RE: Frank Discussion on Hate
May 26, 2010 at 8:39 pm
(This post was last modified: May 26, 2010 at 8:41 pm by fr0d0.)
(May 26, 2010 at 8:21 pm)Saerules Wrote:I'm banking on love being all good. I'm sure that's right. So far I don't think you've disproved this.fr0d0 Wrote: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?
(May 26, 2010 at 8:21 pm)Saerules Wrote:Show me thenfr0d0 Wrote: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
(May 26, 2010 at 8:21 pm)Saerules Wrote:1. Murder being the unlawful taking of life. Again... anger taken further = not anger.Quote: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'?
(1) Anger alone can lead to murder... or it can inspire (to murder)... (2) or it can explode your coronary (and murder you). (3) How are you defining anger and hatred here? We apparently have much different definitions for the two
2. Old people die on the loo from mild exertion.
3. Anger = justified, controlled rage, appropriate negative reaction; Hatred = harboured resentment, obstinate dislike ...a position from clouded logic.