What is Emotion?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Tue Mar 06, 2018 9:34 am

Troll wrote:
Tue Mar 06, 2018 2:11 am
""What emotion means----" : meaning pertains to persons. You are a person at a philosophy forum so it's your job to be explicit as to what you mean.

"There is a buried presupposition-----". Who is doing the presupposing? No presupposition exists without presupposers. Please stop this evasive passive voice.

"One treats---" . Who treats? Again , please stop this evasive passive voice. State your position as explicit Troll. Please edit out all usage ; one says this and one says that."
I mean all the answers here, and in the recent post on emotion. Also, in daily life. The general notion that the scientific research program, currently in power, is the place to seek the answer to this question, What is emotion?, is very powerful.

So, it appears to me, one is not philosophic, but, rather, one assumes whichever scientific research program is currently in power is the place to seek the answer. This is what "one" thinks. And yet, on this website I find it especially rife, even by the standard of the estate of human beings.
I believe that you are sincere in what you write.

The evasion which I complained about is not about your avoiding facts and ideas. The evasion about which I complained to you is about your lack of explicit language. You write "one is not philosophic, but,rather, one assumes----". you should have written not 'one' but you should instead have explained exactly who is not philosophic .

Is English not your native language?

I am not an authority on any science however I know enough of physiology at undergraduate level to assure you that the physiological model of emotion is effective for healing therapies and educational aims. According to the physiological model emotions are physiological responses to stimuli, responses which can be monitored by physical means such as haematology.

The word you want is not emotion but feeling, subjective feeling. Feelings are affected by physiological emotions and also by learning and memories.

It's helpful for people suffering from unpleasant feelings to know that the emotional component of those feelings is physiological , as this insight helps the sufferer to adjust false beliefs and aids self discipline. For instance an aftermath of a viral infection is depressed spirits; it's helpful to know that gloomy thoughts and feelings are caused largely by disruption of physiological emotional function due to the virus.

Dalek Prime
Posts: 4261
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:48 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Dalek Prime » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:08 pm

Emotion.

A waste of perfectly good time best served by detachment.

Nick_A
Posts: 2737
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Nick_A » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:08 am

Dalek Prime wrote:
Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:08 pm
Emotion.

A waste of perfectly good time best served by detachment.
Sexism? You just don't want Oprah to make money. If women stopped emoting Oprah would go broke. You wouldn't want that.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Greta » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:28 am

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:10 pm
You may enjoy this debate as to whether or not animals have emotions

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ho ... ons-debate

As I understand it, animals like clams live by sensations. They open and shut in response to external stimuli. Higher mammals not only have sensations but animal emotions as well that are rudimentary expressions of "value" Mother love is an animal emotion a snake does not have. Human beings not only have animal sensations and emotions but also the potential for conscious self awareness. As a result people are also capable of a higher quality of emotion and appreciation of value than animal reactive emotion reflecting conscious understanding.
The link was pretty good.

Other species either have emotions or, if they are governed by only reward impulses, then so are humans for the most part. Basically, to deny animals emotions one deeds to raise the bar as to what constitutes an actual emotion to the point where not all humans could be said to have experienced emotions, and especially so as children.

In truth, other species are intensely emotional and the human difference is the capacity to not be subject to those strong emotions like a child but to use reason to act in a more wise, manner taking into account long term consequences. This is nicely shown in impulse control experiments on young children to see the age where self control kicks in (around age five).

Consider autistic savant, Temple Grandin's revolutionising of slaughterhouse facilities by empathising with the animals and helping create slaughter conditions that reduced stress on the animals. Note that she not only empathised with the other animals but was a highly emotional person herself.

In nature emotions are useful, behavioural and chemical bundles or packets of behaviours that can be triggered en masse like the calling of a subroutine. In the complexity of human cities, emotions increasingly need to be controlled and harnessed for the sake of civil society.

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:14 am

Nick_A wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:10 pm
You may enjoy this debate as to whether or not animals have emotions

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ho ... ons-debate

As I understand it, animals like clams live by sensations. They open and shut in response to external stimuli. Higher mammals not only have sensations but animal emotions as well that are rudimentary expressions of "value" Mother love is an animal emotion a snake does not have. Human beings not only have animal sensations and emotions but also the potential for conscious self awareness. As a result people are also capable of a higher quality of emotion and appreciation of value than animal reactive emotion reflecting conscious understanding.
Yes, but I'm concerned to differentiate between emotions and feelings. Clams have emotions but not feelings. This is because, unlike humans, clams have no very developed central nervous systems. Values originate and are refined in developed central nervous systems or brains as they are often called. Specifically the mammalian forebrain.

The usefulness of differentiating between emotions and feelings is that feelings which, unlike emotions,cannot exist without a developed forebrain depend upon reasoning which is the speciality of the forebrain. This matters because feelings and values matter. Because feelings and values matter it matters that feelings and values result from reasoning.

