I think a decent analogy would be alcohol. If I want to do something outrageous and stupid, I can do it without alcohol, and if I need alcohol to do something stupid, I obviously do not want to be doing something stupid. The same can be said for anger. If I believe it is the better of two evils to hurt someone, I don't need anger to do it, and if I need anger to do it, it must not be justified. Hate is pretty much identical to anger, except I'd wager that it is more likely to be based on theoreticals and generals, rather than isolated instances. So down-grading allows for you to be more rational and clear-headed, meaning any hate-fuelled decision you would have made would be made (or rejected) based on greater reasoning, rather than the impulse of a destructive emotion like hate.Fagotto said:How is it irrational? Just saying "You gain nothing from it" does not suddenly make it irrational. Not all things need to be gained from. Nor is your personal reasoning convincing on its own. I can understand it, but I don't see why I should accept that as the only rational reason to hate things.Biosophilogical said:Because it is irrational; more so than other emotions. You gain absolutely nothing from hatred. It is dark and twisted, and taints anything it touches. The only thing I can see hating without alternative[footnote]Meaning you cannot justify a substitute emotion, or in some way re-interpret the subject to be anything less than hated[/footnote] is someone being a colossal, genocidal dick yet also being intelligent enough to not be that way through brainwashing or sociopathy. In other words, someone deriving pleasure and satisfaction from the detriment of others for no other reason than they are a despicable creature; not because their species is unavoidably genocidal, or that they had abusive parents, or they have a genetic predisposition to all things hateful and cruel, or any other explanation that could be reasoned for.Fagotto said:Why does it need to achieve anything? It's just an emotion. I have a reason and for that reason I hate them. What is the benefit in reducing it to a less intense emotion? How is it at all more practical? Hating doesn't require action, it's simply the intensity of how much I dislike it.Biosophilogical said:Okay, I've quoted you just so that you can correct me if I'm wrong.Wolfy2447 said:-snip-But what does hating achieve? I think the point was that hating something doesn't change anything. Either you have a legitimate reason, which means you have a non-hate reason to try and stop/hinder/prevent action/person/thing 'X' from doing whatever it is you consider worthy of hate; or you do not have a legitimate reason, in which case there is no reason to hate them.Fagotto said:Because they're the sort of people who don't mind deliberately causing people trouble when the people don't necessarily deserve it.Wolfy2447 said:Why hate lulzsec??
It would seem more reasonable to figure out why you hate them, put your emotions to the side, and reduce it to the less intense, but potentially more practical "I disagree with their/its ideals/consequences, and therefore feel it is important that, when given the opportunity, work towards a more beneficial and less harmful ideal/consequence."
In any case but that, whether a lesser extreme or reasonable circumstance, it can be self-reasoned down to pity, or a rational opposition. I can honestly say I do not hate anyone, because I can always find a reason people behave the way they do, even if it is as simple as "They are a selfish greedy bastard".
But why should it be brought down? You haven't answered what it would gain me. It seems odd to throw that hate gains me nothing as a point while not answering what your alternative gains me.
So I consider it more productive and beneficial to avoid destructive or stupid emotions/states of mind so that a more rational decision can be made.