It seems to me we can play physical games and mental games involving negative feedback in terms of resistance to and amplification of what we will feel. Emotion as a source of anything like love, justice, decency seems a non-starter. One might, once again, wonder about 'conditions for existence' - and some of these conditions are shared by animals.
On 28 Sep, 19:09, Lonlaz <[email protected]> wrote: > Does emotion really need to be that metaphysical? > > We are physical creatures, and our emotions and feelings are part of > our physical interface to the world. A cat's fur stands on end to > make the animal look larger upon encountering a dog. A stag's body > fills with adrenaline with the thrill of combat. I don't think these > emotions are any different than ours. > > Our main problem our feelings and the physical reactions that go with > are still linked baser, more animal reactions, and they may be > obsolete for the situation in our complex world. This is a problem > because our feelings and emotions are much closer to our animal mind, > which usually gets a drop on our more rational thought processes. > > The neat thing about ourselves is that our minds create an internal > world to percieve. This leads us to having physical reactions to non > physical situations. This is the primary reason for the existance of > our minds, to be able to predict or engineer pain and joy. Strangely > enough, it is by invoking those feelings on a smaller scale. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
