Frank Discussion on Hate

[Violet]

We aren't talking about that hypothetical society. We are talking about our society. In our society, racist extremism is frowned upon, to say the least. You are creating arguments out of thin air by taking words and phrases and changing their context. It really does nothing to further the discussion. In fact, it clouds and derails and avoids the discussion.

Nor am I talking about a hypothetical society. In fact, there are some societies that outright shun technology... such as a number of Alaskan 'native's. "Our" society is a confused construct too... there are many societies to which I belong... and they are not necessarily the ones to which you belong. I might assume that you are referring to 'American' society in general... but even here there are so many differences that just what the general American society is... is questionable.

Racist extremism is not always frowned upon in our society... and indeed is practiced upon nonhumans within our society often. There are breeds of dogs that are considered superior because of their race... there are horses who are favored in races because of their race... there are salmon who get a better price in marketing because of their race. Don't try to tell me racism is frowned upon by our society... be more specific: human racism. And really... is a dislike of skin color (and treating those with that skin color differently than normal, so as to justify as racism) so different than a dislike of a haircut (and treating those with that haircut differently than normal, so as to justify as haircutism)?

Many very good arguments are created by turning an ideal into a situation, to examplarify it. If this disturbs you, then perhaps one shouldn't hold such ideals Rather, it expands the discussion... and allows for subjects to be brought in that relate to the topic, but would otherwise have to wait for someone to create a new topic. If someone makes a thread asking "Who's your favorite guitarist"... and one likes several equally: should they have to wait until someone makes a thread asking "Who are your favorite guitarists"?

---

No. It can be medicinal. It 'can' be good for you. Lot's of things have the potential to harm you, that doesn't make them 'bad'.

True... just about anything 'can' be good for you. Why should love be considered necessarily good, when just about anything 'can' be bad?

---

Oops...

Because you'd have to redefine love, or add in conditionals like excess or obsession which when added to love, make for something undesirable.

Why would you have to do that? I wasn't away that part of love's definition was that it is necessarily not negative

Methinks you mix up the two. Anger mishandled can lead to excess. Again we're having to add a qualifier. The saying : "Don't go sleep on your anger" illustrates the potential for anger to turn into what is really bad : hatred.

'mishandled'?

Anger alone can lead to murder... or it can inspire (to murder)... or it can explode your coronary (and murder you). How are you defining anger and hatred here? We apparently have much different definitions for the two