Hatred serves a great purpose. It serves as retribution for negative behavior, and w/o that there would be no cooperation. Studies on game theory have shown that w/o the ability to retaliate against someone for misbehavior, cooperation tends to break down. So if you eliminate retaliation you break down social cohesion.
Plus your own personal cohesion. W/o hatred people can walk all over you and your loved ones.
What about a scenario where me and mine cooperate on some collaborative undertaking - a mission to land men on the moon, say, or a project to split the atom, or whatever - precisely because we’re motivated by negative feelings about the other side in general, since we in particular don’t want 'em beating us to the punch? And so we pioneer computing breakthroughs for the sake of superior artillery calculation and ace cryptography and so on, all while building a better jet engine in between working on exciting new breakthroughs with submarines, and so on, and so on – the better to kill people and break their stuff.
Is that hatred, or love, or what, on your view of things?
Isn’t hatred at least half anger?
Anger is the best drug ever. I never feel so fully alive as when I’m angry. It’s better than crack. But it’s every bit as addictive. And it can make you do stuff you’ll never be able to live down.
Being forgiving of everything makes you a pussy, gets you crucified, gets your life’s message corrupted by cherry-pickers.
How many inventions came out of World War II?
To me, it’s not the emotion that makes one weak or strong, it’s the way it is handled. Action can cause strength, inaction can cause weakness.
Of course, there are a lot of nuances in that statement - and a lot of it becomes subjective. I see a man in love who doesn’t act, and I might think him weak. But he might be a man in love who knows that it cannot be, and therefore chooses not to act, and that might make him actually strong.
I see people who are angry about the economy, or homelessness, or senseless death, and do nothing. To me that makes them weak. I see others who take that hatred and channel it in to volunteerism, activism, even donations - and that gives them strength.
I think weakness and strength is determined more by a person’s character and how it chooses to respond to that emotion.
First, because a certain amount of aggression and animosity does impart a survival advantage, regardless of baseless assertions to the contrary. To be loving and polite is to tie your hands, to restrict the set of actions you will engage in, because some of them aren’t ‘nice’. Being mean and aggressive opens up the playing field and incentivizes you to strike first. Obviously this can easily give you a bit of an edge in many situations, no conspiracy theories necessary.
However, even if hatred didn’t provide a survival advantage, it could easily “stick around” anyway because it’s not genetic. Hatred and aggression are learned, if you can call something that’s so obvious than any one-year-old can figure it out “learned”. So you can’t breed it out of the species because it’s not bred in.
Did anyone else hear this in Edward G. Robinson’s voice? Or perhaps Chief Wiggums?