Why do we dislike others?

I dont ever dislike anyone, because I realise that there is always a reason that they behave in the way they do, and that any action of theirs which I dont like results either from a genuine belief that its the right thing to do, or a genuine mistake. Nobody deliberately does things that they believe to be bad, unless they've been listening to too much gangsta rap and think its good to be bad, in which case they still believe they're doing good things!

So if I think I don't like someone, there's three possibilities - I don't understand them, or I'm making a genuine mistake in my beliefs, or they are making a genuine mistake in their beliefs. There is therefore never a valid reason to dislike another person, and I will try not to force my beliefs onto them because its just as likely that I'm the one who is making a mistake!

The other kind of dislike is where you dislike the things someone says/does/the way they look etc. rather than the person themself. This is not dislike of the person, it's just a matter of taste - stuff that you find displeasing to the eye/ear/whatever. It doesnt reflect badly on the other person at all but is a valid reason for not wanting to spend time with them because you dont enjoy it. People are like music - you can dislike the way it sounds, or what it stands for, but someone out there will always like it, and nobody is ever right or wrong about it!
Chris

 

thats all well and good...until you consider actual social deviants...eg. rapists, murderers...some may believe that they're doing the right thing if they are under some mental strain...but you can't tell me that child molesters for example think they're doing the right thing...and if i was ever in a situation with someone like that i'd have to say i wouldn't be too keen on them...

 

I can well imagine it's been a little while since you've seen a penis, but I can assure you that I know what mine looks like thanks

This brings up two important points. Firstly, it seems that people are confusing the issue of disliking someone with judging someone - and I find it amazing that hippies should need to have this distinction explained to them. The child molestation example is great in this regard. It's perfectly right and proper that you should dislike a child molestor, but it's also imperative that you should try and understand what's happened to them in their lives to make them the way they are (because after all, nobody chooses kiddy fiddling as a lifestyle option). 90% of child abusers were themselves abused as children.

The second point that this raises is personal choice. If you follow through the logic that we're all acting in a way that we genuinely believe to be correct, then you're arguing that we're all automatons with no personal choice. People have the capacity to choose between what they believe to be right and wrong, and some will persistently choose the selfish option. Of course the constraints of our upbringing and environment will affect our capacity to make this choice in a free and informed fashion, but we do still have a choice.

Take, for example, a rapist. Not a serial rapist or a sexual predator, but a bloke who's never done it before but can't take 'no' for an answer. He picks up a girl, she's a bit pissed, leads him on a bit, he tries to fuck her, she says know.... and he forces himself on her. Now, this person is making a choice. They know what's right and wrong, they aren't the victim of a fucked-up childhood..... they're making the free and informed decision that they will put their desire for sex above the freedom of the girl to say 'no'.

I agree that in many instances, we fail to understand people, and this leads to us judging them. I agree that we should try to empathise wherever possible. In fact, these are principles that I've practiced in my everyday life for as long as I can remember. However, there's nothing wrong with disliking a person and aknowledging this. It's proper and healthy. To do otherwise is to indulge in a fantasy world in which we all love each other and get along great. It doesn't exist. Yeah, I hope it does some day, and I think we should all practice compassion and understanding in an attempt to usher in that fantastic new world, but for now, it's fantasy. Failing to aknowledge a dislike for others will not bring forward the dawn of a new age, it will delay it. It's avoidance, and an unwillingness to confront our whole range of feelings. Closing your eyes to something does not make it go away.

Tell that to the girl being raped when you're failing to force your views onto the rapist.

 

They dislike me because I'm not that pretty. I dislike them because they are, very simple!

 

Its a good example but the same principle applies here - the guy is forcing himself on the girl because all his natural instincts tell him it is the right thing to do. Men have been programmed with those instincts for millions of years and the human race would not exist today without them. Unfortunately in the modern world which is so very different from our natural environment, acting on those instincts is no longer appropriate behaviour. Most of us have the strength of will to overpower those natural instincts but there will always be a few who have either less willpower or were born with much stronger natural instincts. For obvious reasons the human race has evolved to include rapists. Can we hate them for it? I don't think we should, but we do need to take whatever action is necessary to prevent them from hurting others.

I still maintain that all dislike for people is based on ignorance. I do very often feel dislike for peoples actions or behaviour but not for the people themselves because I can never know enough about them to make an informed decision on that.

