Hatred- useful or poisonous?

[miss fortune]

Cooperation of the people within your group, yes. But should we honestly trust the likes of an outside party and risk our own existence? Do you not think that groups should function independently from one another? And for purposes of keeping peace, do you not think that groups should just leave each other alone?

no- because different groups have different resources and talents that may be beneficial to other groups, and in working together and cooperating EVERYONE'S lives can be made easier And I didn't say trust- I merely said be nice to them- distrust ≠ hatred you don't have to like someone to be nice to them for goodness sake civility makes the world function!

edit: remember Uber- you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar!

 

[The Ü™]

Okay, here's an obvious inquiry: Legalities aside, do you not think hate is useful for destroying the people you don't want to exist?

 

[elfinchilde]

Hate is essentially how we stay alive.

That which forces division from our shared identity is certainly evil.

Night: was there ever a shared identity? Isn't the rule always, divide and conquer?

Whatever's and Uber's stands are fundamentally different, because they come from different sides of the stand:

She speaks from the viewpoint of life as harmony, he speaks from the viewpoint of life as survival.

Hatred is ultimately an emotion. And like all emotions, it has force. Whether it's useful or not depends in the end on how one channels it. Left within, it festers and poisons the soul:

"One cannot always carry an adder at one's breast, nor rise up every night to sow thorns in the garden of one's soul."--Oscar Wilde.

But if there are no positive forces in one's life, then, hate can very well be a driving force to living, more so than love can ever be.

How i'd persuade someone off killing themselves: You don't love life? Fine. But you hate it, don't you? If so, hate it enough to live. Hate it enough to fuck reality and show everyone what life means, since, you've got nothing to lose anyway, isn't it? So live.

In that sense, erroneous though it may be to general perception, hate can be a primal force in driving life.

I believe that may be where Uber's coming from. The shadow revealed under stress. In that situation, hate is useful, if properly channelled.

(pardon the cuss word used there. )

Edit: Uber, don't hate so much, ok? It'd only hurt yourself in the end.

 

[redacted]

Okay, here's an obvious inquiry: Legalities aside, do you not think hate is useful for destroying the people you don't want to exist?

a) why would you want anyone to not exist? that's already hate right there, so your question is circular.
b) no. it would be better to be one of those crazy calm murderers. you'd be less likely to make a mistake that way.

 

[miss fortune]

Okay, here's an obvious inquiry: Legalities aside, do you not think hate is useful for destroying the people you don't want to exist?

no- people shouldn't be destroyed- just give them enough rope to hang themselves and if they're really unpleasant enough to arouse distaste from you they'll probably be out of your hair soon

otherwise, you shouldn't be hating people... it takes up too much mental energy you could spend on something a lot more interesting

 

[The Ü™]

a) why would you want anyone to not exist? that's already hate right there, so your question is circular.

Maybe it could be something as simple as someone being hopelessly annoying. By forcing him out of existence, life becomes easier -- but as I said, legalities are put aside for purposes of this debate.

b) no. it would be better to be one of those crazy calm murderers. you'd be less likely to make a mistake that way.

What about when I become king?

 

[alcea rosea]

Uber - I know that deep down you only want to love people.

 

[wildcat]

Okay, here's an obvious inquiry: Legalities aside, do you not think hate is useful for destroying the people you don't want to exist?

Diamonds are forever.
Pencils are not.

The Finns think Xylitol is sugar.
The bees are not fooled.

 

[SillySapienne]

Grrrr!!!!

A request/suggestion:

Those participating in this thread (including myself) should provide their definition/s of hatred prior to expressing their opinions on it.

 

[redacted]

Maybe it could be something as simple as someone being hopelessly annoying. By forcing him out of existence, life becomes easier -- but as I said, legalities are put aside for purposes of this debate.

if you really want to kill someone who's annoying, you have some extreme hatred. it consumes you. you wouldn't want to kill anyone unless you felt hatred. even if you don't actually hate the annoying person, you're still displacing hatred toward them because you hate someone else.

CIRCULAR QUESTION.

wow do you need therapy...

at least study psychology or something.

What about when I become king?

i make a good point, you come up with a fantasy in which is doesn't matter. nice debate skills.

 

[redacted]

Uber - I know that deep down you only want to love people.

it's SOOOOOOOO deep. buried under years of unhappiness and hatred. it won't come out without extreme extreme amounts of work.

he might also have anti-social personality disorder...

