Sociopath Community

Thoughts come from emotions. 

Interesting idea. Are you trying to say you get angry about nothing? Are you trying to say you process situations with your heart? You never thought about what you just processed? 

You get ripped off at a store and before you even notice you are ripped off you are angry for no reason? You get ripped off at a store and you did not think "I just got ripped off this is unfair"? 

Do you not remember when people come to you and ask...  Why are you sad? Why did you either spill your guts out or pretend it was alright? Were you sad because you were sad? 

Are people sad when they see a necklace? Are they not sad because they thought "Oh this necklace reminds me of my dear dead grandmother"? 

So you think emotions come without an initial analysis? I might as well get angry every time I see someone with two apples? In a mind of just emotions would it not make me sad to see the person did not share their apple with me?

Some might say emotions are a type of unconscious thought.

I may have been too narrow. I will think about this...

You'll have situations where emotion precedes thought (you panic in the dark before you calm yourself down and search for a light switch) and vice versa (you start thinking about how someone broke something of yours but you didn't get mad until you realized they never did anything to make amends).

"You could like something and it causes you to think, and we previously defined emotion as feeling, not thought. That thoughts are separate from emotions because thought is a period of thinking. What exactly is thinking then? You can think about emotions, “how did I feel then?” etc. So is thought just a period of increased attention? Or is it a sharp spike in attention focused on one particular thing that is clear? You can be emotional and have more attention, but usually if you are emotional you are going to be less attentive than you would be if you were thinking more. Then again, if you are emotional you are being attentive to your emotions, whatever they may be, and if your emotions are on something like the sun, then when you see the sun you are going to be attentive to it, but not be thinking about it. So you can pay attention to something and not be thinking about it at the same time. But you aren’t going to be paying attention to anything else. It seems that thought is more attention than emotion, however. If you try to “feel” your computer you still don’t give it as much attention as if you were thinking about your computer. Then again, it depends what you are thinking about your computer, if you are thinking that your computer sucks, you are going to give it less attention than thinking that it is great. It also depends what your feelings are about that computer. The thoughts and the feelings correspond, however. That is, if you are thinking it is bad, then you are going to feel that it is bad. Thus thought and feeling are really one and the same. But thoughts are really clearer than feelings. Thought and feeling may result in the same amount of attention to something, but thought is more precise. It is more precise for you to think that the computer is good, then to feel that the computer is good. When you’re running you have a lot of attention on the fact that you are running, and you’re not thinking about it or being emotional about it. This means that just because you like something, doesn’t mean that it is emotional. You might like running, but it doesn’t cause emotions in you. What does emotion mean then?  So the difference between emotions, feelings and thoughts is that you know what thoughts are about, but you don’t have as good an idea of what emotions and feelings are, as they are more obscure and harder to identify. hus once you find out what is causing the emotion, it is no longer an emotion. But it is a thought (that is, you now call the emotion a thought, so the thought is still probably generating emotion. In your mind then there is still an emotion, but this emotion is now “part” of a thought. You call it a thought instead of an emotion, because you generated the thought (and hence it also seems that you are now consciously also generating the emotion (the emotion coming from the thought))). So that would mean that all emotions have route in real things, and these real things can be explained with thoughts, so all emotions then are really thoughts that you haven’t realized; an emotion would just be a thought that you haven’t identified yet, so the term “emotion” goes away when you realize it is a thought (because that is what it really was all along, a thought) (though this thought might still be generating a feeling). You might be lazy however and not want to spend time thinking, which are what emotions are for. “Ah that gold sword is pretty” might be the emotion, but to your conscious mind you would have no idea that you like the sword because it is pretty, you might just know that you like the sword and it is making you emotional about it. Therefore, emotional things are really any feelings that cause unconscious or conscious thought. Feeling is also another word for unconscious thought. That then leads to the conclusion that thought can be emotional (because thoughts are going to be about things that can cause emotion). I think that emotions can be more emotional than thought, however, because emotions can contain more than one thought (while thoughts are very slow consciously), therefore causing it to cause more feeling, or be more emotional. While you can only express a few thoughts a minute, your emotions can contain endless numbers of thoughts per minute – they are not as exact and hence don’t make as much sense as thoughts do. So thought is just a lot of attention on one little thing. And emotion is attention on lots of individual things, or possibly one thing. So things that are emotional are things that cause you to think, consciously or unconsciously. And therefore they would cause you to feel, consciously or unconsciously. So the more you like something you can’t consciously identify as to why you like it, the more emotional it is, and the more you like something where you can consciously identify what it is, the more conscious thought it is going to cause, and the more logical that thing is going to be. Emotion is just unconscious thought."

Spatial Mind stated: source post

Prolonged hatred will stress out the physical body, disrupt sleep patters, accelerate the aging process, unpleasant dreams, chest pains, high blood pressure, organ failure, grandiose violent fantasies, shorten the lifespan and create other complications the majority would doubt. 

What about passive hatred, a hatred that isn't constantly on your mind until something triggers it? I don't imagine it having the same prolonged effect as one with an obsessive hatred. 

There are those I hate, but I tend to not really think about the sources until they are relevant. I don't forgive easily, but down the line I don't ruminate on it either. 
 

It's important to note we can only hate who we once loved or admired.  

Racism you already covered, which I'd still see as a misinformed version of hate within the right circumstances from a variety of potential sources, seeing as it can root from negative associations and misdirected damages just as readily as trained assumption, but what about the cause of a past trauma? If someone were raped or kidnapped for instance, they could hate the one responsible without having ever loved or admired them. They'd also consequently "lose sleep" along with so much more over it. 

