Hi Mark, This was primarily a post by Ian.
Marsha On Aug 7, 2011, at 12:22 PM, 118 wrote: > Hi Marsha, > I would present your statement in reverse. "I am therefore I feel my > emotions." This is where Descarte got it wrong and sidetracked > Western Logic. "I think therefore I am" should have been "I am > therefore I think". This is obviously much more logical. We have to > be to think. We cannot think that we are. We are also not what we > think (what we eat maybe). > > You do point to a correct interpretation of "I", in that I owns both > the brain and body, and is therefore neither. Of course you knew this > from your readings of Buddhism. > > So, we are ultimately in agreement. > > Cheers, > Mark > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Ian Glendinning > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Marsha asked >> "What role do emotions play in consciousness?" >> >> Well, our consciousness (the bundle of patterns that is us) are >> conscious of them. >> I feel my emotions therefore I am. >> (What happens next depends on how you use your brain / body.) >> >> BTW - I just blogged the clip you linked and also linked back to my >> earlier piece on Haidt's Happiness, and noticed Damasio featured >> heavily there too. I made a throwaway remark a few weeks ago that >> there really wasn't very much contentious left to be understood in the >> brain / mind workings these days - even things like "will" - one of >> the reasons I get frustrated when we continually recycle old debates. >> I still "feel" that's true. >> >> Haidt is/was (almost) a total Buddhist, but just pulled back to a >> position of dynamic balance in his conclusions. >> >> Regards >> Ian ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