Troll
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:53 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Troll » Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:12 pm

“You write "one is not philosophic, but,rather, one assumes----". you should have written not 'one' but you should instead have explained exactly who is not philosophic .”
What “one” does speaks to the generality. One follows rules. One goes on green and stops at a red. One speaks correctly. One is gramatical. One publishes or perishes. And so on… I’m not sure why you want to point to a “who”. The danger would be that we focus, then, on accidental eccentricities which is a perfidious habit in philosophy. Then, one risks arguing the boring cases, i.e., the outliers, against the typical ones which should interest us. The non-conformist is of interest when they bring something of collective importance or something great. The non-conformist, too, is one, and it is through this juxtaposition that they deviate and so show themselves.

“The word you want is not emotion but feeling, subjective feeling.”
This split is not philosophic. One would have to ask, how was it arrived at? Who grants it makes sense? Who grants the statement? Where are they so we can talk to them? One can not argue, you see, against “one”. Yet, you express this one when you say, tacitly, one makes a distinction between emotion and feeling. You thereby express the non-philisophic attitude, which is not aware of oneself as one who does as one does. And as the one who tacitly takes up all the already granted notions of the tradition like the air, which is not noticed.

So, don’t you see, in making a distinction between feeling and emotion, we use common sense? and thereby we say things that are not “objective”? Which may be given in another way.

“healing therapies”
This shows more selection of purpose. More arbitrariness. For instance in the implication of a notion of mental health. In former times there was such a thing as the ‘black bile’. the black bile was not a thing to be got rid of, or "cured". The number of things taken for granted in such a channeling into an equipmental rearing up of resources towards a manipulation of beings, is vast. It is a goal form within one, as one of the ones who does ‘science’ under the current notion one has of what science is.


That being said. Thank you for this statement. Since, it is, of course, very worth knowing what one lays down as law, with regard to usage. I’m not sure, however, that the distinction between emotion and feeling is as general as you claim. It sounds specialized and part of a niche within a field.


I don’t know that this answered the question, concerning the usage of emotion in daily life. So far as I can see, emotion in daily life does not correspond to either of your terms. Which, in fact, are the same term projected into prefrontal cortex and the rest of the brain-behaviour model. Emotion doesn’t mean any of that in the example I gave. Though, I admit, the scientific questions, too are interesting, though essentially somewhat childish. As all they aim at is manipulation.

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:19 am

Troll wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:12 pm
“You write "one is not philosophic, but,rather, one assumes----". you should have written not 'one' but you should instead have explained exactly who is not philosophic .”
What “one” does speaks to the generality. One follows rules. One goes on green and stops at a red. One speaks correctly. One is gramatical. One publishes or perishes. And so on… I’m not sure why you want to point to a “who”. The danger would be that we focus, then, on accidental eccentricities which is a perfidious habit in philosophy. Then, one risks arguing the boring cases, i.e., the outliers, against the typical ones which should interest us. The non-conformist is of interest when they bring something of collective importance or something great. The non-conformist, too, is one, and it is through this juxtaposition that they deviate and so show themselves.
But generalising facts is not evidence. I want you to point to 'who', 'where', 'when' if possible, because philosophers should be engaged in real life. Otherwise what value have we to man or beast?

Perhaps all we may have is 'accidental eccentricities'. If we are to glean meanings from phenomena we must remain aware of the phenomena and not let our interpretations become quite mad.

“The word you want is not emotion but feeling, subjective feeling.”
This split is not philosophic. One would have to ask, how was it arrived at? Who grants it makes sense? Who grants the statement? Where are they so we can talk to them? One can not argue, you see, against “one”. Yet, you express this one when you say, tacitly, one makes a distinction between emotion and feeling. You thereby express the non-philisophic attitude, which is not aware of oneself as one who does as one does. And as the one who tacitly takes up all the already granted notions of the tradition like the air, which is not noticed.
Modern neuroscientists and psychologists arrived at the dichotomy of emotions and feelings by way of combining neuroscience and psychology.(See especially Antonio Damasio)
So, don’t you see, in making a distinction between feeling and emotion, we use common sense? and thereby we say things that are not “objective”? Which may be given in another way.
I don't understand this
“healing therapies”
This shows more selection of purpose. More arbitrariness. For instance in the implication of a notion of mental health. In former times there was such a thing as the ‘black bile’. the black bile was not a thing to be got rid of, or "cured". The number of things taken for granted in such a channeling into an equipmental rearing up of resources towards a manipulation of beings, is vast. It is a goal form within one, as one of the ones who does ‘science’ under the current notion one has of what science is.
I presumed that your thoughts were embedded in the modern paradigm.
I’m not sure, however, that the distinction between emotion and feeling is as general as you claim. It sounds specialized and part of a niche within a field. That being said. Thank you for this statement. Since, it is, of course, very worth knowing what one lays down as law, with regard to usage.
I'm not sure either. However I am sure that I'm right as regards explicit language in a forum such as this.
Keep vague generalities for chitchat and platitudes.
I don’t know that this answered the question, concerning the usage of emotion in daily life. So far as I can see, emotion in daily life does not correspond to either of your terms. Which, in fact, are the same term projected into prefrontal cortex and the rest of the brain-behaviour model. Emotion doesn’t mean any of that in the example I gave. Though, I admit, the scientific questions, too are interesting, though essentially somewhat childish. As all they aim at is manipulation.
English doesn't seem to be your native language.