 

[The Ü™]

if you really want to kill someone who's annoying, you have some extreme hatred. it consumes you. you wouldn't want to kill anyone unless you felt hatred. even if you don't actually hate the annoying person, you're still displacing hatred toward them because you hate someone else.

We're talking about how useful hatred is. By hating the annoying person, I can kill the annoying person. My life will then become easier once the annoyance has subsided.

And relax, we are talking about imagined scenarios that validate reasons to hate, ethics and morale have been set aside for such purposes.

 

[miss fortune]

eh- it's rarely any use to argue with Uber- he sets out what path he plans on taking in the beginning and then there's no swaying him no matter what you say :rolli: I think he's intentionally going over the top here just to see how long we'll argue

CC- here's your def that I've tended to follow

Hate
–verb (used with object) 1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.
2. to be unwilling; dislike: I hate to do it.
–verb (used without object) 3. to feel intense dislike, or extreme aversion or hostility.
–noun 4. intense dislike; extreme aversion or hostility.
5. the object of extreme aversion or hostility.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: bef. 900; ME hat(i)en, OE hatian (v.); c. D haten, ON hata, Goth hatan, G hassen]

 

[alcea rosea]

he might also have anti-social personality disorder...

I think Uber has quite sarcastic way of looking at things.
I still believe he is a good human being (even if he tries to look evil).
I think he just needs hugs.

 

[SillySapienne]

That which forces division from our shared identity is certainly evil.

"shared identity"

please explain what you mean by this, because... I don't get.

 

[The Ü™]

Hate
–verb (used with object) 1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest: to hate the enemy; to hate bigotry.
2. to be unwilling; dislike: I hate to do it.
–verb (used without object) 3. to feel intense dislike, or extreme aversion or hostility.
–noun 4. intense dislike; extreme aversion or hostility.
5. the object of extreme aversion or hostility.

I honestly didn't think there was any other definition for the word hate. (These are the ones I've been using all along.)

But how do we define what is passionate and what is not? That is subjective, and we all have different thresholds.

 

[miss fortune]

I honestly didn't think there was any other definition of the word hate. (That's the one I've been using all along.)

But how do we define what is passionate and what is not? That is subjective, and we all have different thresholds.

passionate

–adjective 1. having, compelled by, or ruled by intense emotion or strong feeling; fervid: a passionate advocate of socialism.
2. easily aroused to or influenced by sexual desire; ardently sensual.
3. expressing, showing, or marked by intense or strong feeling; emotional: passionate language.
4. intense or vehement, as emotions or feelings: passionate grief.
5. easily moved to anger; quick-tempered; irascible.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1375–1425; late ME < ML passiōnātus, equiv. to LL passiōn- passion + L -ātus -ate1]

 

[redacted]

We're talking about how useful hatred is. By hating the annoying person, I can kill the annoying person. My life becomes easier.

so if all other variables were constant, but you didn't hate the person, you couldn't kill them, according to your logic. which would mean you wouldn't want to kill them; the pros wouldn't outweigh the cons.

your life is easier when you do things where the pros outweigh the cons.

therefore, hating them doesn't make your life easier.

now you're gonna make the point that you wanted to kill them anyways, even if you didn't hate them. well, fine. then you don't need hate to kill them. hate is useless in both cases.

And relax, we are talking about imagined scenarios that validate reasons to hate, ethics and morale have been set aside for such purposes.

i don't care about ethics in this conversation. i'm getting worked up because your defense mechanisms are so damn strong! my arguments are obviously better than yours here. you're just running from the truth because it's uncomfortable.

 

[SillySapienne]

WordNet -

hate

noun
1. the emotion of intense dislike; a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands action [ant: love]

verb
1. dislike intensely; feel antipathy or aversion towards; "I hate Mexican food"; "She detests politicians" [ant: love]

 

[The Ü™]

so if all other variables were constant, but you didn't hate the person, you couldn't kill them, according to your logic. which would mean you wouldn't want to kill them; the pros wouldn't outweigh the cons.

your life is easier when you do things where the pros outweigh the cons.

therefore, hating them doesn't make your life easier.

now you're gonna make the point that you wanted to kill them anyways, even if you didn't hate them. well, fine. then you don't need hate to kill them. hate is useless in both cases.

I hate the person because he's annoying me, the universally logical thing to do is to kill him -- that will give a 100 percent assurance that the particular object of hate will not annoy me any longer, hence life will be easier for me.

My hate is essentially caused by my desire to live easier, because it drives me to break through the barrier.

Why is this so difficult to understand?