Emotion and Regulation

[Mole]

As babies we were dependent on others to regulate our emotions. As we grew we slowly learned to regulate ourselves in many different ways, but learning to regulate our emotions seems to come last.

So while we are in the process of learning to regulate our emotions we come here. And being as yet unable to regulate our own emotions, we expect others to regulate them for us, just as our parents did when we were babies.

And when the others fail to regulate our unruly emotions, we blame them, just as we blamed our parents as children.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Maybe someday we can learn to move our own emotions to our internal off-topic posts, our internal fluff zones, our internal graveyards, our internal temp-bans and even a few internal perma-bans.

 

[Mole]

Maybe someday we can learn to move our own emotions to our internal off-topic posts, our internal fluff zones, our internal graveyards, our internal temp-bans and even a few internal perma-bans.

Yes, the hallmark of emotional intelligence is restraint.

This is in opposition to the New Age which champions self expression, values narcissism, and which provides us with bromides to keep repeating over and over, until all restraint is removed and we are liberated.

Yes, liberation and emotional intelligence are opposites.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Yes, the hallmark of emotional intelligence is restraint.

This is in opposition to the New Age which champions self expression, values narcissism, and which provides us with bromides to keep repeating over and over, until all restraint is removed and we are liberated.

Yes, liberation and emotional intelligence are opposites.

I agree that restraint is part of it, but there does need to be an outlet for negative emotions. They are like a river that needs to be channeled. For the most part I lean towards Buddhist ideals of restraint and detachment, but from what I've observed and experienced, I do think that anger needs to be addressed and expressed. There are certain instinctual angers that result from being wronged that require expression, but not reckless expression. it is a difficult topic because most expressions of the negative emotions just perpetuate these by instilling them in others and rehearsing them in ourselves. The problem with complete suppression of negative emotions is that they build up subconscious pressure that releases at apparently random times and/or aimed in the wrong direction. They need to ideally be channeled towards problem solving, but if that isn't an option and they are expressed towards someone, it is best directed at the person responsible for instilling that negative emotion in the first place.

 

[Mole]

it is best directed at the person responsible for instilling that negative emotion in the first place.

No one can make us feel anything. We choose our own emotions and we are responsible for our own emotions. Otherwise rapists can blame their victims.

But for those who haven't yet learnt to modulate their own emotions, it is convenient to blame others for making us feel negative emotions. Happiness is having someone to blame, they say, and we marry in order to have someone to blame.

Look labyrinthine, it is obvious to me your are responsible for instilling negative emotions in me. So I don't know whether to get angry at you or to marry you.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

^I don't have any anger towards you. I'm not even sure why you feel angry at me. I did make one joke about the narcissist threads, but I tried to clarify it wasn't meant as mockery. It's fine if you have anger towards me, but I generally think you just have unique ideas. I don't think you particularly try to hurt people, so I don't have a problem with you. I was actually just trying to converse with you.

 

[Dreamer]

No one can make us feel anything. We choose our own emotions and we are responsible for our own emotions. Otherwise rapists can blame their victims.

But for those who haven't yet learnt to modulate their own emotions, it is convenient to blame others for making us feel negative emotions. Happiness is having someone to blame, they say, and we marry in order to have someone to blame.

Look labyrinthine, it is obvious to me your are responsible for instilling negative emotions in me. So I don't know whether to get angry at you or to marry you.

Is it your experience to select which emotions are best for a given situation? How to best carry yourself or best handle someone or something? If so, how do you know which emotions are best, and are there any emotions that are ideal for a given situation? Is it better to not feel? If emotions guide us to certain behaviors and thoughts/views of the world, what can be taken away if we remove the strength in emotion itself? I agree, having the ability to choose our emotions would at times, grant us a freedom, but is there something, an entity or presence such as uncontrolled emotion, can also teach us?

 

[Coriolis]

Is it your experience to select which emotions are best for a given situation? How to best carry yourself or best handle someone or something? If so, how do you know which emotions are best, and are there any emotions that are ideal for a given situation? Is it better to not feel? If emotions guide us to certain behaviors and thoughts/views of the world, what can be taken away if we remove the strength in emotion itself? I agree, having the ability to choose our emotions would at times, grant us a freedom, but is there something, an entity or presence such as uncontrolled emotion, can also teach us?

It is better simply to feel what we feel, while remaining enough distanced from it to not have it cloud our judgment or dictate our actions. We can then consider any emotion we do feel as just another input to our decision.

 

[Yuurei]

It is better simply to feel what we feel, while remaining enough distanced from it to not have it cloud our judgment or dictate our actions. We can then consider any emotion we do feel as just another input to our decision.

You beat me to it.

A common misunderstanding -especially in the typing community- " feelers don't think and thinkers don't feel.

Wrong. We all have thought, we all have emotion. We do not have control over our immediate emotions are thoughts. What we do have control over is with which we decide to base our choices.

To me the healthiest option is never all one or the other but knowing when one is more appropriate than the other.
For me, 90% of the time I go with thought and rationale, but that isn't always necessary. Some moments in life really are just about enjoyment.

While I'm here; this thread reminded me of my best friend. He is a brilliant man, incredibly gifted in the sciences. This does not make him a thinker.

He makes VERY stupid choices, especially when driving. I thinking it is outlet for rage...yeah, on the road...already you can tell he is not a thinker.
Being in the car with him makes me nauseous. He constantly slams on the breaks and then immediatly goes from 0 to 60, higher if possible.
He does this to emphasize how angry he is; a reaction to slow cars on the road. When a car in front him is too slow, he will slow down even more to mock them " Lookit how slooooow I am( have to go because of you) going.
When I finally convince that he is contributing to the problem and holding up the people behind him he guns the engine to speed and swerves around the ( oh so offending) car.

I called him it.
" I HAVE to slam on the breakes! It isn't MY fault they are going too slow!" To me, this was an absurd response. Of course he doesn't HAVE to behave like a jackass in reaction to someone gowing slower than him.
I brought this up also. He shot me a look of utter confusion.

He really does not seem to grasp the concept of detatching certain emotions from his decisions.

I do very much wonder how someone can behave that way at his age ( nearly fifty)

 

[geedoenfj]

As babies we were dependent on others to regulate our emotions. As we grew we slowly learned to regulate ourselves in many different ways, but learning to regulate our emotions seems to come last.

So while we are in the process of learning to regulate our emotions we come here. And being as yet unable to regulate our own emotions, we expect others to regulate them for us, just as our parents did when we were babies.

And when the others fail to regulate our unruly emotions, we blame them, just as we blamed our parents as children.

I don't think we're able to regulate the emotions of babies, they're not yet developed to understand and process emotions, they cry because it's a form of communication, their survival instinct is reacting to their needs ..
I believe emotional regulation is more during childhood, and to some level in adulthood, people and society have a big influence on how we should emotionally process certain situations, which afterwards forms a set of beliefs that determines our judgments and feelings about these issues, our degree of awareness of this fact is what determines our ability to develop self regulation..
And I agree with [MENTION=29849]Yuu[/MENTION] about her input, yes as a feeler myself, I find myself often taking a better decisions and have more comprehension and control over the situation than most thinkers I have known, and they keep being so defensive (even emotionally defensive) and very picky about the points you brought up to them, then eventually they're not providing a sensible input or valid solution..

 

[Tennessee Jed]

You beat me to it.

A common misunderstanding -especially in the typing community- " feelers don't think and thinkers don't feel.

Wrong. We all have thought, we all have emotion. We do not have control over our immediate emotions are thoughts. What we do have control over is with which we decide to base our choices.

To me the healthiest option is never all one or the other but knowing when obe is more appropriate than the other.
For me, 90% of the time I go with thought and rational, but that isn't always nessecery. Some moments in life really are just about enjoyment. [... snipped]

I agree. Basically, Emotion and Reason should both be considered as input toward any actions/decisions we take. Both Emotion and Reason have strengths and weaknesses, so both are needed for mutual reinforcement.

For example, Emotion is weak in that it tends to be short-term and not good at cost-benefit analysis. As I said in another post, Emotions fill us full of pleasure when we eat candy and ice cream but later react with displeasure when we're fat and ill from eating all that candy and ice cream. It's Reason that puts 2 and 2 together and warns us that we should eat sweets in moderation in order to find that balance between enjoyment and good health.

On the other hand, Reason also has its shortcomings. Reason can lead us to make cost-benefit analyses that argue in favor of eugenics and euthanasia of the sick and elderly. Cost-benefit analysis alone isn't a good way to run a life.

Also, despite being short-term in its operation, Emotions comprise a lifetime of experiences, both good and bad. We have experiences, we store them in our memory, and when we run across something similar in the present we have an instant recall about how we reacted to such experiences in the past: They were fun, they scared us, they made us angry, etc. That's important info, to let us know whether a given decision or action is a good fit for us.

So the best way to react to things is via a mix of Reason and Emotion.

One book I was reading recently ("Designing Your Life: How to Build a Well-Lived, Joyful Life, " by Bill Burnett and Dave Evans, pub. 2016) talked about how to make decisions via a process of "discernment," that is, via a layered approach that uses both Emotion and Reason. That is, start with Reason (gather info, do your due diligence, make cost-benefit analyses), then use your "gut" to decide whether your choice is a good fit.

For example, if you're making a career decision:

First, do step 1): Gather intellectual fodder. Do your homework, take notes, talk to experts, etc. After you've done that, progress to step 2): Use emotional/intuitive/spiritual input as well. This is your "gut" response. This is where you've stored a lifetime of impressions about what's a good fit for you; listen to it. Then add on step 3): "Live your choice." That is, given two or three options, pretend for 1-3 days that you've accepted option A, and run your life as though you were prepping for or living that life. Then do the same for option B, etc. Basically this process of "living your choice" is another way of accessing emotional input: You "live" the options in your head and see if they are a good fit.

****************

Anyway, the above comments are more about one's decision-making process.

Actually, the start of the thread was about "emotional regulation," which is more about "being socially appropriate," IOW, whether it's appropriate to throw tantrums, act on our raw emotions, etc. Regarding those issues, Wikipedia has articles on both "emotional self-regulation" and "regulation of emotion" (there is a slight difference depending on the context in which the emotion is used).

 

[Dreamer]

You beat me to it.

A common misunderstanding -especially in the typing community- " feelers don't think and thinkers don't feel.

Wrong. We all have thought, we all have emotion. We do not have control over our immediate emotions are thoughts. What we do have control over is with which we decide to base our choices.

To me the healthiest option is never all one or the other but knowing when obe is more appropriate than the other.
For me, 90% of the time I go with thought and rational, but that isn't always nessecery. Some moments in life really are just about enjoyment.

While I'm here; this thread reminded me of my best friend. He is a brilliant man, incredibly gifted in the sciences. This does not make him a thinker.

He makes VERY stupid choices, especially when driving. I thinking it is outlet for rage...yeah, on the road...already you can tell he is not a thinker.
Being in the car with him makes me nauseous. He constantly slams on the breaks and then immediatly goes from 60, higher if possible.
He does this to emphasize how angry he is; a reaction to slow cars on the road. When a car in front him is too slow, he will slow down even more to mock them " Lookit how slooooow I am( have to go because of you) going.
When I finally convince that he is contributing to the problem and holding up the people behind him he guns the engine to speed and swerves around the ( oh so offending) car.

I called him it.
" I HAVE to slam on the breakes! It isn't MY fault they are going too slow!" To me, this was an absurd response. Of course he doesn't HAVE to behave like a jackass in reaction to someone gowing slower than him.
I brought this up also. He shot me a look of utter confusion.

He really does not seem to grasp the concept of detatching certain emotions from his decisions.

I do very much wonder how someone can behave that way at his age ( nearly fifty)

I suppose I may have misinterpreted the OP. I see the importance in choosing our behavioral response to situations, but is it even possible to choose our emotional response to situations? In my mind, the two are quite different. It is the impulse though, that I feel is more at hand, and being able to control such impulses. Your friend, it seems, doesn't have a problem with feeling the emotion, and responding to it, in his way, but being able to detach and assess the situation at hand. I personally tend to distance myself from the situation after feeling the emotional response, give myself a breather and time to recollect myself, then make my behavioral choice. Not all situations give us such opportunity to do so unfortunately. In those cases, where an immediate action is required, how does one make the "better" behavioral response?

 

[Tennessee Jed]

I personally tend to distance myself from the situation after feeling the emotional response, give myself a breather and time to recollect myself, then make my behavioral choice. [...]

Yeah, that's the usual way to handle emotional situations in social settings. Count to ten, and all that. If you have time to gather yourself, then you distance yourself a bit and reflect about what's best, do a quick cost-benefit analysis, etc.

[...] Not all situations give us such opportunity to do so unfortunately. In those cases, where an immediate action is required, how does one make the "better" behavioral response?

Prepare or train for it:

1) Driver's training for beginning drivers: Drill them on difficult procedures like parking and intersections until they can react correctly under pressure. Advanced driver training handles things like high-speed skids, evasive driving in the event of attacks (bodyguard training), etc. The idea in both types of training is to drill procedures that would otherwise cause people to freeze up and lose it due to adrenaline and emotion.

2) If you're a soldier and at risk for getting ambushed on patrol, then you train for ambushes over and over until it becomes natural to react the "right" way in a real ambush, instead of falling apart, dropping your gun, and running.

3) If you're at work and going before a board or a tribunal for a tricky interview, you prepare "talking points" ahead of time and try to anticipate any trick questions. The idea is that preparation will help you get a grip on your emotions and keep the interviewers from tripping you up when under fire.

4) Also, some people just like drama and crisis management. Adrenaline junkies. Over time, they just get good at doing the right thing under pressure. They get good at using the adrenaline and emotion to propel them in a "good" direction instead of tripping them up. Practice makes perfect.

 

[Cellmold]

If only this were unique to a single internet forum.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I suppose I may have misinterpreted the OP. I see the importance in choosing our behavioral response to situations, but is it even possible to choose our emotional response to situations? In my mind, the two are quite different. It is the impulse though, that I feel is more at hand, and being able to control such impulses. Your friend, it seems, doesn't have a problem with feeling the emotion, and responding to it, in his way, but being able to detach and assess the situation at hand. I personally tend to distance myself from the situation after feeling the emotional response, give myself a breather and time to recollect myself, then make my behavioral choice. Not all situations give us such opportunity to do so unfortunately. In those cases, where an immediate action is required, how does one make the "better" behavioral response?

I don't think I can choose my emotional response. I experience emotions as an abstract nervous system and not experiencing pain in response to it is the same process as not experiencing physical pain in response to my concrete nervous system. Emotions flow like rivers which can be channeled by choice, but the strength and inertia of the flow is what it is.

There is a lot of study in psychology that shows that many dysfunctions are the result of suppressing emotional responses into the subconscious where they distort perceptions and behaviors. So many different disorders are the result of emotions that are rejected from the conscious mind and suppressed into the physical body and the subconscious mind. It even accounts for certain types of physical illnesses. It is also the reason people express anger towards individuals who have not hurt them, which is a common problem in human interaction.

 

[Mole]

is there something, an entity or presence such as uncontrolled emotion, can also teach us?

Sure, we find uncontrolled emotion in our unconscious, that is why we choose a very safe environment such as the analyst's couch, to experience our uncontrolled emotions for the first time.

On the analyst's couch we safely being our unconscious into our conscious. This can be a traumatic experience for those who have had a traumatic childhood, but for those with a happy childhood, it can be a delightful experience.

And by bringing our unconscious into consciousness we can analyse it, we can evaluate it, and we can integrate it into our daily life.

 

[Coriolis]

On the other hand, Reason also has its shortcomings. Reason can lead us to make cost-benefit analyses that argue in favor of eugenics and euthanasia of the sick and elderly. Cost-benefit analysis alone isn't a good way to run a life.

Nothing wrong with cost/benefit analysis, as long as one is wise in identifying the costs and the benefits.

I personally tend to distance myself from the situation after feeling the emotional response, give myself a breather and time to recollect myself, then make my behavioral choice. Not all situations give us such opportunity to do so unfortunately. In those cases, where an immediate action is required, how does one make the "better" behavioral response?

This is where practice and experience come in, just as [MENTION=22236]YUI[/MENTION] illustrated. The more accustomed one becomes to getting that distance on a situation and assessing it as objectively as possible, the easier it becomes to do this quickly and with good judgment.

I agree, having the ability to choose our emotions would at times, grant us a freedom, but is there something, an entity or presence such as uncontrolled emotion, can also teach us?

Perhaps, but I'm told that illness and loss have things to teach us, too. I for one won't go looking for those, though, just to learn those lessons.

 

[Tennessee Jed]

Nothing wrong with cost/benefit analysis, as long as one is wise in identifying the costs and the benefits.

Depends on what you mean by "wise." Personally, I would say that Reason (cost-benefit analyses, logic) becomes "wise" when it can incorporate or correctly prioritize things like empathy, kindness, compassion, caring, charity, moral codes, religion, custom, legal systems defining right and wrong etc.. And I think all that gets us into the determination and prioritization of values, which are traditionally within the realm of Emotion (and Fi in particular).

There exists the field of "Moral Reasoning" which talks about using logic to decide ethical issues. But again, that implies some sophistication at dealing with values, morals, and ethics, again, the realm of Emotion.

Perhaps I'm being too much of a stickler in insisting on this kind of a hard dichotomy between Emotion and Reason. But values (in the non-monetary sense) are very much part of the realm of Fi; and a form of Reason that doesn't take into account these kinds of values isn't going to get very far on its own.

So yeah, a "wise" cost-benefit analysis would imply (to me) a sophistication with values, which presupposes a level of emotional maturity or sophistication. IOW, to repeat my earlier point, a mere facility at cost-benefit analyses isn't enough by itself, in isolation. It's a minor point, but those Spock-like young Thinkers who would pretend to disdain Feelings would thus be less "wise" than they think themselves.

Of course, the opposite is true, too. An emotionally mature person who disdains Reason (cost-benefit analyses, logic) isn't going to be "wise" either. But that's more or less taken for granted in this day and age.

 

[Dreamer]

I don't think I can choose my emotional response. I experience emotions as an abstract nervous system and not experiencing pain in response to it is the same process as not experiencing physical pain in response to my concrete nervous system. Emotions flow like rivers which can be channeled by choice, but the strength and inertia of the flow is what it is.

There is a lot of study in psychology that shows that many dysfunctions are the result of suppressing emotional responses into the subconscious where they distort perceptions and behaviors. So many different disorders are the result of emotions that are rejected from the conscious mind and suppressed into the physical body and the subconscious mind. It even accounts for certain types of physical illnesses. It is also the reason people express anger towards individuals who have not hurt them, which is a common problem in human interaction.

I am as you are. There is no possible way for me not to feel my immediate emotional responses. Experience though, has me dealing with my emotions in as controlled and productive manner as possible, at least in how it relates to others and my personal well-being. Luckily, I've been able to identify potential downward slopes in my emotions, that usually start with a particular collection of thoughts and actions. I've also been able to identify when and how tempers may flare. There is no possible way I can temper my emotional responses, maybe some people truly can, but tempering my behavioral responses and how I work with my emotions is something I continue to work on each day and so far it seems to prove rather successful.

 

[Dreamer]

Yeah, that's the usual way to handle emotional situations in social settings. Count to ten, and all that. If you have time to gather yourself, then you distance yourself a bit and reflect about what's best, do a quick cost-benefit analysis, etc.



Prepare or train for it:

1) Driver's training for beginning drivers: Drill them on difficult procedures like parking and intersections until they can react correctly under pressure. Advanced driver training handles things like high-speed skids, evasive driving in the event of attacks (bodyguard training), etc. The idea in both types of training is to drill procedures that would otherwise cause people to freeze up and lose it due to adrenaline and emotion.

2) If you're a soldier and at risk for getting ambushed on patrol, then you train for ambushes over and over until it becomes natural to react the "right" way in a real ambush, instead of falling apart, dropping your gun, and running.

3) If you're at work and going before a board or a tribunal for a tricky interview, you prepare "talking points" ahead of time and try to anticipate any trick questions. The idea is that preparation will help you get a grip on your emotions and keep the interviewers from tripping you up when under fire.

4) Also, some people just like drama and crisis management. Adrenaline junkies. Over time, they just get good at doing the right thing under pressure. They get good at using the adrenaline and emotion to propel them in a "good" direction instead of tripping them up. Practice makes perfect.

I thank you for responding to my post. I do wonder though, if it's at all feasible to prepare for so many potential outcomes as it relates to our emotions, and instead of training for certain scenarios, you train more broadly, in how to deal with the flows and fluctuations of your own emotions. In essence, the scenarios suggested by you, do this as well, but (not sure if you were being literal with your examples) what we can learn from any situation really, is how our emotional responses showed itself in a given situation, what can we do about it, and what can we do better next time? The judgement criteria I have tended to abide by, is if my emotional responses render me unable to continue about my day, meaning do they leave me wallowing in some pit of momentary depression, or do my responses, and therefore reaction to such responses, allow me to recognize the situation, learn from it, and find a use to the occasion. As volatile as some people can be in reaction to their emotions, or, their impulses may be, I would say the opposite end of the spectrum is just as destructive. Meaning, ignoring such emotional responses and not taking the opportunity to learn and grow from them, would do you no better.