GENIUS FORUMS

I'm taking a break from a book about emotions (primarily because I diverge from the author's view that emotions should be studied in depth, and not simply discarded), but something Jamesh just said in the "Un/Consciousness" thread reminded me of a particular idea. (What Jamesh said, btw, is not especially relevant to the idea.)

Basically, the author had posited that emotions are completely separate from feelings. This separation is so complete, in fact, that there is only one "feeling" a person has -- namely, a rush of chemicals. How this feeling is interpreted is entirely dependent on the person's rational assessment of his situation. The exact same rush of chemicals that in a dangerous situation would be interpreted as terror, in a different situation might be interpreted as ecstasy. Since in the month-and-a-bit since I read this, I have seen nothing that contradicts this belief, I'll present the question here: does this sound like an accurate theory of feelings?

To me, feelings, and emotions are the same thing. Both are chemical reactions in the brain. But the fact that we can control our feelings (not cry in front of other people for example) meams that feelings are secondary to consciousness, and third to sentience. Although consciousness, and sentience are very similar.

Conscious = awake.
Sentience = being aware that you are awake.

Just a single rush of chemicals is not something I have looked into. I presume that it is right. Although there might be a strength of chemicals involved.

I would tend to agree with the author, that just as all physical objects appear to evolve from a single substance (matter), so too do all emotions seem to evolve from a single feeling. In other words, as James suggested, emotions are merely complexes of other simpler bodily feelings. Just as two simple elements, hydrogen and oxygen for example, unit to form the compound water, with its own unique and identifiable characteristics, so too do simple bodily feelings amalgamate to form more complex emotions such as fear or anxiety.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: Basically, the author had posited that emotions are completely separate from feelings. This separation is so complete, in fact, that there is only one "feeling" a person has -- namely, a rush of chemicals. How this feeling is interpreted is entirely dependent on the person's rational assessment of his situation. The exact same rush of chemicals that in a dangerous situation would be interpreted as terror, in a different situation might be interpreted as ecstasy.

That seems unintuitive to me. However, certain views I adhere to now once seemed counterintuitive, so, perhaps.

Also, it seems pretty arbitrary, perhaps even inappropriate, to classify 'terror' as a feeling. I could just as easily, or perhaps more appropriately, classify it as an emotion.

Maybe you can link me to something about this book on Amazon.

Since in the month-and-a-bit since I read this, I have seen nothing that contradicts this belief, I'll present the question here: does this sound like an accurate theory of feelings?

Not really. But I would think that a reasonable opinion out of any of us would require more exposure to the the whole of the authors views. I would like to know what this lone chemical responsible for feeling is identified as. Also, it'd be helpful to know if he tried distinguishing this chemical from the chemicals responsible for emotions. Finally, what sort of behavior, or what mind states would he regard as emotional?

cory: Martha Nussbaum - Upheavals of Thought

I'll look more in-depth at the replies when I'm not about to pass out.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: there is only one "feeling" a person has -- namely, a rush of chemicals. How this feeling is interpreted is entirely dependent on the person's rational assessment of his situation.

At one point I had stage fright. I learned to re-interpret the feeling as being excitement instead of anxiety, and then was able to find being on stage exciting and enjoyable.

But I don't think it's true that there is only one feeling - you get rushes of different chemicals in different proportions, and hence different feelings.

There is the fight-or-flight adrenalin rush, certainly, which gives a state of excitement or anxiety. But there are other feelings, like being relaxed, or being in love, or happy, (or high?) that are qualitatively different.

. . . the whole gamut of emotions from "A" to "B". :-)