Loving People vs. Liking People

[DreadFish]

Alright folks, i've got one for ya. Simply put: can a person love and care for the well being of other people without liking other people?

Elaboration: Can a person love and care for the well being of other people though they have little interest in being around other people, don't necessarily want to get to know other people, and may not even like other people in general?

Would this be an irreconcilable contradiction, maybe an excuse to feel better about a sort of misanthropy, perhaps, or do you think these sort of qualities can coexist within a person quite naturally?

In this context, I will define "Like" as:
Verb
Find agreeable, enjoyable, or satisfactory.

And I will define "Love" simply in the open unconditional sense, not wishing harm and caring for one's well being.


Answers and discussion will be appreciated!

 

[Straw Dog]

Simply put: can a person love and care for the well being of other people without liking other people?

Sure, married folks do it all the time.

 

[savagewind]

Sure, married folks do it all the time.

LOL. Let's do a poll. How many people thought of that first thing.

I agree too. Yes it is not an uncommon thing to love but not like. Very common.

 

[DreadFish]

Thanks for the responses.

This question originates from my own disposition. While I do not wish harm on other people and wouldn't go out of my way to inconvenience anyone, I have no interest in most people and find that interacting with most people is not worth the effort

I would not go as far as misanthropy, "hatred" is far too strong a word; im not sure I could say I hate anything except stupidity. Nonetheless, besides those whom I deem "individuals" who think for themselves, think more deeply about things and, in general, live in "deeper" sort of way, I see the general populace as sheep, for the most part, and have no more interest to get to know them than I would to make a pet out of a squirrel. Sure im not gonna try to kill the squirrel or hurt it, and I hope it has a healthy meaningful life (as meaningful as you can deem a squirrels life, thats up to individual perspective ), but I dont want to pet it, I dont want to talk to it, and I dont want to take it home and feed it

Im not making a direct comparison between humans and squirrels, but they are both animals and I respect life in general and love the whole world im in and both of these are manifestations of life. So, I love people, they are part of the world I love and, in just existing and living, they contribute to my life, but I dont want to talk to most of them and im pretty much have no interest in their lives or getting to know them.

Im probably just a hermit at heart

 

[savagewind]

Thanks for the responses.

This question originates from my own disposition. While I do not wish harm on other people and wouldn't go out of my way to inconvenience anyone, I have no interest in most people and find that interacting with most people is not worth the effort

I would not go as far as misanthropy, "hatred" is far too strong a word; im not sure I could say I hate anything except stupidity. Nonetheless, besides those whom I deem "individuals" who think for themselves, think more deeply about things and, in general, live in "deeper" sort of way, I see the general populace as sheep, for the most part, and have no more interest to get to know them than I would to make a pet out of a squirrel. Sure im not gonna try to kill the squirrel or hurt it, and I hope it has a healthy meaningful life (as meaningful as you can deem a squirrels life, thats up to individual perspective ), but I dont want to pet it, I dont want to talk to it, and I dont want to take it home and feed it

Im not making a direct comparison between humans and squirrels, but they are both animals and I respect life in general and love the whole world im in and both of these are manifestations of life. So, I love people, they are part of the world I love and, in just existing and living, they contribute to my life, but I dont want to talk to most of them and im pretty much have no interest in their lives or getting to know them.

Im probably just a hermit at heart

It is nice. You are not hermit at heart. A hermit is one who chooses to live alone. You did not say you prefer to be alone. You said you do not like the populous in general. Who does? You are someone who values your time. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[DreadFish]

It is nice. You are not hermit at heart. A hermit is one who chooses to live alone. You did not say you prefer to be alone. You said you do not like the populous in general. Who does? You are someone who values your time. There is nothing wrong with that.

Well, I do actually like being alone

Besides close friends and small groups of people, I dont like being around people at all. It spaces me out, I can't think straight and it makes me nervous. Being around people really drains me and is a generally unpleasant experience

 

[savagewind]

Well, I do actually like being alone

Besides close friends and small groups of people, I dont like being around people at all. It spaces me out, I can't think straight and it makes me nervous. Being around people really drains me and is a generally unpleasant experience

Ahhh You are not alone here.

 

[Straw Dog]

Seriously though, it is possible to cultivate good will or loving-kindness for all life. This is love without attachment or aversion. I suppose that it also cannot be ignorant of the essential nature shared by others. It starts at home with the immediate frame of reference or stream of consciousness. If we cannot love this form without clinging then what hope do we have for loving others?

I also tend to have misanthropic tendencies at times. It manifests as a general aversion towards my preconception of popular opinion. I try to remember that opinions are impermanent and that so is life. Then I return to the pivot of the existential. Recently, I came to realize that practices like tonglen and metta are very rational pursuits.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I find misanthropic humanism to be perfectly consistent and rational.

 

[ChristineES]

You can love someone- care about their well being, hope they are happy, etc. without wanting to hang around them for one reason or another. Some people might rub us the wrong way although we do care about them.

 

[Draka]

I just thought about one of my aunts. My mother and her other siblings would all agree that they love and care about their baby sister, but the way the youngest sister acts and treats them, I can't really think of a one of them that can claim they actually "like" her very much. Not the first time I've seen that with siblings either.

So yeah, you can have love for others, care about others, and not really like them much.

 

[dust1n]

I find misanthropic humanism to be perfectly consistent and rational.

I'm still waiting for you to switch sides and join philanthropic defeatism.

 

[Me Myself]

Alright folks, i've got one for ya. Simply put: can a person love and care for the well being of other people without liking other people?

Elaboration: Can a person love and care for the well being of other people though they have little interest in being around other people, don't necessarily want to get to know other people, and may not even like other people in general?

Would this be an irreconcilable contradiction, maybe an excuse to feel better about a sort of misanthropy, perhaps, or do you think these sort of qualities can coexist within a person quite naturally?

In this context, I will define "Like" as:
Verb
Find agreeable, enjoyable, or satisfactory.

And I will define "Love" simply in the open unconditional sense, not wishing harm and caring for one's well being.


Answers and discussion will be appreciated!

I d say definetely. You can love people you dislike or that you find highly anoying.

 

[Brickjectivity]

You can hug someone with a pillow between you.

Alright folks, i've got one for ya. Simply put: can a person love and care for the well being of other people without liking other people?

You can, but its not the same as loving someone that you do like. Liking someone changes you, therefore it changes your love. You cannot love equally someone that you don't like.

 

[AdityaMookerjee]

The idea is, that do you love yourself, and that is why you love others? What if the others who love you, stop loving you? It seems, we love ourselves, identifying our properties. Then, we love others to an equal degree, perhaps, and we continue loving ourselves, or increase our love towards our imaginary 'personality', and it doesn't matter, if the other person is around, or not. If possible, love the basic human, and a person doesn't necessarily love every human being he/she meets, normally, so you don't have to love every existence on earth, if you are not aware of it.One needs self-understanding the most. This is of paramount importance.

 

[absols]

love is opposite to care

love is always related to oneself present superior sense

this is how it reveals that love as unconditionnal mean to another is a lie

that is how the unconditionnal mean is always from noone

it is a lie bc evil is the rule based on takin advantage from existence being true

so evil force the image of one being a god, so the idea that love is of god

love is all to evil always

care is to existence and existence is to truth

u cant care about urself but what is objective of it

bc care is always to objective reality, and here it links with truth of superior mean about else

truth superiority as the base of all rights and individuals free positive presence awareness

so caring about rights or superior intelligence recognition is of course possible to a certain limit of superior possibility

so about ur question

that is why the reactions here meant marriage relations or families ties, which by definition is the opposite to else so to an abstract identification of anyone

that what proves my beliefs that marriage is wrong also that there is no family in truth

but of course any should precious relations from birth bc they are true then too at their ends

while caring by definition mean else, one must b to care for smthg else

bc care is always relative so realtive in both senses

and when existence by definition is objective constancy then care is true

also as an answer to ur question i would say

this reveals the hypocrisy of all religions, when all is one living wether god or jesus or nature or watever plant as they believe

then the love or affinity rule is meant to force as it is consciously a lie
u r then being nice to stay as one for one all

this is also wat reveals evil being any and all religions base

generalizing the rule of else abuse as the way to b positive

instead of truth rule which is else recognition as the true way of finding oneself present free result

 

[`mud]

LOVE is the existence of the 'desire' to love, not the result of the doing.
That made sense a few seconds ago, now.........?
~
`mud

 

[`mud]

hey Absols, from another post of yours
You seem to have an important message to say.
I like a lot of what I read, but honestly, I can't figure out your message.
Example:
you said:"god existence is evil necessary"
I read, and thought:"god's existence is an evil necessity ?"
If so.....I'll read further, again for the third time.
Welcome aboard
~
`mud

 

[McBell]

Thanks for the responses.

This question originates from my own disposition. While I do not wish harm on other people and wouldn't go out of my way to inconvenience anyone, I have no interest in most people and find that interacting with most people is not worth the effort

I would not go as far as misanthropy, "hatred" is far too strong a word; im not sure I could say I hate anything except stupidity. Nonetheless, besides those whom I deem "individuals" who think for themselves, think more deeply about things and, in general, live in "deeper" sort of way, I see the general populace as sheep, for the most part, and have no more interest to get to know them than I would to make a pet out of a squirrel. Sure im not gonna try to kill the squirrel or hurt it, and I hope it has a healthy meaningful life (as meaningful as you can deem a squirrels life, thats up to individual perspective ), but I dont want to pet it, I dont want to talk to it, and I dont want to take it home and feed it

Im not making a direct comparison between humans and squirrels, but they are both animals and I respect life in general and love the whole world im in and both of these are manifestations of life. So, I love people, they are part of the world I love and, in just existing and living, they contribute to my life, but I dont want to talk to most of them and im pretty much have no interest in their lives or getting to know them.

Im probably just a hermit at heart

Seems to me the word you are looking for is apathetic.

 

[Sunstone]

Elaboration: Can a person love and care for the well being of other people though they have little interest in being around other people, don't necessarily want to get to know other people, and may not even like other people in general?

I think that, if a person had an active dislike of another, he or she would have some difficulty loving and caring for that person. In my experience, when one has an active dislike for someone, attempts to show concern, care, or love have a way of being too little, too late, or of otherwise going wrong.