of patronizing arrogant sarcasm that that leaves you wallowing in ignorance, and your posts ignored.
Ohhh, I get it. I wounded your pride when I said that I found nothing interesting or original about your posts to be worth further independent study thereof. Ahhh, I understand your attitude problem and emotional response now.
‘Unsubscribing from topic’… Now!
Happy trails.
It seems to me the question is seeking an answer other than a definition. As compared to “love,” perhaps a judgment of the usefulness and pitfalls of “hate” are of interest.
Hate is an extension of fear or judgmental attitudes. If so and love is its opposite, love may be an extension of safety, security and attitudes of acceptance. It may be argued that hate is useful in avoiding that which is harmful or even ridding our environment of harmful elements. The counterargument would be that love may be more useful in avoiding that which is harmful.
Humans risk injury in encounters with sharks, hippos, crocodiles, bears and many other wild animals. Destroying them is clearly not the answer as it upsets the natural equilibrium of the environment. Love leads to understanding and understanding to constructive ways of maintaining a balance with less risk of injury to humans.
Should we hate those who cheat on their partners? Seems to me that doing so accomplishes nothing especially considering the statistics indicating how widespread and common the phenomenon is. Should atheists hate the believers or vice a versa? As with predators and other dangerous animals there are other ways of reducing risks without hating the perpetrators or those who espouse views opposing our own.
Aside from the violence inflicted by the hateful on the objects of their hatred, hate does more damage to those who nurture such sentiments than to those intended as its recipient. The energy of hatefulness permeates the ambiance as a repulsive force detectable even by those the sentiments are not directed towards.
One can love and accept without inviting danger, and exuding an aura of respect invites the same in return.
the opposite emotion of hate is lust. Real love is not an emotion it is a sense or instinct. If love were an emotion you could not get angry at one you love, you could not be saddened by one you love they could not make you feel happy… Love encompasses the emotions it is not one emotion it is a sense, it bonds us to those around us. You can temporarily hate ones you love. You do not stop loving that person just because of a temporary emotion. Emotions are temporary. Real love is not temporary. what most feel instead of love is lust when dealing with people Now lust is the emotion that causes many to think love and hate are the opposite. Lust is an emotion that causes strong feelings as does hate. No lust is not just about mating either. Lust is an emotion that can be felt when the other person has some strong attraction to your pysche. You want that person in your life. Be it the same gender or not. It is not love.
If love were a sense, there would have to be some organ in the body through which that sense were transmitted to the brain. As far as I know no such organ has been discovered. I can’t imagine how or why it would be instinctual. Maybe lust is instinctual though. As a verb, love is not an emotion, but as a noun I think it certainly is an emotion or perhaps a combination of emotions.
People have conflicting emotions all the time. There is no mystery to that as far as I know.
I agree, but it has nothing to do with the durability of emotions.
I don’t see a need for a distinction between love and real love.
Either way, however, it could be enduring or not as is also the case with other emotions.
![http://www.propertyfinder.com/objects/GB/2/U/G/502293814,20070907232250,p,400x300,photo1.jpg[/img]](http://www.propertyfinder.com/objects/GB/2/U/G/502293814,20070907232250,p,400x300,photo1.jpg%5B/img%5D){kind=link}