Merriam defines
- hate as “intense hostility …” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hate
- hostility as " deep-seated … ill will" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hostility
- ill will as “unfriendly feeling” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ill will
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.
- bias as “an inclination of temperament or outlook” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bias
- bias as “to give a settled and often prejudiced outlook to”
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.
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.
I like that you responded to “I hate rape” with “this is persuading me to trust myself in being opposed to…hate[ing rape]” Yikes!
Relativists can’t stand for anything, it’s a cowardly position that comes from understanding uncertainty and our limitations (both very real). It’s wise to be “somewhere in the middle”, as black and white thinking is rarely accurate (or productive), but even for that attitude there are exceptions. Discernment is needed.
The “this” was vague. I was referring to autism stigmatization & accusation. That phrase in that comment was hateful & fallacious
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). 🤷
Right, that was certainly Aristotle’s interpretation on the concept of magnanimity. Aristotle claimed to have said,
(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,
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.
Is this an LLM? MOOOOOOOOODS!
Can you articulate this suspicion? Do I need to speak inauthenticly so that you don’t falsely accuse me?
This user was reported for being an LLM. I do agree that they have a very thorough writing style that is uncommon.
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
One that LLMs can never get right is asking them to cite a textbook.
I’m not sure if it’s a deliberate inability due to copyright concerns.