There are those who try to live like robots without Emotions — Massimo

I'm not sure I have met someone like that before. Who are you thinking of? How do you know what others are feeling if you are only watching from the outside?

But still I would love to hear the criticisms of emotionalism even though I probably already know what they are. I think that acting on Emotions is what emotionalism is. — Massimo

I would have thought that most people make choices based on their emotions. I also would have thought that a focus on emotion is a hallmark of our current era. And even those who privilege reason are likely to do so because reason appeals emotionally.

There was a period called Romanticism (18th and 19th century) which privileged emotion over reason - amongst other things. I often think we are living in a new era of romanticism. Certainly in the West.

How useful this is depends upon what emotions you give in to and what you do about them. Personally I avoid people who find it hard to regulate their emotion, they are often histrionic and narcissistic, as if their experience is the only one which matters.

thanks for your thoughtful reply perhaps you are right about the robot people I just assume that some people are living like robots. And I disagree about this being an age of Romanticism I think this is still an era of Anti Emotions in no part thanks to Electronics and other dehumanizing machine's.

And I disagree about this being an age of Romanticism I think this is still an era of Anti Emotions in no part thanks to Electronics and other dehumanizing machine's. — Massimo

Really? Think about how much of our technology is used to show off fairy-tale lifestyles, dream vacations, musical reveries and the cult of the body beautiful. The aesthetics of Marvel movies are pure romanticism and soft-core Fascism. The popular culture of the present era is drenched in emotionality - from ubiquitous reality TV to histrionic pop music and self-absorbed Instagram and TikTok. Politics is descending into Fascism all around the world, appelas to a romsold to voters on the strength of extravagant emotional appeals, with reason nowhere to be found. What is the great preoccupation our current age - apart from hysterical visions of doom and paranoia? It's probably the cute cat video. :wink:

I don't deny that Electronic entertainment is being used as escapism. But I do deny what you are saying about politics I think american politics is like that but everywhere else politics is a boring Rational affair. Also what do you mean when you say the cult of the body beautiful ?

I don't deny that Electronic entertainment is being used as escapism — Massimo

Romantic escapism. Everything is furiously overstated and stylised.

Also what do you mean when you say the cult of the body beautiful — Massimo

The overwhelming preoccupation culture has had with gym bodies, weight loss, supermodels, plastic surgery, botox, food fetishes - we are obsessed with romantic and idealised views of how people are meant to look. Then there's the ridiculous pouting and choreographed bombast of Instagram where people romanticise their lives, possessions and choices by posing, etc, all designed to create heightened feelings of emotionality in others - envy, admiration, acclaim, desire, jealousy, etc.

But I do deny what you are saying about politics I think american politics is like that but everywhere else politics is a boring Rational affair. — Massimo

Not at all. I'm not American. Think of politics and the increasing hysterical Right in England, Poland, Turkey, Hungary, Germany... And Australia just failed to grant constitutional recognition for its First Nations people based on a right wing emotional appeal to white bigotry and fear.

We are, alas, living with the consequences of rationalism. The enlightenment and the success of science make it seem as if reason has triumphed over emotion, but this cannot be, and even the terms 'success' and 'triumph' are emotional judgements.

But to reject rationality in favour of emotion would be as impossible and dangerous as the worst excesses of rationalism. Emotion in the broadest sense is caring about something some degree. To reject emotion is to pretend not to care about anything, and that is a recipe for failure to say no to absolute horror. But to deny reason is equally to deprive oneself of any ability to act effectively on one's emotions. Reason it is that demand, when emotion says no to horror, that one acts to end horror.

You're being that stiff rigid robot — Vaskane

How many stiff rigid robots have you communicated with?
What examples of advanced AI systems have you interacted with?
I absolutely agree with @Tom Storm here. Have you ever tried to act as if you were emotionless?
Have you any idea how difficult that would be for a human to achieve?
How would you demonstrate your own ability to be emotionless?

one of the wall huggers — Vaskane

That is a meaningless image to me. A human can't hug a wall unless they can wrap their arms around both ends of the wall, and even then, it is still not appropriate as 'hugging' anything is an emotional act.

That you're being obtuse to the point of taking metaphoric language as literal it shows you're incapable of reading the emotion in the text, like a robot. — Vaskane

Which example are you complaining about in this thread of 'taking metaphorical language as literal?'

You are not making much sense! I think I will leave it there.

yeah so how would one find the balance ? Between the two

why bring politics into this discussion ?

How many stiff rigid robots have you communicated with?
What examples of advanced AI systems have you interacted with?
I absolutely agree with Tom Storm here. Have you ever tried to act as if you were emotionless? — universeness

Exactly. :up:

It's what every decent human has to do, care for each other and reason our way to living together. "How" is with a deal of wisdom that is hard to find, and harder to practice. Doctors have to do it, especially surgeons. How does one kindly take a scalpel to another human? I don't know...

