There was a wise observer of human affairs which noted: Hate is not the opposite of love. Fear is. However, I come to restore the old relationship, because while fear and love are both deeply felt and ring within all the force of a mega-quake through the subjects conscious and subconscious mind, only love and hate are simultaneously conscious at the same magnitude. Fear is—in all reality—instinctual, while love, like empathy and other images that arise from the befittingly termed “mirror neurons” in the cerebral core, are not; they are learned. Not one was ever taught to fear, or for that matter, to enjoy something or like something, not by any truly complex process at any rate (no one here doubts the absent capacity for emoting or even sensing as far as a paramecium is concerned). However, it takes a great level of psychological consistency, as well as disciplined construction, for either love or hate to emerge in the greenhouse of the consciousness and remain a viable specimen. Not to say that there is no such thing as true love, but rather, it must seem naturally occurring to the subject, otherwise, one may overdo some aspect of maintaining this fragile meme, and it will expire. Not to say that hate is not equally difficult to maintain; rather, it is akin to a psychic weed, such that it flourishes unnoticed easily. Many people do not want to bother such a thorny and bothersome occupant, as detrimental to health as it often is, often leaving it to its preferred state of relative neglect. “The fine line between love and hate” is a perfect way to describe how such antipodal ideas coexist and can effectively cross-pollinate. It is the case of these things, as different as they are, to try and live peaceably with one another, that the world respects balance, and if impossible at the local level, then in the larger locality of a group.
Such is affection, the simplest strands, the meekest vines, that can reach out to people. All of these things are naturally unconscious, and do not affect life in a great way. But as attention is given to a desired idea, something to which we identify, or would wish to (the unconscious makes no distinctions between is and ought), then a real relationship, more than pure data, is born. Then, as is the nature of any normal custom anywhere, a one way path is erected to face this object of affection. (Naturally many are turned off by the nature of the work in psychology, which identifies the patient as ‘subject’ and all else as ‘object’, feeling that people aren’t in fact, objects of any kind. Indeed they aren’t, as the subject would agree, because all people are people, by way of subconscious transference. Really, the distinction is made between “self” and “other” dogmatically because of the nature of the concept: unraveling the strands that weave the cocoon wherein the subject awaits revelation upon a new day, or rather, a new mind. But, to an enlightened being of the universe, whether the [sub/ob]ject is different is pure wastefulness.) Then, as interaction increases, thoughts travel freely on this unofficial road to each other’s conscious mind. Disaffection, dislike, and trepidation are identical in process, however it often feels that one is being approached by something unwanted, primarily solicitation of some sort of contraband, as far as the subject is concerned. Whether it is realized or not, this too becomes a bi-way if the subject speaks his mind, offering the truth as a ‘fair’ exchange for some criminally offensive content, again being either physical or memetic. Often, as is the case mostly, either the traffic between people increases, or decreases, when such a politico-social economic situation is met. Very rarely does the interaction remain steady, unless there is some unconscious agreement, possibly unknown to the one or both of the partners here, that there not be a change in the nature of relationship. It is all objective, obviously, but when someone has accrued too much “trade debt” let’s say, then the situation either becomes a creditor/debtor financial feud, or turned over to some collection agency, which is, as all current cultures have unanimously agreed, the higher authority (natural or supernatural).
But why am I using such stagnant ideas as old dirty roads, or faceless people, packages of undisclosed content, and not a lick of irregularity and non-professionalism which then has so obviously defined the world up until this point? I am ‘objectiviz-ing’, which, I apologize, will end here. My dear reader, however few or many you are, I do not wish you to fear the truth nor feel the need to cringe from an assault on traditional sensibilities. I do believe in a holistic reality, and as such wish to involve as many people as I can in this working piece of passion about humanity and what that is, in a most quintessential sense. No, the relationships that people form are in no way unnatural, and even though something may be extraordinarily uncommon, it all follows from some natural law burnt into the back of our cortex. Such is the nature of a purely descriptive scientific standpoint, the trend that in all hope, will last much longer than its history up until now… It is a system which takes all possible lies and misunderstandings out of the equation, as there is nothing proscribing nature to be and act as it is, and only what can act as a good model to the universe can be correct. It is much as any good detective, and was in fact a famous line from Sherlock Holmes lore: “by eliminating the impossible we arrive at the truth.” In all reality, the impossible hasn’t occurred, mere human error has occurred. Definitions change, reality doesn’t; bringing us full circle again, as hate and love are really opposite to one another.
The case for this is as old as time itself: hate is a destructive force, and love, creative. Affection builds things, while fear repels them mutually. Only by disregarding the base and unhelpful inclinations can people coexist. This is, by all accounts, platonic love. Human relationships aren’t like electric outlets, where positive and negative flow so smoothly to allow energy passage out into the world as light or heat, or to operate some apparatus. They are surely dysfunctional, as there are very many repellent things about people, and roughly the same number of attractions, between husband and wife, mother and daughter, friend and friend. The whole special interests craze, in politics, religion, and society, is the reveal of this long submerged force in the human collective unconscious, for people to actively search for community, small pools of lower entropy, which, as entropy goes, will get smaller and more numerous as time wears on… often the powers of any one man are supplanted, repressed, yet the complete whole suffers not. It used to be the environment; mere inclement weather would be the bane of persons’ livelihood, yet now, humans control more and more of each other, and only the greatest of nature’s forces gives us pause, and the average man is subjected to the peal of thousands of millions of human forces that have supplanted this. Much as a phase change, water has no face, but ice has several facets to it, differing properties, and yet it is all merely a change from a liquid—flexible and ultimately uncontrollable state of material, to a tangible, shapeable, and three-dimensional form—solid state society. It is really hard to imagine what will happen when nature’s influence is reduced so much that this cube of ice is eventually transformed once more, to the coldest possible state allowed, and than all are, in a very real sense, one water molecule. But humans again, push and pull one another in a much less organized manner than a bundle of magnets; we are likely never going to replicate scientific experiments on a global scale. Unfortunately, I’ll have to leave this as is, at a mere 1,362 words