For example, I hate the things that Bush does and the things he says, I even dislike the way he looks, but I don't hate him because his father brainwashed him from birth to think in that way, and he is a puppet with others controlling him anyway.

 

Fanks!

 

No he's not. He's doing it because he thinks he can get away with it, and he makes the choice to take that risk, and to sublimate his moral faculty.

So if I'm understanding you correctly, then you're arguing there is no freedom of choice, and we're all acting in a pre-determined fashion. If that's not what you're saying, then your argument doesn't make sense.... because we're exercising our free will when we decide whether to follow, for example, a biological drive, or whether to act according to our moral code. If you are saying that we have no free will, and that we act simply according to instinct, then there's little point in us striving to better ourselves, is there?

What is it about this concept that people find impossible to grasp? I think you guys all have some issues of your own that you need to sit down and work out before you come projecting them in this thread! Let me spell it out yet again...... disliking someone does not involve judging them, or even for that matter hating them. Disliking someone, hating them, and judging them are three entirely distinct concepts that should not be confused. I'm not suggesting that hate is ever a valuable emotion, but the act of disliking someone can inform us of who our intuition believes are the people we should best avoid.

 

I have to take you up on this one I'm afraid!

Neither myself or anyone I know (I hope) has ever had these instinctual reactions to women on any level, not even that primal level that makes you need to eat. Rapists are people with real problems, mostly having experienced similar experiences themselves. This would suggest that it's not anything ingrained at all and more a form of damage than an evolutionary necessity.

 

If you read back over what I was saying, you'll see that actually I said we both have natural instincts and freedom of choice, which in most cases will override natural instincts, but in some extreme cases might not. For example we might have a fear of spiders - we know they are harmless here, but an ancient natural instinct makes some of us very afraid of them because our ancestors came from places where poisonous spiders existed. The rape instinct must, in some people, operate in similar way.

Our belief is equally as valid as yours, and we have an equal right to express it.

Now that is a good point - we could have an instinctual dislike of certain people, which overides our logical decision that we shouldn't dislike people without understanding them. I would say that dislike would be the wrong word though, perhaps distrust, or a desire to avoid?

Chris

 

Since probably neither of us know a rapist (or at least neither of us are aware of knowing a rapist!), we cannot know or find out what drives those people to behave in the way that they do, we can only guess.My guess is that either or both of a natural instinct to reproduce and past experiences could play a part. I think its unlikely that a significant proportion of rapists have been raped themselves, that sort of scenario seems to apply more to paedophiles, which is why I picked on instinct as a likely cause.

 

So what you're saying is that bad choices are only ever instinct, not freedom of choice? That's no choice at all, and amounts to exactly the same thing. In your philosophy, where does choice enter the equation?

You're being incredibly ignorant here. I wasn't disputing your right to your own point of view, I was disputing your inability to understand the distinction between disliking someone, hating them, and judging them.

Nope. I think 'dislike' can fit the bill just as well. I also make a logical decision to dislike people whose behaviour/attitude/lifestyle repulse me.

You're moving the argument away from the example of the casual rapist (who may only ever rape once) which I was using to illustrate my point. Such a person is very unlikely to have been abused themselves, since they're not socially dysfunctional, nor a serial offender. Simply someone who chooses to be selfish. And actually, I have know men who've raped women.

 

I disagree. Casual and serial rapists are usually two entirely different breeds. It's not always about an inability to stop themselves, but rather an unwillingness. To suggest anything else is, as I've already pointed out, to suggest that we effectively never have any freedom of choice, and that all our actions our predetermined by biology and environmental factors. Unpleasant though it may be to accept, some people have the capacity to make informed, moral choices, yet still opt to behave destructively.

No, not at all. Although social pressure does help to create a framework for what is and isn't considered to be acceptable behaviour. However, disliking someone isn't about attempting to reform them - it's about our personal reaction towards the way a person behaves. It's about us, not them.

Sorry, but this is patronising rubbish. You're making huge assumptions about me while choosing to ignore what I've repeatedly said - disliking someone does not preclude understanding them, nor does it imply a simplistic judgement of their behaviour. I've known many rape and abuse victims over the years. I've always provided them with whatever support I was able, and I've always advocated attempting to understand what motivates the behaviour of the abuser. As I've said before, 90% of abuse victims have themselves been abused. Lining up to form a lynch mob for abusers might be great for your moral image with your mates, but it doesn't help to address the problem. This has always been my argument. It's therefore more than a little insulting to have you tell me that I don't take the time to understand people's actions. The word 'rape' certainly doesn't scare me, nor does it motivate me to avoid debate of the real causes.

Rubbish. It may be pointless to the victim, but for the person who dislikes the rapist, it informs their moral framework and social structure. I still think you're confusing judgement, hatred and dislike.

I'm very sorry to hear that. However, I would point out that the example I specifically used to illustrate my argument was 'casual' date-rape. I believe people who rape repeatedly, be it within marriage or any other context, are most likely in need of help and understanding. These were not the people I was talking about - as I believe I made clear.

 

Coolies. No probs then.

Indeed it is. But the motivation of the responsible individuals varies widely. You were talking about understanding people - well surely that end isn't served by categorising all rapists together?

Not necessarily. For the casual rapist, they may well still consider their actions t be morally and socially unacceptable, but still choose to rape because they decide to prioritise their personal sexual satisfaction above other moral considerations.

Obviously. But surely there's a distinction between an individual who is so emotionally damaged that their ability to make an informed choice has effectively been inhibited, and an individual who is still exercising an informed free will?

I disagree. Again, it's not necessarily that they find the act morally acceptable, but rather that they choose to ignore the morality of the act.

No problem. Sorry for the misunderstanding. But I don't see why disliking someone even needs to be justified. If I want to dislike someone, I am free to do so. It's my personal reaction to a person based upon how I perceive them. As I've said before, it doesn't preclude understanding them, or imply any inherent judgement, so it's not as though my disliking someone precludes my rational assessment of a person and their motivations.

Can you explain to me what aspect of disliking a person is destructive? I agree that in many instances, disliking the actions of person rather than the person themselves can be valuable - and indeed this is something that most of us will practice when those close to us behave in ways with which we disagree. But that still doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with disliking a person.

I agree. But the two things are not mutually exclusive. It's quite possible to understand the distinction between different forms of rape while acknowledging that the trauma suffered by the victim is still the same.

I agree. And this is why I still think that you're confusing dislike and judgement. I always seek to understand people's behaviour, whether I like the person or not. If I feel that a person's background explains why they behave in the way that they do, then I don't judge them for it. In some cases, I may still actually like the person. I can think of at least one strong example of this in my own life. I have a close friend who frequently behaves in the most infuriating of ways, but I understand why he does, and I still like him as a person.

Again, not necessarily. This will vary wildly from person to person. I also think that what you're really saying is not that this person's view of what is morally and socially acceptable will change, but rather their view of what they can get away with.

But in disliking the person I'm not seeking to inform my understanding of them. That's an entirely separate faculty. Even if I dislike a person, I will still seek to understand them. I do not allow my judgement to be clouded by my feelings towards a person. Again, disliking someone and judging them are two distinctly separate processes.

Disliking someone is a reaction to the a person as we assess their affect upon us and the way in which they impact upon our lives. I can dislike people for a number of reasons, but this does not cloud my understanding of them. Disliking someone is a choice about what's healthy to have around you as much as anything else.

I think that to dislike a person is a healthy reaction to how we perceive others. It stops being healthy if it becomes a judgement, or if it mutates into hatred - and it should never cloud your willingness to understand a person. Disliking people is part of life. It's part of who we are.

Interestingly, I think this last post has been one of your most rational and intelligent posts. I disagree with much of what you say, but when you take the time to put your argument across thoughtfully you're clearly able to discuss these serious issues in a productive and informed fashion, without the need to be confrontational. I do wonder..... for all you talk about understanding, forgiveness, happiness etc etc.... you seem to have a lot of suppressed anger and antagonism. That's not meant as a criticism, but rather an observation. Oh yeah, and not typing with a Somerset accent helps

 

Now we're getting somewhere. Disliking people doesn't' cause me personal anger or upset, so how's it destructive to me? If this is what it comes down to, then you're advocating something that's ultimately just your personal, subjective preference, when it might not be suitable to others.

I actually have a lot of time for that theory. I agree that many of our actions are motivated from fear or love, but I disagree that everything can be reduced to one of these two emotions.

Yes and no. Defensiveness is clearly the underlying motivation, but it manifests itself as antagonism.

