Exactly. The analogy doesn't work. People is just term for humans in general. Treating a group who (by definition) are people as if they are not people is not comparable to treating a group who aren't people as if they aren't people. The relationship between the subject and the actions aren't the same; since all an analogy is is a comparison between relationships, the analogy fails.mendel wrote:The fact that we respect women as people doesn't enter the analogy: if it did, it wouldn't work:
1) Not my job to come up with your references.So what should I be referencing?[1] And would it actually matter?[2] Or do you just like to dis Freud?[3]
2) Yes. Freud was describing a set of feelings. He may very well be wrong on whether or not those feelings work that way.
3) I actually do. People reference all the god damn time as if he was remotely credible. The only real contribution he made to psychology was his method of psychoanalysis. His actual theories are pretty much all wrong.
1) When did I say anything about hurting people? Seriously, quote me please.We agree that it hurts "actual people" when they interact closely with others who do not respect them. You seem to believe[1] that this is caused by the disrespect alone, but I believe that without sufficient interaction[2], it doesn't.
2) What, pray-tell, is the threshold of hurtfulness?
If. You have yet to demonstrate that Freud's particular concept of hate is an accurate description of it's behaviour.If the concept of hate that I should be using is the same or similar to the one Freud used, then the criticism of Freud is pointless re: our argument.