In his "History of Theology," lectures for the Great Courses, the philosopher Phil Cary points out that today, in the shadow of the Holocaust, we tend to worry about "becoming machines." Whereas in ancient philosophy, the top concern was more than we would "degenerate into beasts."

Looking at myself, the people I know, and the world around us, I think we flatter ourselves in worrying about becoming "too rational." I think the ancients had it (more) right — that the biggest threat to our personal sovereignty is generally that we become slaves to our own disordered drives, desires, and instincts.

That said, I've always tended towards the romantic side. I don't think it has to be an either or. Rationality and self-discipline/self-government need not mean a sterile and robotic life. Rather, when we are most in control of ourselves, we are most able to love and help others. Our love is more ours in this case, less an effect of external causes.

Plato, Augustine, and Hegel are both very much "be ruled by reason," types, but then they also write more about love and the family than other major philosophers I can think of.

:up:

Perhaps look up the definition of a metaphor if you don't know what a metaphor is. — Vaskane

You have just responded like an emotionally hurt child.
Try to answer my question:

How would you demonstrate your own ability to be emotionless? — universeness

rather than seek ridiculous distractions, as described by the thread author:

why bring politics into this discussion ? — Massimo

This is not a choice. Emotionalism is a fact of human life.

who are you to judge what is and isn't a ridiculous distraction ? If such even exists.

Emotion and reason are intimately connected in the brain, and they are not in perpetual opposition.

Humans whose emotions and reason are disconnected in varying degrees) aren't robots, they're psychopaths or sociopaths. Guilt, a powerful emotion, does not operate in their brains to curb decisions which are anti-social.

The best bet for people is to accept that they have emotions (some of which are very strong and may be easily provoked) and learn how to manage them. Most of us learn how to live with the emotional machinery we have--sometime; maybe not till 50 or 60, but eventually.

"emotionalism" isn't a philosophical approach to life. Some people make it a practice to display a lot of their emotions openly. Others of us, like us white protestant males, keep our emotions to ourselves -- not a particularly healthy practice, either.

There are those who try to live like robots without Emotions which really doesn't make much sense because weather we like it or not we as humans have profound emotions and should not deny them. But still I would love to hear the criticisms of emotionalism even though I probably already know what they are. I think that acting on Emotions is what emotionalism is.

Don't confuse not showing emotions externally with not possessing or using emotions (internally). In competitive environments, generally speaking showing emotions can distract oneself and definitely is seen as a weakness by one's competition, making one a target for their attacks.

In general, having an icy exterior signals to others mental strength, resolve and grit, thus those looking for easy prey look elsewhere. However, intelligently using naturally occurring emotional energy and channeling it in useful ways is a competitive advantage, just don't let them catch you doing it.

who is attacking me and why ? Seriously what are you talking about are people looking to eat me if I show to little or to much emotion.

then why do most people believe that reason and emotions are separate ?

People entertain all sorts of wrong ideas, like the mind and body being two separate things. Blame Descartes for that.

Many people 'privilege' rational thought and denigrate emotion, overlooking the fact that fast emotional responses are a critical part of human survival. Fear get's you moving fast on short notice. Lust keeps the world populated and most of us find it quite fun. Etc.

Thinking is critical too, of course, and one of the things that encourages thinking is the pleasure we experience when we solve a problem.

It SEEMS like our hearts and heads (so to speak) are opposed to each other. But generally our hearts and heads are on the same page.

It's folk wisdom (more like folk bullshit) that mind and emotion are separate.

:lol: Sounds to me that you are both quite emotional creatures. Perhaps, with little ability to be otherwise.

Plato placed emotion as the intermediary between contrary forces, the body and the mind. Sometimes emotion takes direction from the mind, like when the law is being enforced, and sometimes it takes direction from the body, like when the law is being broken. Sometimes it might even be left directionless, when a person is lost and confused.

I don't take kindly to your mocking insult. Ad hominins are a last resort of someone losing a debate.

I have very little interest or concern regarding what you find to be a mocking insult.
I have even less interest in your lack of ability to assess who won or didn't win a debate.
I consider our boring exchange over.
I suggest we ignore each others posts in the future. I prefer to debate with grown ups.

I don't take kindly to your mocking insult. — Massimo

He always insults and disrespects other users who don't think like him. Trust me when I say that he will destroy your energy and waste your time as well. My advice is to ignore him. Something difficult because he is always around posting hate and vacuous messages. What I don't understand is why moderators keep him here...

Massimo, you have posted very interesting comments here, and I wish you a good experience here. Welcome. :smile:

Well root my toot! who knew it was as simple as that! :cool: