We thus see that it is possible for one man to love a thing and for
another man to hate it; for this man to fear what this man does not
fear, and for the same man to love what before he hated, and to dare to
do what before he feared. Again, since each judges according to his own
emotion what is good and what is evil, what is better and what is
worse, it follows that men may change in their judgment as they do in
their emotions, and hence it comes to pass that when we compare men, we
distinguish them solely by the difference in their emotions, calling
some brave, others timid, and others by other names.
For example, I shall call a man _brave_ who despises an evil which I
usually fear, and if, besides this, I consider the fact that his desire
of doing evil to a person whom he hates or doing good to one whom he
loves is not restrained by that fear of evil by which I am usually
restrained, I call him _audacious_. On the other hand, the man who fears
an evil which I usually despise will appear _timid_, and if, besides
this, I consider that his desire is restrained by the fear of an evil
which has no power to restrain me, I call him _pusillanimous_; and in
this way everybody will pass judgment.
Finally, from this nature of man and the inconstancy of his judgment, in
consequence of which he often judges things from mere emotion, and the
things which he believes contribute to his joy or his sorrow, and which,
therefore, he endeavors to bring to pass or remove, are often only
imaginary--to say nothing about the uncertainty of things--it is easy to
see that a man may often be himself the cause of his sorrow or his joy,
or of being affected with sorrow or joy accompanied with the idea of
himself as its cause, so that we can easily understand what repentance
and what self-approval are.
Love and hatred towards any object, for example, towards Peter, are
destroyed if the joy and the sorrow which they respectively involve be
joined to the idea of another cause; and they are respectively
diminished in proportion as we imagine that Peter has not been their
sole cause.
For the same reason, love or hatred towards an object we imagine to be
free must be greater than towards an object which is under necessity.
An object which we imagine to be free must be perceived through itself
and without others. If, therefore, we imagine it to be the cause of joy
or sorrow, we shall for that reason alone love or hate it, and that too
with the greatest love or the greatest hatred which can spring from the
given emotion. But if we imagine that the object which is the cause of
that emotion is necessary, then we shall imagine it as the cause of that
emotion, not alone, but together with other causes, and so our love or
hatred towards it will be less.
Hence it follows that our hatred or love towards one another is greater
than towards other things, because we think we are free.
_The Power of Love Over Hate_
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account