Aren't these two things expressions? It's sorta similar to: if the beauty of a flower could be explained through a bunch of mathematical methods, would you still consider one as being equal to the other? (or doesn't it lose (or gain) something in the translatory process?)But they are still love and hate.
No one is denying that one couldn't develop hatred for someone that hurt his loved one. The point is that it'd be wrong, whereas love is right. Must you have right with wrong? There should not be an interdependency between the two - though, that does seem to be the case... Usually (to put it lightly)!OK. So, what in your mind follows from these in terms of conclusions or questions in relation to interdependency?
For instance, the first thing that comes to my mind is, what might one look for in neuroscience to demonstrate the simple complete idea that one feels "hatred toward a particular person because they have physically hurt someone they loved"?
The best definition for love that I could come up with was: acceptance + emotional component. On second thought, this doesn't sound good enough because you can still have love without the acceptance part (can you not?): I love people that I don't particularly like (which either means that I don't accept them or something about them, or that I do accept them, but I'm just not aware of it (weird)). Question: is love possible without any emotional involvement? Ex. someone preaching that emotions are bad, but then, at the same time, loving truth - that reminds me of "you can't say there are no absolute truths, because that very statement discredits itself." Another thing: can one love an object or develop an emotional connection to an object? (I say things like: I love this or that, but I don't consider that kind of love a genuine type - for instance, I wouldn't risk my life for... a pizza!)
Unintentional.Why did you reverse the order of the quotes?
My bad.That's because I never intended it to.