I noticed that no gift to the world my precious words for too long so I decided to fix it. What could be the subject today? I could talk about the case or the case Bertolaso \u200b\u200bDi Girolamo (Ständige ovation) - Punch - n'drangheta or appropriate electoral PDL or choose a topic case. Obviously will choose at random. Let's talk about
"hate" and "love" starting from the definition provided by my precious vocabulary. "I hate: 1) feeling of great hostility for which you want to hurt others, 2) a sense of repugnance, of opposition, intolerance for anything."
As for the word "love" my vocabulary can provide up to a column and a half. And while this seems significant. I write only the first two definitions: "1) suffering intense feeling of deep devotion, or tenderness, 2) inclination for a strong and unique person, based sexual instinct, which is manifested as physical desire and affective pleasure union. "
Now some thoughts of the lowest interest.
The first thing you notice is the extent of hatred. I mean. Hatred is the feeling of those who wish evil" others " . The "others" may be Gino, Gino whole family or the whole human race. It means a love instead tilt "exclusively" for one person. If I love Gina can not love Pierre.
I do this thing I do not want resign. Because one can love to hate everyone but one person? You will all agree with me that it would be better the other way: no doubt we live in a better world.
And why such a definition castrating? know Gina and I find that I love so many things about her that I can not do without. After a month I know Piera, and repeat the magic. And then? Vocabolariescamente is not possible? Would it not be a cultural heritage of our Western civilization based on Christian morality of mold? Or the casus I have outlined above is impossible, and then if I love you - I really love or so I believe - Gina even I see the beauty (in every sense) of Pierre? I have a theory but it is still in the conceptual closure.
step further.
Love is founded "sexual instinct" and "desire manifested as physical and emotional pleasure of the union." Here come into play two other interesting points. The first. Love is based on instinct sex? Certainly. But to what extent? If I'm not as horny, do not love you anymore, and the matter is closed? According to this definition would be easy to tell when a story is over, but in reality it is not. And I know I do? I pull out the drawer to the second part, what makes close, separated by an insignificant "and" merge the physical and emotional union. Then there is this affective component! And if there was only this? The vocabulary seems to prevent us from talking about love. And he's right. How many times you would like to join in a physically be X and at the same time, you remove the head to bite? So it is true that if you do not brush it off with little more or have a big problem but not the end of love.
And where is it hatred in all this chatter? It has no weight, is a feeling too easy to prove.
short, where I wanted to with all this rubbish? Nowhere. I only know one thing: the vocabularies they understand little of these things.
"hate" and "love" starting from the definition provided by my precious vocabulary. "I hate: 1) feeling of great hostility for which you want to hurt others, 2) a sense of repugnance, of opposition, intolerance for anything."
As for the word "love" my vocabulary can provide up to a column and a half. And while this seems significant. I write only the first two definitions: "1) suffering intense feeling of deep devotion, or tenderness, 2) inclination for a strong and unique person, based sexual instinct, which is manifested as physical desire and affective pleasure union. "
Now some thoughts of the lowest interest.
The first thing you notice is the extent of hatred. I mean. Hatred is the feeling of those who wish evil" others " . The "others" may be Gino, Gino whole family or the whole human race. It means a love instead tilt "exclusively" for one person. If I love Gina can not love Pierre.
I do this thing I do not want resign. Because one can love to hate everyone but one person? You will all agree with me that it would be better the other way: no doubt we live in a better world.
And why such a definition castrating? know Gina and I find that I love so many things about her that I can not do without. After a month I know Piera, and repeat the magic. And then? Vocabolariescamente is not possible? Would it not be a cultural heritage of our Western civilization based on Christian morality of mold? Or the casus I have outlined above is impossible, and then if I love you - I really love or so I believe - Gina even I see the beauty (in every sense) of Pierre? I have a theory but it is still in the conceptual closure.
step further.
Love is founded "sexual instinct" and "desire manifested as physical and emotional pleasure of the union." Here come into play two other interesting points. The first. Love is based on instinct sex? Certainly. But to what extent? If I'm not as horny, do not love you anymore, and the matter is closed? According to this definition would be easy to tell when a story is over, but in reality it is not. And I know I do? I pull out the drawer to the second part, what makes close, separated by an insignificant "and" merge the physical and emotional union. Then there is this affective component! And if there was only this? The vocabulary seems to prevent us from talking about love. And he's right. How many times you would like to join in a physically be X and at the same time, you remove the head to bite? So it is true that if you do not brush it off with little more or have a big problem but not the end of love.
And where is it hatred in all this chatter? It has no weight, is a feeling too easy to prove.
short, where I wanted to with all this rubbish? Nowhere. I only know one thing: the vocabularies they understand little of these things.
0 comments:
Post a Comment