What gives anyone the right to be unhappy when there always someone worse off?

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

That's your assertion, not fact.

It is important in terms of what begets what.

Exactly. And belief begets both.

No, I'm not. Both are rational. Both are (can be) responses to emotional cues.

Let's take your second statement>So, we are in agreement then about what rational in this case refers to: Thinking and/or feeling?



I get emotional when something goes against me. Emotion isn't the primary substance, it couldn't be because something so strong cannot come from no where. It is so strong because it either resonates exactly with me, or it is antithesis to me somehow. Implying an underlying something that my emotion is responding to.

 

[Salomé]

Exactly. And belief begets both.

Nope. Both are possible without belief.

I get emotional when something goes against me. Emotion isn't the primary substance, it couldn't be because something so strong cannot come from no where. It is so strong because it either resonates exactly with me, or it is antithesis to me somehow. Implying an underlying something that my emotion is responding to.

Nothing comes from nothing. Emotions are triggered by external (and internal) events.

Emotion cannot be dependent upon belief because creatures incapable of holding beliefs nevertheless manifest emotion.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Nope. Both are possible without belief.



Nothing comes from nothing. Emotions are triggered by external (and internal) events.

Yes, I'm just calling those internal and external events beliefs.

Emotion cannot be dependent upon belief because creatures incapable of holding beliefs nevertheless manifest emotion.

Belief means something that we've internalized as an object of our truth. An animal will have internalized an object of its truth when it learns that if it behaves, it will be treated better. Therefore it's 'emotion' is its expression of its subjective experiences based on how it has learned to be; it will wag its tail to express happiness because it has been affirmed that it is indeed true that he has been a good boy.

 

[Salomé]

Yes, I'm just calling those internal and external events beliefs.

You can't just rename something to suit your argument.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

I am asserting that beliefs are the 'events' you are talking about.

Let us consider an 'event' that would create an emotional response as an example then: Say, being argued with.

Man A says something and Man B disagrees with it. It makes Man A mad. Why?

 

[Salomé]

Beliefs are not events. They are a response to events (in those capable of forming them).

There are as many reasons for man A to be angry as there are A-men. Maybe he was already angry and is just using the disagreement to vent that emotion. Who can say?

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Beliefs are not events. They are a response to events (in those capable of forming them).

I do believe they are a response to original events, yes. Beliefs do not change often or easily. Beliefs are tied to values and when they change, it is a conscious event, not an unconscious emotional response.

There are as many reasons for man A to be angry as there are A-men. Maybe he was already angry and is just using the disagreement to vent that emotion. Who can say?

Why would he already be angry?

 

[Salomé]

Why would he already be angry?

"Who can say?"

Maybe he stubbed his toe? (External event)
Maybe he's hungry? (Internal event)
Maybe his wife left him? (External event)
Maybe Man B reminds him of his father? (Internal event)

In any event it is not Man A's belief per se that causes his anger. Nor Man B's disagreement.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

"Who can say?"

Maybe he stubbed his toe? (External event)
Maybe he's hungry? (Internal event)
Maybe his wife left him? (External event)
Maybe Man B reminds him of his father? (Internal event)

In any event it is not Man A's belief per se that causes his anger. Nor Man B's disagreement.

I was referring to deep-seated anger, not superficial anger. Your examples related to deep anger are #3 and #4. Those might make another man happy. Why do they make him angry?


So how do you define emotions and feelings?

 

[Salomé]

I do believe they are a response to original events, yes. Beliefs do not change often or easily. Beliefs are tied to values and when they change, it is a conscious event, not an unconscious emotional response.

Beliefs are tied to values for you. For me, they're tied to logic. As such, they change easily with persuasive evidence.

For example, people used to believe that the world was flat. Show them a picture of a spherical earth and they'll change their belief. Faith is something else. It is belief without evidence.

I was referring to deep-seated anger, not superficial anger. Your examples related to deep anger are #3 and #4. Those might make another man happy. Why do they make him angry?

What difference does it make?

My only point here was that PB is wrong to say that emotions are only ever influenced by thought. "Nothing more, nothing less".

This is probably harder for NFs to understand since your emotional discourse is generally tightly integrated with your rational one.

Thinkers will understand me, no doubt.

If you have ever tried to console a terrified animal, or even a screaming baby, you would know that rational thought doesn't come into it.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Beliefs are tied to values for you. For me, they're tied to logic. As such, they change easily with persuasive evidence.

You 'logic' is my feeling. They are both 'rational' in that they are the tools we use to reconcile life events with internal beliefs. They are both superficial to belief, which ends up residing quietly in the unconscious and become part of our ego.

For example, people used to believe that the world was flat. Show them a picture of a spherical earth and they'll change their belief. Faith is something else. It is belief without evidence.

But what huge uproars were caused when the earth was proven to be round!! The church had a conniption. It took time to change the collective mind. I agree with you about faith. Faith is the evidence of things not seen. It also makes up our beliefs, probably our most zealous ones, which is why religion incites the worst wars.

If you have ever tried to console a terrified animal, or even a screaming baby, you would know that rational thought doesn't come into it.

Let's leave animals out of this discourse. It introduces too many variables for a logical and consistent argument. A screaming baby is laying in his beliefs. If his mother does not console him, feed him, or nurture him, his belief will become one of, "My mommy is not here for me when I cry," and he will adapt accordingly. He will come to believe that mommy isn't there for him when he cries, so he either has to do something else for mommy's attention, or learn to live without it. This adaptation will, if it has to be used often enough, follow him into adult life and be part of his deep-seated belief system, even if he is not conscious of it; indeed he likely will not be conscious of it.

 

[Salomé]

You 'logic' is my feeling. They are both 'rational' in that they are the tools we use to reconcile life events with internal beliefs. They are both superficial to belief, which ends up residing quietly in the unconscious and become part of our ego.

What? No.

Let's leave animals out of this discourse. It introduces too many variables for a logical and consistent argument.

I introduce animals specifically because they experience emotions without thoughts. The limbic brain evolved before the higher cortical regions. It's relevant.
That said, I'm happy to abandon this discourse altogether...

A screaming baby is laying in his beliefs.

Laying in or laying down? I don t know what you mean.
Babies aren't conscious and don't have beliefs until they start to acquire consciousness. They have needs and they have emotional responses when those needs are frustrated.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

You can lead a horse to water...

 

[greenfairy]

Anyone has the right to be happy or unhappy for any reason in any situation.

But whether it is reasonable, rational, consistent with or proportional to reality, or productive, are different and relevant questions.

Understanding that you have first world problems helps you understand that they are probably rather silly and not worth worrying about. But it's not morally wrong or anything.