User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 20 of 20

  1. #11
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    The simple answer is that it depends on what you mean.

    Are emotions a source of knowledge? That is, is this an acceptable argument. Premise: I feel that X is true. Conclusion: X is true.

    No, it is not, as emotion in itself has nothing to do with the truthfulness of any proposition. However, emotion may be a source of knowledge in a more implicit sense. Primarily so when it comes to making decisions about ethics, or what we should do with our lives. Emotion is an indication of our mental health state. We obviously want to be well, hence we desire a certain emotion. Only through an observation of emotion can we know what we truly want in life. Hence, our passions are something that needs to be analyzed from a dispassionate, objective standpoint. Although, they do not entail knowledge directly.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  2. #12
    Systematic chaos Cenomite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Hence, our passions are something that needs to be analyzed from a dispassionate, objective standpoint.
    I'm a bit confused by this line.

    From what I read, it seems to me that you're saying that we utilize emotions to tell us what to strive for and what to avoid, based off of what makes us feel good or bad. If we succeed in this, we are "well", or rather we experience a sequence of positive emotions. If we fail, then we are "not well", and experience negative emotions.

    If this is true, then why do our passions need to be objectively measured? If you objectively measure your passions, it seems to me that it would involve asking yourself "logically, which thing(s) should I believe in that will make me the most well? Which combination of events, based off of previous experiences, will most likely result in me feeling good emotions?"

    These seem like good questions to ask yourself to me, but why are they needed? Couldn't I just as easily follow my instincts on what to do, based off of what I know makes me feel good? Why do I need to detach from myself to analyze what i like best, when my subjective views are meant for "me me me!" type tunnel vision?

    Also, are your passions really self-determined? I know that I never really chose to be interested in computers and programming, it just sort of happened, and I willingly followed it mindlessly to college.

    Also, that was a very good post, I enjoyed reading it. I just want to make sure I completely understand what you mean.

    EDIT: Getting back to the original topic though: It is true that your example "argument" is not valid, but would this argument be?

    "I have strong "gut" emotional feelings about X, and a logical argument at my side that happens to support these feelings. My emotional feelings combined with my logic make my whole argument more valid than if I had only the logical portion of the argument alone."
    (This is again in regards to a situation in which logic and morality could be mixed)
    The probability that I was procrastinating when I was typing this post:

    P(have big assignment due) = 0.6
    P(posting on TypoC) = 0.2
    P(having big assignment due | posting on TypoC) = 0.7

    P(posting on TypoC | having big assignment due) = .......


    Eh, I'll finish it later.

  3. #13
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,664

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenomite View Post

    Could you give examples of argument topics where the answer to that question would differ, as well as reasons why emotions should be more or less valid in those situations? (Seems like a fair statement, as Jaguar said, but I'm curious as to what your exact views are)

    Emotions are valid in situations when you are discusing emotions with people you are close to. Especially if it is something romantic.

    But if we are talking about politics , science , plans for invasion or construction of infrastructure then emotions should be reduced to pure desire for effeciency.

  4. #14
    Systematic chaos Cenomite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Emotions are valid in situations when you are discusing emotions with people you are close to. Especially if it is something romantic.

    But if we are talking about politics , science , plans for invasion or construction of infrastructure then emotions should be reduced to pure desire for effeciency.
    Ok thanks.

    So what if we were having a discussion about something like the example I posted in my last post where I quoted you (about the device that maxes out human potential being placed into everybody). Would emotions be valid in that argument? It doesn't fall clearly under any of those categories (possibly science, but it's more of the concept rather than the invention itself I guess). Also if you could explain your decision, it would be much appreciated
    The probability that I was procrastinating when I was typing this post:

    P(have big assignment due) = 0.6
    P(posting on TypoC) = 0.2
    P(having big assignment due | posting on TypoC) = 0.7

    P(posting on TypoC | having big assignment due) = .......


    Eh, I'll finish it later.

  5. #15
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Nothing pisses me off more than when someone makes argument purely based on emotions. If you cant reason those emotions that you base your argument on, i will totally ignore the argument and start to argue how invalid your argument is.

  6. #16
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenomite View Post
    I'm a bit confused by this line.