Yes, but I suspect that what you're really doing is attempting to bury some stuff. It seems to me (and I admit I don't know you well enough to claim any degree of certainty) that what you're actually doing is denial.... attempting to bury 'negative' emotional reactions in an attempt to manifest happiness. I'm also not convinced that all the emotions that you class as negative are indeed negative. Anger and dislike, for example, are often valid emotional reactions. They only become negative if we allow them to dominate us in such a way that they determine our behaviour. I think your avoidance of 'negativity' is an unhealthy pattern whereby you suppress perfectly healthy emotions from fear of entering into a destructive cycle. In the long run, I don't think you'll find true happiness that way. But hey, what do I know?

Now that one's an issue all of my own. Having lived for ten years with the Somerset dialect, I now find it indicative of narrow minded, inbred ignorance. Yes, this is an overly negative association, so you'll just have to cut me some slack on that front. I also see colloquial typing as an unnecessary affectation, and it's interesting to see that when you abandon it, this has also corresponded with your communicating more clearly and effectively than I've ever seen you do before. Maybe it's just coincidence, but I suspect it's more about you projecting a front. No offence intended again, just observations (correct or incorrect, I dunno). I also think you're a lot more intelligent than you generally appear, and I find it interesting that this is something that seem to hide? Sorry to sound like a shrink, but I can't suppress my curiosity.... are you afraid of being seen as intelligent? Does it threaten you in some way? I can honestly say I'm surprised by the way you've expressed yourself in the last couple of posts. I've always thought you were more intelligent than you'd like people to believe, but seeing you drop the front so suddenly was a bit unexpected. What's up with that?

 

No, I'm saying nobody believes what they are doing is a bad choice at the time, whether concious decision, or by a decision unconciously influenced by instict, people never deliberately make bad decisions, although they might regret them later. Also 'Bad' is subjective. What you consider bad, someone else might consider good. Nobody is right or wrong, but the majority view is normally accepted, for example not everyone believes that rape is wrong (the rapist doesn't at the time he's doing it), but the majority do, so they imprison rapists to enforce their view. I suspect that without the fear of imprisonment, a large proportion of the male population would be potential rapists.

Perhaps you are being ignorant? How do you know? Its very arrogant to assume that you are right and everyone else who has a different view must be wrong!

disliking someone is having bad feelings about the person themself, as opposed to their actions. Hate is just a very strong form of dislike. Judging someone is making decisions about whether their actions are right or wrong, based of your own beliefs rather than their beliefs. I think you should only judge someone by how true they are to their own beliefs, you should not judge others by your (different) beliefs.

Then you perhaps need to learn to differentiate between disliking people and disliking their actions.

You are missing the point. Study history, genetics, etc. and you will realise that rape was until recently a necessary part of human evolution, and without it the human race would probably have become extinct a long time ago or not developed to the same level. In the modern world rape can no longer play a part in evolution (although it still does in developing countries without contraception and abortion - see the recent stories of how the soldiers of the stronger invading army raped all the women and therefore passed on the stronger genes). We are all decended from hundreds of rapists (both casual and serial) and must have to a greater or lesser extent inherited the instinct.

You may have seen recently on the news a story that geneticists have discovered that several million people are all decended from one man, genghis khan, who killed the men and raped all the women in each village he conquered. The point? The genes of rapists tend to be very successful!

I believe that rape is wrong both because of the suffering it causes to the victim and because it no longer plays a part in the evolutionary process, which has now totally failed in the western world anyway. Others may believe differently. On the other hand, as a soldier in a conquering army in a country with no abortion or contraception, rape could actually be morally right, because it would make the human race as a whole stronger and better and therefore more likely to survive. Controversial but sadly true!

Some people may not have the ability to over-ride their natural instincts, or indeed they might even believe that it is unnatural and therefore wrong to do so! Or, in the kind of cases you are talking about, in the heat of the moment under the influence of alcohol, selfish instinct might just take over in a normally logical and unselfish person. We must do all we can to protect ourselves from these people, but we have no right to condemn them for doing what is natural and possibly also right according to their beliefs, certainlyin the heat of the moment they will beieve it is the right thing to do.

 

You assume here that instinct is hereditary, that's not known to be the case at all. I would also have thought that if a child knows they are the child of rape they would be less likely to rape other people having seen first hand the pain and suffering it can cause. A study if history will reveal just about whatever you want it to depending on where you look and a study of genetics will say nothing at all about learned behaviour patterns (unless you are looking at studies from people who haven't got a clue what they're talking about). A study of evolution will show you no NEED for rape, just migration. in all but 3 cultures the invaders have been absorbed into the culture they invaded after a few generations and the victims remained the stronger genetic trait almost wiping out the invaders.

 

Rubbish! Of course they do! That's the nature of free will - that we can see a choice, and still choose wrong - even when we know it's wrong.

Absolutely. So what's your point?

I agree entirely. But I'm still not sure what point you're trying to make?

Read what I'm writing and pay attention. I'm not debating your right to an opinion.... I'm debating your inability to distinguish between the different types of behaviour to which I'm drawing your attention... dislike, hate and judgement. Your ignorance stems not from the fact that you disagree with me, but from the fact that you don't seem to be listening to the point that I'm making. Let's run over this again:

You: For obvious reasons the human race has evolved to include rapists. Can we hate them for it?

Me: What is it about this concept that people find impossible to grasp? Let me spell it out yet again...... disliking someone does not involve judging them, or even for that matter hating them.

You: Our belief is equally as valid as yours, and we have an equal right to express it.

What makes you ignorant is that I'm drawing a distinction between hatred, judgement, and dislike, and you accuse me of not tolerating the opinions of others. It has nothing to do with opinions. Hatred, dislike, and judgement are three different things. If you insist on confusing them, and then use this as a basis for accusing me of not respecting your opinion, then you're ignorant.

Maybe for you, but certainly not fo me. If I dislike someone, it's a rational reaction to the way I view the person. It does not inhibit my understanding of them, nor does it make me deal with them irrationally. Hatred leads to people abusing other people, and is usually an irrational emotional reaction, and generally it precludes a willingness to understand the other person. The two things are not at all the same.

What a load of crap. Are you suggesting that the only basis for making a moral assessment of someone is whether they're true to their beliefs? Where would Hitler stand in this philosophy?

And you need to learn not to make false assumptions about people. There's plenty of people who I like, and who's behaviour is not always acceptable. In these instances, I dislike the person's behaviour and not the person. There are people who have suffered a great deal in their lives, and who therefore behave accordingly... I dislike the behaviour, but I empathise with the person. Then there are people who have no such excuse, and who consistently choose to behave in a certain way, even though they know better. These people I dislike.

No, I'm not missing the point at all. We have many instincts that are destructive, but our moral capacity enables us to rise above them. If we were unable to rise above them, then the threat of prision would not be sufficient to deter us, would it?

I see. We have no right to condemn the casual rapist. I think you've done more to bury your own argument than any retort could possibly do.

 

Off to Cornwall for the weekend, so no replies from me for a while

 

people dislike other people because some people are just plain arse-holes, who wants to be friends with an arse-hole? not me!

 

No offence, but generally people who're burying stuff don't stick up their hands and say "hey, fair cop!". The nature of suppressing emotion is that we don't realise we're doing it until after the event. Still, we could debate this one forever and never agree, eh?

You're not describing the nature of anger, you're describing the way that you react to it as a result of your particular conditioning. This shouldn't lead to you rejecting anger, but rather it should lead to you addressing the reasons that anger makes you react that way.

Anger, like any other emotion, is perfectly healthy. It's only when you let it dominate you and become out of balance that it becomes a problem.

Emotions are meant to be reacted to, or there's not much point to them, is there?

Well, that's what a lot of people say right before a breakdown. I guess we'll settle this in five years time when we see if you're leading a healthy and happy life, or if it's all fallen apart around you

No, that's not what I said. I said 'negativity'. Note the inverted commas. What's perceived as negative and what actually is negative are two different things. I think you label many things as negative (such as 'dislike') in an effort to avoid dealing with them.

For that to make sense, you'd need to define what you mean by negativity.

I really don't want to get draw into amateur psychiatry, but it seems I can't help it! I find this passage very revealing. Festivals and clubs are no more full of happy people than anywhere else. They're full of people who're trying to forget their problems. I find it interesting that you associate something that masks emotional reality with positivity.

OK, I'm puzzled. If you're the happiest you've ever been, why should you be on the verge of mentally falling apart?

It's great that you're doing this, but I still think if you could take a further step back, you'd recognise that a lot of your belief system is actually fulfilling the same function - protection. You're erecting barriers to avoid dealing with uncomfortable reality.

Keep it up. Your much more pleasant and likeable once you drop the bullshit.

My pleasure