|
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
If they were distant points on the same spectrum then it is implied that you would have to pass through a myriad of points along that spectrum to move from one to the other. This is not the evolution of feeling that I have observed and experienced. Rather then moving gradually through multiple stages from love to hate and vice versa people often move quickly between the two experiencing little or no other emotions along the way. Love can turn to hate and hate to love in an instant because they are parallels, not opposites. Both are intense and complex emotions, the only difference being the connotation one applies to them... love being positive, hate being negative. If you view the spectrum of emotional attachments as being two parallel continuums (one positively connotated, the other negatively) it fits better with the human experience of transitioning from a positive to negative emotional attachment to someone in short order without passing through other intensities of emotion, as you simply jump from the positive to the negative spectrum. |
But is the scope of human emotions qualifiable to the point of mere binary reduction? Positive/negative - light side/dark side, et cetera. In our physical and natural world, I don't see there being anything outside of the savagery and the crudeness that comes from every animal striving to survive in Mother Nature's sick playground. But metaphysically, I still do not see hate or love as competitive emotions, as they all too often serve the exact same purpose - to consume.
When I exhibit the very human sensibilities of western magnanimity, I am serving a purpose. When I exhibit socially abhorrible acts of malice and hatred, I am still serving a purpose. This purpose is always with myself in mind. Now I know that as a Christian, you would argue that not all emotional attachments are selfish, and that it is possible for people to give without any hope of receiving whatsoever, but I simply do not see this. If you love without hope of reciprocation [reward], you are still geaning your so-called 'positive' emotions from said act, or you are doing it to win the favour of some imagined[!] deity - or, most seemingly common of all, you are serving a social purpose, some 'greater good' by means of acts out of love and positivity. I see hatred as merely a more pure and honest form of this selfish dynamic - is that justification for cruelty? No, but it's certainly more individualistic to serve oneself and hope [love?] to incite this within others.
My point is that positivity and negativity are outcomes with means we have arbitrarily assigned to them when, in reality, have seemingly random repercussions we cannot possibly anticipate, yet have fabricated a culture of reactions in order to give reason and achievement to the cohesion of our species. Whilst I do agree that our notions of love and hate are not polar opposites of one, linear spectrum, I reject the notion of actual indifference as a factor, as everyone has their motivations for feeling and acting the way that they do; few of these emotions being truly quantifiable as part of any measure, and merely just memetic programming made to serve a purpose that is, for all intents and purposes, natural.
___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
|