The love/hate connection is pop psych BS rooting from the comparisons of pleasure/pain, light/darkness, and others, that the two stem from strong passions, and from losses paired with other fuel making for an easy gateway from one to the other. One can hate without the potential of love just as much as one can love without the potential of hate. 
 

Systematic stated: source post

Hatred is energy, energy has potential. Any excess in emotion can be steered in a different direction with the right mentality. 

What times have you used hatred to better yourself? 
 

Few emotions convert into passion and drive as well as hate does. There's a reason a good rivalry is valued.

 Rivalry typically doesn't root from hatred, but instead through a core sense of competition. 

Do you consider hate to be good?
At this point I would have to say no, but I don't try to be likable. Why, do you consider me more than human? Do you consider yourself artificial? I don't consider myself anything, and I consider you to be my equal.

Whatch' yall thinking?
I'm wondering if you cut yourself.

Have you used hatred to better yourself?
Oh yes, all that light sabre swashbuckling is very me.

I'll get some gov source for better understanding. 

"An experience of emotion is an intentional state—it is an affective state that is about something. Consequently, any description of emotion experience must go beyond pleasure and displeasure to give a systematic account of the phenomenological differences between emotions that we take to be psychologically distinct, such as anger, sadness, fear, pride, awe, and joy. Studies that focus on emotion words (e.g., angry, sad, afraid, guilty) to describe emotion experiences and studies of appraisals (i.e., the meaning of situations) reveal something about the content of these phenomenological differences."

"It is often assumed that arousal is essential to the experience of emotion because people perceive emotional feelings in their bodies. William James and later Antonio Damasio proposed that the experience of specific emotions results from the perception of specific and unique patterns of somatovisceral arousal. Schachter and Singer, in contrast, argued that the experience of emotion was due to the direct and explicit experience of a generalized autonomic arousal. Decades of research, however, suggest that neither of these views is correct in the strong sense (for a review, see Barrett et al. 2004). First, little support has been obtained for the idea that different categories of emotion are consistently associated with unique sets of visceral sensations. Second, different measures of autonomic, somatic, or cortical arousal tend not to correlate highly with one another, such that “arousal” is not a unitary phenomenon, suggesting that there is no single accepted definition of arousal. Third, people do not have automatic, immediate, and explicit access to autonomic and somatic activity. As a result, the exact role of bodily feelings in the experience of emotion is still an open scientific question."

"Continuously through time, the brain is processing and integrating sensory information from the world, somatovisceral information from the body, and prior knowledge about objects and situations to produce an affective state that is bound to a particular situational meaning, as well as a disposition to act in a particular way. As a result, core affective feelings and construals of the psychological situation very likely are perceptually categorized and experienced as a single unified percept, much like color, depth, and shape are experienced together in object perception. Building on this percept, a mental representation of emotion may be an example of what Edelman (1989) calls “the remembered present.”

Across this continuously varying landscape, patterns appear that occasionally constitute the conditions for the experience of emotion. In the view described here, an emotion experience is a conceptual structure stored in memory whose conditions include current perceptions, cognitions, actions, and core affect. A specific emotion conceptualization (e.g., a context-specific conceptualization of anger) is generated via a top-down, multimodel simulation that reinstates how these conditions have been experienced in the past, and this conceptual representation interacts with the existing affect-situation percept to produce the emergence of an emotion experience. In this way, a situated conceptualization (Barsalou 1999, 2003;Barsalou et al. 2003) of emotion (i.e., category knowledge about emotion that is situated in knowledge about the social world and is designed for action; Barsalou et al. 2003, Niedenthal et al., 2005) constrains the emerging perceptual categorization (for a discussion, see Barrett 2006b). In the resulting representation, core affect is foregrounded and bound to conceptions of the situation, and in so doing, transforms affect into an intentional state by allowing an attribution about its cause."

"In this chapter, we began by locating the study of emotion experience in a philosophical approach to understanding consciousness, because questions about emotion experience are essentially questions about consciousness and discussions about the nature of emotion experience are always grounded in some philosophical perspective, even if implicitly."

So I pretty much skimmed this article with bias eyes. I took out some quotes that might shed some light. So feel free to read source to pay closer attention to the words with any perspective.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1934613/

core affect is foregrounded and bound to conceptions of the situation, and in so doing, transforms affect into an intentional state by allowing an attribution about its cause.

The background noise of a person.However, the wiring is different for each...and how that interacts and is balanced against training/ conditioning, etc etc....many different outcomes. How one perceives their emotions , intensity is not necessarily apparent to  external observation. 

So...hatred may correlate with lack of respect, which feeds on itself. 

An endless debate that can be deconstructed ad infinitum, ad nauseum, and makes no sense as the emotion if not acted upon is of no consequence in and of itself. 

Over simplifying...but you get the idea..

Mhmm nice.

I kinda admire you primal. I see you are dedicated to peruse something when you want it no matter how big or small. 

Thank you. Figured you would be one of few that may understand...anger...is not hatred...but can become so...and when it does, it loses reason. Reasoning with emotion is a pointless effort in futility, and validating bullshit similarly. Anger/ hatred should not be confused for other than what it is....fear of hurt. What hurts? How much does it hurt? Tolerances are different.

In the final analysis...it's about Respect. What that is based on....is another thing...nuanced...I don't need to explain my meaning to you. You know it better than most. 

A person filled with hate is despicable, but some hate in necessary - to defend yourself and to impose order to other people (like when a kid is chewed out for screwing up).