Merriam defines

So hate is just the extreme end of an “unfriendly feeling” which is synonymous to a negative feeling. We can go “golden middle” on this and say that moderate negative feelings are ideal, but even the moderate form seems synonymous to bias or prejudice.

    • quacky@lemmy.worldOP
      1·
      3 days ago

      I was researching stoic philosophers on their opinion of hatred. Here’s some quotes I’ve collected:

      • Mankind is born for mutual assistance, anger for mutual ruin: the former loves society, the latter estrangement. The one loves to do good, the other to do harm; the one to help even strangers, the other to attack even its dearest friends. The one is ready even to sacrifice itself for the good of others, the other to plunge into peril provided it drags others with it. Who, then, can be more ignorant of nature than he who classes this cruel and hurtful vice as belonging to her best and most polished work? Anger, as we have said, is eager to punish; and that such a desire should exist in man’s peaceful breast is least of all according to his nature; for human life is founded on benefits and harmony and is bound together into an alliance for the common help of all, not by terror, but by love towards one another. ~ Lucius Annaeus Seneca (c. 4 BC – A.D. 65)

      …

      • Keep this thought handy when you feel a bit of rage coming on – it isn’t manly to be enraged. Rather, gentleness and civility are more human, and therefore manlier. A real person doesn’t give way to anger and discontent, and such a person has strength, courage, and endurance – unlike the angry and complaining. The nearer a man comes to a calm mind, the closer he is to strength. ~ Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121 A.D. – 180 A.D.))

      …

      • Do you suppose that you can do the things you do now, and yet be a philosopher? Do you suppose that you can eat in the same fashion, drink in the same fashion, give way to anger and to irritation, just as you do now? ~ Epictetus (c. 55 – c. 135 AD)
  • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
    41·
    3 days ago

    I hate rape. I hate blatant, dangerous immorality. Hatred is rarely appropriate, but rarely does not mean never. There is a time for everything, after all. Now, if you’re not making a bad faith argument, get diagnosed for the tisms and reassess your statements.

    • quacky@lemmy.worldOP
      12·
      3 days ago

      I appreciate your comment as it provides color and contrast for the embracement of hatred. It is persuading me to trust myself in being opposed to, or not entertaining of, hate & negativity.

      • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
        3·
        3 days ago

        There are things one has to be/will be vehemently opposed to and morally disgusted by, or “hate”, if you believe in virtue (or simply stand by anything). 🤷

        • quacky@lemmy.worldOP
          13·
          3 days ago

          Right, that was certainly Aristotle’s interpretation on the concept of magnanimity. Aristotle claimed to have said,

          "He [who is magnanimous] must be open both in love and in hate, since concealment shows timidity; and care more for the truth than for what people will think; and speak and act openly, since as he despises other men he is outspoken and frank, except when speaking with ironical self-deprecation, as he does to common people… "

          (I got this quote from Wikipedia entry of Magnaimity who got it from this link https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0054%3Abekker+page%3D1123a#note2 ) )

          However, Aristotle was born before the Greek Stoics. Some Stoics thought that being good was transcending pain-pleasure, love-hate, into a more rational plane of existence. Here’s a quote by Stoic Marcus Aurelius,

          “… the Magnanimity is the elevation of the intelligent part above the pleasurable or painful sensations of the flesh, and above that poor thing called fame, and death, and all such things.”

          In conclusion, there are differing views of what virtue means, for Aristotle it means something close to good judgement or the wisdom of how to moderate one’s actions away from excess while for the stoics it means acting rationally despite hardship and embracing life in its entirety. For example, not letting negativity impact you, not getting carried away by passion.

            • quacky@lemmy.worldOP
              12·
              3 days ago

              Can you articulate this suspicion? Do I need to speak inauthenticly so that you don’t falsely accuse me?

              • vatlark@lemmy.worldM
                2·
                3 days ago

                This user was reported for being an LLM. I do agree that they have a very thorough writing style that is uncommon.

                • quacky@lemmy.worldOP
                  11·
                  3 days ago

                  LLM doesnt cite primary sources, nor can it think critically. But i guess it passes the turing test for some folks. The new turing test is for humans to prove they are human, which may he a shit-flinging contest because AI dont have grostesque animal bodies like we do. I would say the reporting is ridiculous, but rhat would be negative and hateful, so I guess i just gotta accept the reality that people are going to be paranoid and anti intellectual. But hey, thats diversity. Gotta love our differences

  • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
    1·
    3 days ago

    After I lost my belief in free will, I also seem to have lost my ability to feel hate. I haven’t felt that in years - almost a decade. To me, hate is just a story you’re telling yourself to stay angry. I don’t tell myself such stories.

    I can still feel annoyed, irritated, or dislike someone, but hate is incompatible with my worldview. And I don’t mean “hate” in the casual way people use it in everyday speech - I mean true hatred. I can’t hate an object, because it just is and couldn’t be otherwise. But in the same way, I can’t hate people either, because while I think they have the ability to act differently in the future, I don’t believe they could have acted differently in the past once something has already been done.

    Hating someone for what they are seems to imply they should’ve been different, which makes no sense. If someone is being an asshole, it’s not their fault - they can’t help themselves. I might not want to be around that person, but I don’t hate them. It’s like hating the rain or the darkness.