Opposite of Love

[Angrboda]

I don't get opposites existing on the same axis.

-5 and 5 are on an axis, and we assume they are opposites only if we assume that there's a 0 and that they're on the same axis. They are 2 different numbers and while their characteristics may be the similar you can't mathematically be both 5 and -5 . It presupposes that every real number (emotion) has an opposite. Yes you can feel emotionally inconsistent positive and negative emotions at the same time, but they are still distinct like 5 and -5. The only constant in the above is 0 (or -0, 0 and +0 for you math buffs) which I posit as the difference of emotion. Whatever emotion you are feeling it's opposite is no emotion. regardless of the characteristics of said emotion. You can feel more Love and less love (magnitude) but reducing less love to it's conclusion is 0 or no emotion.

Did that make any sense to anyone other than me? I feel I explained that horribly.

Having had mixed mania episodes in which I experienced crushing depression and extreme euphoria at the same time, I'm not sure I know what to think.

I understand your point about numbers, but similarly, I don't think I expressed myself very well. I'm not going to try to rephrase it any, nor is this necessarily a defense, but I would draw attention to Liebniz' law here. Accordingly, things are identical if they share the same properties. Going off that, the furthest that one could get away from being identical would be having properties that were in some sense opposite. Again, I think you could go two ways on that. It's true that love and hate or revulsion or whatever share the properties of existence, but then again, there's Kant's point that a hundred imaginary thalers have the same properties as a hundred real thalers, so existence is not a property. Depending on that, the only resolution consistent with Kant would be an existent that has different properties than love, as indifference differs from love in the property of being a non-existent emotion, and existence or non-existence isn't itself a property.

[tackattack]

If existence isn't a qualifier property, but we all subjectively detect emotional states in ourselves and others surely it has some measurable subjective existence? Maybe we should just assume emotions exist but can't be quantified. If you can agree to that then Kant's point is moot because there are other descriptive attributes and labels we give to hate, love, anguish, joy, disgust, etc. as a way to gauge what the emotion "is". Liebniz' law does not allow for Love to equal hate. They are discernible and therefore unique and therefore not opposites unless all unique attributes are exact opposites. With emotions being subjective I don't think the magnitude of an emotion will ever match exactly and that's why I have a hard time believing that love has an opposite emotion.

[possibletarian]

hrm... After digesting some of the responses I see some similarities.

We have
A. those that see the opposite of one emotion being another emotion
B. those that feel any emotion is just a degree on a scale and the opposite is a null position
C. people like possibletarian that just sit on the fence and refuse to make any assertion. (no offense meant, I hope none taken)

How do A type people explain feeling multiple opposing emotions at the same time or towards the same thing?

No offence taken at all.

I don't think there has to be apposite when describing complex emotions, I think love is a well described emotion on it's own, I think of such things as either fitting the description or not. In other words i can lack love or not show any which, would mean emotions fitting some other description would be manifest, or maybe total indifference.

Let me use the number analogy a moment, I have £50 in my back account and i spend it and have nothing, the lack of money is not the opposite of £50, even if i say spend £100 and go overdrawn by £50, i still don't instinctively feel i have the opposite of £50 I in fact owe £50 or have £50 less than nothing.

[tackattack]

You don't instinctively feel like you have the opposite of 50, but you do feel you have 50 less than what you did have. If that's all you had (and credit didn't exist, wouldn't feeling like being broke be the opposite of feeling you have 50 to spend? That's what I'm claiming. You can have more or less money, and it comes and goes, but when you have nothing to spend you still feel penniless or "broke". For me that is why the opposite of love is apathy/indifference.

[possibletarian]

You don't instinctively feel like you have the opposite of 50, but you do feel you have 50 less than what you did have. If that's all you had (and credit didn't exist, wouldn't feeling like being broke be the opposite of feeling you have 50 to spend? That's what I'm claiming. You can have more or less money, and it comes and goes, but when you have nothing to spend you still feel penniless or "broke". For me that is why the opposite of love is apathy/indifference.

I don't agree, having nothing is not an opposite of anything (other than having something i suppose) but that something remains undefined it could be any amount.  If i say a have something in my bank account (credit) it tells you I have something (rather than nothing) but in no way describes the measure of my wealth. In other words I could say I don't have any amount even if in credit, but maybe we are pushing an analogy way too far, this often happens. In other words when I have nothing, I feel like i have nothing not a lack of any given (random) amount.

If I'm indifferent I would never describe it as the opposite of love I would simply describe it as indifference. Maybe different minds intuitively think different ways.

Is everything that is not love the opposite of love, and at what point does it fall below the threshold of love ?

[tackattack]

[possibletarian]

[tackattack]

[possibletarian]

[tackattack]