Troll
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:53 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Troll » Tue Apr 24, 2018 3:08 am

“But generalising facts is not evidence. I want you to point to 'who', 'where', 'when' if possible, because philosophers should be engaged in real life. Otherwise what value have we to man or beast?”

General norms of society are the single largest reality of modern life. No one exists without being one of many, and finding oneself amidst what is general and what has come before. You’re talking baby nonsense in the vapid fugitive manner one talks unsinn (i.e., nonsense), when one talks bollocks. There is nothing one ever encounters but not an already existing general form. Even oneself. The human being. The term eccentricity is generally available to human beings in our age. Even unavoidable as a feature of life.

Now, it would be more noble, not to flee in the face of your peculiar manifestation of the dreadful banality.
Modern neuroscientists and psychologists arrived at the dichotomy of emotions and feelings by way of combining neuroscience and psychology.(See especially Antonio Damasio)
That’s not the split I mentioned. I know that academic charlatan's assumed conventional Pseud's Corner-worthy spiel, it does not address the problem at all. The division I spoke of, and exampled exactly with particular examples!!, is between daily life and traditions of research projects, not mind and body.

You are living in a dank scutcheon of rank dishonesty the repellent stench of which smiles out at the forum.

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:47 pm

Troll wrote:
General norms of society are the single largest reality of modern life. No one exists without being one of many, and finding oneself amidst what is general and what has come before. You’re talking baby nonsense in the vapid fugitive manner one talks unsinn (i.e., nonsense), when one talks bollocks. There is nothing one ever encounters but not an already existing general form. Even oneself. The human being. The term eccentricity is generally available to human beings in our age. Even unavoidable as a feature of life.
To succumb without question or awareness to"general norms of society" is a recipe for enslaved minds. True, general norms of society are best adhered to when a society is harmonious and settled. Our modern world society is anything but harmonious and settled but is full of grief and suffering. Is Troll some Pollyanna from a sheltered background, or a Conservative who is unthinkingly complacent about the political and social status quo?

jayjacobus
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by jayjacobus » Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:05 pm

It is difficult to understand emotion because the brain makes the emotion understandable to the soul but the soul is also the source of emotion. So the soul is both the source and the perceiver of emotion. How can that be?

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:12 pm

jayjacobus wrote:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:05 pm
It is difficult to understand emotion because the brain makes the emotion understandable to the soul but the soul is also the source of emotion. So the soul is both the source and the perceiver of emotion. How can that be?
That can be because body and soul or body and mind are one whole .
Emotions are generated from two sources. One of those is the instinctive source that we share with other animals.The other source of emotions is generated by the several human cultures of belief . These cultures of belief are internalised so that we don't often know that we believe and trust them they do however act like animal instincts in making us react to circumstances often without engaging conscious deliberations.

jayjacobus
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by jayjacobus » Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:23 pm

Belinda wrote:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:12 pm
jayjacobus wrote:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:05 pm
It is difficult to understand emotion because the brain makes the emotion understandable to the soul but the soul is also the source of emotion. So the soul is both the source and the perceiver of emotion. How can that be?
That can be because body and soul or body and mind are one whole .
Emotions are generated from two sources. One of those is the instinctive source that we share with other animals.The other source of emotions is generated by the several human cultures of belief . These cultures of belief are internalised so that we don't often know that we believe and trust them they do however act like animal instincts in making us react to circumstances often without engaging conscious deliberations.
I can see that but what I mean is how are emotions created in a human? An event is external but an emotion isn't an event but a feeling. The feeling is not a sense but seems related to a sense in its formation.

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:52 pm

Jay, an emotion is a physiological event that involves the release of biochemicals into the bloodstream. The effects of these biochemicals can be observed in signs such as pallor, sweating, enlarged pupils, fast pulse,or quicker reactions and so on. The feelings of these biochemicals are felt as fear, anger, affection, lack of appetite, or sexual excitement and so on.

Emotions are translated into feelings such as being in love, jealousy, hate, and so on when the emotions are interpreted by the brain-mind and its remembered beliefs and attitudes.

jayjacobus
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by jayjacobus » Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:08 pm

I agree with everything you say. I just want to add that the brain is the translator and it's not clear how it does that.

Belinda
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: What is Emotion?

Post by Belinda » Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:10 pm

jayjacobus wrote:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:08 pm
I agree with everything you say. I just want to add that the brain is the translator and it's not clear how it does that.
You can say that again!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests