Wondering About Forgiveness

[Spockrates]

"Apathy" is a specific, whereas "not-hate" is a general.

Perhaps I'm speaking of apples and you're hearing oranges? When I use the word apathy, I'm speaking of an absence of any emotion, such as anger, resentment, empathy, concern, and the like. This would correspond to definition (1) given above, from dictionary.com.

So in the sense I'm using for the word, hatred would actually be more specific than apathy. For hatred is limited to only specific emotions and is an absence of only some emotions. But apathy is more broadly limited, insofar as it is an absence of all emotions.

But what do your ears hear when I say the word apathy?

 

[Spockrates]

You see? I'm thinking apathy cannot be hate, because hate requires hateful emotions, such as anger or resentment, but apathy is by its nature an absence of such emotions. Spock from Star Trek, who prides himself on his skill at suppressing all emotion, might be logically said to be apathetic, but not hateful.

 

[crossfire]

Perhaps I'm speaking of apples and you're hearing oranges? When I use the word apathy, I'm speaking of an absence of any emotion, such as anger, resentment, empathy, concern, and the like. This would correspond to definition (1) given above, from dictionary.com.

So in the sense I'm using for the word, hatred would actually be more specific than apathy. For hatred is limited to only specific emotions and is an absence of only some emotions. But apathy is more broadly limited, insofar as it is an absence of all emotions.

But what do your ears hear when I say the word apathy?

Non-hatred would cover whatever is not hatred, so would be more general than apathy. It could include apathy, friendliness, compassion, humor, or just about anything else that is not hatred.

 

[Spockrates]

Non-hatred would cover whatever is not hatred, so would be more general than apathy. It could include apathy, friendliness, compassion, humor, or just about anything else that is not hatred.

My apologies. I thought you were saying non-hate (or not hate) cannot be apathy, and apathy is hate. I now see you meant the opposite: Non-hate (or not hate) can sometimes be apathy, and apathy cannot be hate. Or am I still misunderstanding you?

 

[Spockrates]

So it seems, then that the words of Buddha we are discussing are perhaps ambiguous, for they could mean:

"5. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time. Hatred ceases by non-hatred [which can be apathy, compassion or any other emotional state not having hateful emotions]."

Or am I making an incorrect inference?

 

[crossfire]

My apologies. I thought you were saying non-hate (or not hate) cannot be apathy, and apathy is hate. I now see you meant the opposite: Non-hate (or not hate) can sometimes be apathy, and apathy cannot be hate. Or am I still misunderstanding you?

I would venture to think that you have it correct, for the moment. No guarantees. You may change your mind again.

 

[crossfire]

So it seems, then that the words of Buddha we are discussing are perhaps ambiguous, for they could mean:

"5. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time. Hatred ceases by non-hatred [which can be apathy, compassion or any other emotional state not having hateful emotions]."

Or am I making an incorrect inference?

I don't see non-hatred as ambiguous at all. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Spockrates]

I would venture to think that you have it correct, for the moment. No guarantees. You may change your mind again.

No doubt! One who has much to learn often has much to correct about his misconceptions.

[emoji4]

 

[Spockrates]

I don't see non-hatred as ambiguous at all. Your mileage may vary.

Yes, you might be right. I think Muller found the word ambiguous when he translated it as love. You know (and I now know) that the word might just as well mean apathy. Perhaps he knew better but was trying to make the text more palatable to Christians of the time. [emoji849]

It would seem, then compassionless Spock is just as forgiving as compassionate Socrates, and the complete sociopath is just as skillful at forgiveness as the empathetic Buddha, I think. Do ya?

 

[crossfire]

Yes, you might be right. I think Muller found the word ambiguous when he translated it as love. You know (and I now know) that the word might just as well mean apathy. Perhaps he knew better but was trying to make the text more palatable to Christians of the time. [emoji849]

It would seem, then that compassionless Spock is just as forgiving as compassionate Socrates, and the complete sociopath is just as skillful at forgiveness as Buddha, I think. Do ya?

Spock was half human, so was not compassionless. I would not say that a complete sociopath is just as skillful as Buddha, (and not just because compassion is associated with skillfulness,) but also because the complete sociopath does not have the wide array of tools as Buddha.

 

[Spockrates]

Spock was half human, so was not compassionless. I would not say that a complete sociopath is just as skillful as Buddha, (and not just because compassion is associated with skillfulness,) but also because the complete sociopath does not have the wide array of tools as Buddha.

Yes, you would think so. But Spock explains from time to time that Vulcans are capable of feeling emotions even more strongly than humans, hence their motivation to suppress them and develop the skill of apathy.

I agree with your premise about Buddha. I was having fun by using hyperbole. However, I say with sincerity that if Allfoak was correct in thinking I'm a sociopath, then I'd be more likely to be apathetic than many more sane than me, as I'd have a natural talent for forgiveness.

The upshot: A compassionate person might be no more skillful at forgiving than a completely apathetic person.

 

[crossfire]

Yes, you would think so. But Spock explains from time to time that Vulcans are capable of feeling emotions even more strongly than humans, hence their motivation to suppress them and develop the skill of apathy.

I agree with your premise about Buddha. I was having fun by using hyperbole. However, I say with sincerity that if Allfoak was correct in thinking I'm a sociopath, then I'd be more likely to be apathetic than many more sane than me, and so I might have a natural talent for forgiveness.

**holds Zen stick at ready**

The upshot: A compassionate person is no more skillful at forgiving than a completely apathetic person.

 

[Spockrates]

**holds Zen stick at ready**

LOL! Are you sure you disagree?

I mean, to forgive, one must use skill to attain a state is non-hate. Non-hate can be compassion, but can also be apathy. So why can't apathy be the sole cause of forgiveness, for the less compassionate among us?

 

[crossfire]

LOL! Are you sure you disagree?

I mean, to forgive, one must use skill to attain a state is non-hate. Non-hate can be compassion, but can also be apathy. So why can't apathy be the sole cause of forgiveness, for the less compassionate among us?

I can agree with the idea of this possibility being true for some beings.

 

[Spockrates]

I can agree with the idea of this possibility being true for some beings.

Then I'd like to thank you for helping me think this through. I have a better idea what forgiveness is than I had before. It was worth the effort to me.

[emoji4][emoji106]