Spinoza's Emotions

[LMNO]

Yeah, I'm really going to have to get that book.

[B_M_W]

Yeah, I think I will too.

[Cain]

I've always called that post-rationalization done by determinists, but I suppose that phrase will do....

[Cramulus]

I posted this in Cain's thread but I'll post it here too.

I scanned & uploaded the prologue
http://www.cwyohba.org/noexit/Black%20Swan%20Prologue.pdf

but it's rotated 90 degrees for some reason
YUO HAVE BEEN WARNED

[Iron Sulfide]

i think i read something in the old POEE archive about the assembly method. sounds similar.

maybe it was RAW. doesn't matter.

the experiment in question, a bunch of college kids were invited to take part in an experiment, in which they went into a booth and asked questions of a yes/no variety. an anonymous answer came from the other side via revealing a yes/no.

the kids were asked to explain the results afterwards, or something. in most cases, they seemed to assemble a meaning behind the advice give. all the yes/no replies were randomly generated.

[Epimetheus]

So, Spinoza's saying the following:
If I feel joy, then that makes me a better (more perfect) person than I was before. Or if I feel sorry about something, I'm a less perfect person.
If I feel sorry for a homeless person, then I hate them.
If I think I'll feel sorry for someone when I see them, then I fear seeing them.
Wtf?
Frankly, bah, humbug.

[Pope Lecherous]

Most of our emotions can be broken down in a far easier and more simple way.  Biological.  Animals have basic emotions that promote survival, such as anger, fear, happiness, and sadness.  When we do something like eat food>live longer>feel good.  Mate>pass on genes> feel good.  Something wants to kill you> get scared or angry> survive.

Beyond those basic feelings, for explaining more complex emotions... consult the law of fives...  Someone will come up with some way to rationalize ANYTHING.  Explaining such things=Retrospective whatnot.  Mental masturbation

[LMNO]

So everthing is first circuit?



I'm not buying it.  Especially when you look at the things that are biologically harmful that people gravitate towards.

[Triple Zero]

you gotta hand him, there's maybe a tiny hint of 2nd circuit in his description :-P

but he forgot about language and communication, mostly.

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

So everthing is first circuit?



I'm not buying it.  Especially when you look at the things that are biologically harmful that people gravitate towards.

If you look at it from the standpoint of Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene, everything is motivated from a desire to preserve our genes (and memes), not necessarily individual survival, which still keeps with the concept of all our actions being first circuit at their base. I don't entirely agree, but he makes a good case.

[Cain]

I have quibbles about individual survival.  Often that is the case, but when the magnitude of threat seems beyond that, as threatening the entire genetic population of a certain group, then it seems most cultures agree that sacrafice of a sample of that, for the greater good, is permissable.

Evolutionary psychology and studies on altruism probably shed more light on this.