    From what I read, it seems to me that you're saying that we utilize emotions to tell us what to strive for and what to avoid, based off of what makes us feel good or bad. If we succeed in this, we are "well", or rather we experience a sequence of positive emotions. If we fail, then we are "not well", and experience negative emotions.

    If this is true, then why do our passions need to be objectively measured? If you objectively measure your passions, it seems to me that it would involve asking yourself "logically, which thing(s) should I believe in that will make me the most well? Which combination of events, based off of previous experiences, will most likely result in me feeling good emotions?"

    These seem like good questions to ask yourself to me, but why are they needed? Couldn't I just as easily follow my instincts on what to do, based off of what I know makes me feel good? Why do I need to detach from myself to analyze what i like best, when my subjective views are meant for "me me me!" type tunnel vision?

    Also, are your passions really self-determined? I know that I never really chose to be interested in computers and programming, it just sort of happened, and I willingly followed it mindlessly to college.

    Also, that was a very good post, I enjoyed reading it. I just want to make sure I completely understand what you mean.

    EDIT: Getting back to the original topic though: It is true that your example "argument" is not valid, but would this argument be?

    "I have strong "gut" emotional feelings about X, and a logical argument at my side that happens to support these feelings. My emotional feelings combined with my logic make my whole argument more valid than if I had only the logical portion of the argument alone."
    (This is again in regards to a situation in which logic and morality could be mixed)
    What emotions are: Simply having impulses. That is what emotions are. They are unprocessed unconscious cognitions. Sometimes they invade your conscious thought, for example when you get hit, you cannot help but feel pain.

    Role of emotions in rational thinking: Emotions alone tell you nothing. They are impulses. However, analysis of emotions informs you of your well being. For example, if you are hit, emotion alone will not give you an idea of what is going on with you. However, if you think about how you feel, you may realize that you are in pain.

    Why do we not make decisions based only on emotions?

    You cannot tell what directions your emotions will steer you in. They are merely instinctual responses to circumstances. The course of action that your passions may advise you of are frequently far from congenial. In short, emotions alone are simply blind. Acting without knowing what you are doing almost never leads to any good.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  7. #17
    Senior Member laughingebony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    That is, is this an acceptable argument. Premise: I feel that X is true. Conclusion: X is true.

    No, it is not, as emotion in itself has nothing to do with the truthfulness of any proposition.
    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker
    You cannot tell what directions your emotions will steer you in. They are merely instinctual responses to circumstances. The course of action that your passions may advise you of are frequently far from congenial. In short, emotions alone are simply blind. Acting without knowing what you are doing almost never leads to any good.
    Is logic any more trustworthy?

  8. #18
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,656

    Default

    Also beckons the question...if indeed you can tell that the other is basing his argument on emotions, is it invalid? As SW stated, they are still information, you just have to process them in order to use them. But that doesn't mean that once that has been done, the information isn't useful. Even in rational discourse.

    If someone then shows those emotions AND you notice their logical reasoning and sentence building going down during the debate, you could assume that what you're getting to see is a draft, because they haven't taken the time or haven't gotten the time to process a bigger emotion properly. At that point you can either I feel, give them that time, or withdraw. All this however does NOT mean that the argument in it self doesn't have merit. It just comes out garbled and needs further work. So maybe judgement and nitpicking should be reserved untill you see the complete version? Alternatively you can help the other person analyze the information he's trying to convey into a logical argument.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  9. #19
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Someone arguing based off of emotion can produce a coherent argument, but it's often the case that emotion-fueled arguments won't be clear or rational. Argument, by definition, is a set a reasons for or against a point, and if the reasons make no sense, the argument isn't valid.

    But emotion as an expression is still valid, so if someone is in despair and is making totally incoherent arguments, the fact that they are in despair should be taken into account.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenomite View Post
    My question is: To what extent are emotions a valid source of argument? Should they be weighed equally with logic in terms of validity? Why or why not?
    Emotional factors matter more than logic only when dealing with emotional matters.

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] Expressing emotions properly as an INTJ
    By goodgrief in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-06-2010, 11:13 AM
  2. [MBTItm] Why Do Thinkers See Emoting and Thinking as Dichotomous Processes?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-26-2008, 09:30 PM
  3. Avatars As Communicators of Emotion
    By Usehername in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 07-20-2008, 12:58 AM
  4. present an argument as to why you are your type
    By Grayscale in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 03-27-2008, 09:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO