Would we be better of without EMOTIONS?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Not really. It is illogical to wipe out species of animals for example. So logical thing would be to minimise deaths?

---

Not if that species was a threat, then it would be logical to wipe them out. Same goes for humans. Threat = true = kill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

But we can think intellectually without emotions involved?
It is the intellect that frees us from the emotional bondage?

---

I'm not sure it's that easy. I'm not sure it's really possible to draw a line between emotions and intellect as one probably (I say probably!) relies on the other.

Can you have rational, without irrational?
Can you have objective without subjective?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

On serious note - yes. Emotions needs to be controlled by Rationality and guided to mutally beneficial ends... :-)

I guess we will have to wait for consciouss androids to see if an emotiona-less existence is feasible. I guess it will be but perhaps intelligent machines too will develop emotions in time.

---

Absolutely, and what a dilemma that would create :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

Not if that species was a threat, then it would be logical to wipe them out. Same goes for humans. Threat = true = kill.

---

Not necessarily. The threat could be easily contained?

Quote:

---

Can you have rational, without irrational?

---

hum...I don't know...need to think on that.

Quote:

---

Can you have objective without subjective?

---

Yes. Scientific Method.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Yes. Scientific Method.

---

Please explain?...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

Please explain?...

---

Scientific Method is the way to establish objectivity.

That doesn't really tell me anymore than the last comment. What is Scientific method (precisely), how does this method establish objectivity?

I'm not being pedantic here, I genuinely am not sure what you mean by this :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

That doesn't really tell me anymore than the last comment. What is Scientific method (precisely), how does this method establish objectivity?

I'm not being pedantic here, I genuinely am not sure what you mean by this :)

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

I'm not convinced on the issue of objectivity, although I'm not quite sure why (which is quite annoying). Perhaps it's something to do with the fact that in some ways, whilst the method may be sound, the interpretation is still subjective. Like statistics, for example, the numbers might be the numbers but you can say whatever you want with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

I'm not convinced on the issue of objectivity, although I'm not quite sure why (which is quite annoying).

---

With scientific method we have created computers and sent probes to distant planets. If that is not good enough for you then what is?

Scientific Method together with deductive logic is the only way we can verify objectivity. Rest is just subjective experiences of the individual.

I think objectivity in the scientific method can best be seen in Francis Bacon's Idols of False Knowledge philosophy. Described very briefly here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

With scientific method we have created computers and sent probes to distant planets. If that is not good enough for you then what is?

Scientific Method together with deductive logic is the only way we can verify objectivity. Rest is just subjective experiences of the individual.

---

Oh I agree, the scientific method works and as a system it's very effective, but not that it's necessarily because it's objective (or otherwise).

Still not entirely sure what it is that makes me feel (aarrggh - emotional decision making!) uncomfortable with this. I'll give it some more thought and come back to you on that one.

It raises an interesting point though. Without emotions would there be intuition?

Hmm, see I'm coming to this site a little late in the day was going to start straight in with emotion but see we have moved on. So, fine with me a little empiricism to kick off...Well trying to stick with the original question, empricism is okay; the theory of knowledge based on experience. My understanding of this concept is based on the ideology of the 17th century
Natural Philosophers Locke, Hooke, Newton et al. Okay so knowledge based on experience and how does that equate to emotion? And even more importantly how does that engage with:

Quote:

---

"Would we be better off without emotions?"

---

Well having developed over a serious period of time a limbic [mammalian] brain, it would appear that there is no choice over having or not having emotions, because it is all tied into our limbic brain which evidently melds the circuitry of the enteric nervous system and the reptilian brain into our sense of emotion. Emotion it is believed, comes prior to thought, and that is exactly where most people run into great difficulty. Our emotional experience is an immediate and primal response that has very little if anything to do with our ability to reason. Thankfully the neo-cortex, takes the 'edge' off those limbic emotions and allows us to be a liitle more goal oriented, abstract and well communicate verbally. So I think the answer has already been given. If emotion does come before thought, then lets face it, we need those emotions badly. Or it would be "Life, but not as we know it, Scotty". [James T. Kirk, Starship Enterprise, Signing off].

http://www.seishindo.org/articles/four-brains.html

If we did not have emotions...how could we tell if it were better?
Aren't our emotions the way we use our subjective judgement ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueSkyGB

If we did not have emotions...how could we tell if it were better?

---

We use a objective standard. For example you might say it feels 40 degrees outside and someone else would say it feels 30 degrees outside. Objectively we can measure the temperature with a thermometer. Thus problem resolved. No emotions involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Haven

Emotion it is believed, comes prior to thought, and that is exactly where most people run into great difficulty.

---

Thermometer? Don't think so, who would have thought of one let alone made one, if as is believed emotion comes prior to thought? Hmm?

http://www.seishindo.org/articles/four-brains.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

We use a objective standard. For example you might say it feels 40 degrees outside and someone else would say it feels 30 degrees outside. Objectively we can measure the temperature with a thermometer. Thus problem resolved. No emotions involved.

---

But that is because temperature is a concept that can be measured. How does one measure "better"?

No. Emotions are one of the few human traits that separate us from our computers. What could ever emerge from a unemotional existence that wasn't limited to 2+2=4?...and never Why? What Art would exist in this state?: Poetry limited to a calculation of lines and meters; Music to a calculation of notes and scales; etc.. Without the heart's expression and the soul's depth, what would humanity create or enjoy...worthy of humans?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

But that is because temperature is a concept that can be measured. How does one measure "better"?

---

Depends what "better" you want to measure?

Are green vegetable better for you?

Yes, it is possible to get objective scale measure for this?

Are computers better at controlling the braking system in a car on a icy road or humans?

Yes, we can get an objective scale measure for this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrayFoxDown

No. Emotions are one of the few human traits that separate us from our computers.

---

But humans at the level of DNA are digital replicators.

Quote:

---

What could ever emerge from a unemotional existence that wasn't limited to 2+2=4?...

---

A peaceful world? a "happy" world - unfettered by cheaos of emotions?

Quote:

---

What Art would exist in this state?

---

Circle would still be a circle - a perfection of geometry?

Quote:

---

Poetry limited to a calculation of lines and meters
; Music to a calculation of notes and scales; etc.. Without the heart's expression and the soul's depth, what would humanity create or enjoy...worthy of humans?

---

I have no idea if poetry can exist without emotions. Perhaps without emotions poetry would be redundant and we will find something else to do :-)

Then we'll have a world of cyborgs. While this may seem very intellectually entertaining when confined to science fiction stories and related discussions, I'd rather not be a part of it. I suppose I'd be in a similar situation to that of Miles in INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS...a film that once terrified me, and still does as I witness society becoming more and more self-absorbed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrayFoxDown

Then we'll have a world of cyborgs.

---

I think this will be inevitable. That is the only way we can compete with computers of the future :-)

Quote:

---

While this may seem very intellectually entertaining when confined to science fiction stories and related discussions, I'd rather not be a part of it.

---

To compete with computers I think you will have no choice in that matter :-)

Quote:

---

I suppose I'd be in a similar situation to that of Miles in INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS...a film that once terrified me, and still does as I witness society becoming more and more self-absorbed.

---

LOL :-)

Daleks in the Doctor Who serios terrified the hell out of me aged 8!!!

Then, if you're right, I'd welcome my inevitable death and oblivion with open arms. With that, I'll close this exchange. Regards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Depends what "better" you want to measure?

Are green vegetable better for you?

Yes, it is possible to get objective scale measure for this?

Are computers better at controlling the braking system in a car on a icy road or humans?

Yes, we can get an objective scale measure for this?

---

Is red better than green?
Is 71 degrees better than 70 degrees?
Are brown eyes better than blue eyes?
Is spinach better than broccoli?
Is Coke better than Pepsi?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

Is red better than green?

---

Red light has a different frequency than green So which is better depends on the context.

Quote:

---

Is 71 degrees better than 70 degrees?

---

A 1 degree difference temperature makes a enzyme work or not. Depends on the context.

Quote:

---

Are brown eyes better than blue eyes?

---

Brown light and blue light have different frequencies. I believe that blue eyes has some advantage in a snowy climate?

Quote:

---

Is spinach better than broccoli?

---

Again the context? Levels of vitamin c would be different.

Quote:

---

Is Coke better than Pepsi?

---

All these require a context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrayFoxDown

Then, if you're right, I'd welcome my inevitable death and oblivion with open arms.

---

If we can download our consciousness into cyberspace then death would be irrelevant :-)

I'm sorry, but you seem to want to reduce everything down to some extremely simplistic answer and I am afraid I don't accept that. You keep referring to "context", but subjectivity is really what it comes down to. There are some things that may be measured on an objective scale and there are some that are simply subjective. I think you are grasping at straws a bit here. Vitamin C levels? Pfft. :)

The fact remains that humans are not the only creatures that experience emotions. Other species feel at least anger, contentment and fear. Social bonding also occurs. None of these may be as complex as human emotions, as we could assume that complex emotions require complex brains...However, if an emotionless state was "better" wouldn't every species here already reflect that?

If there was some biological state of not feeling that was advantageous, would it not exist in nature already? The fact that it doesn't suggests to me that the ability to feel emotion is possibly necessary to survival.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

I'm sorry, but you seem to want to reduce everything down to some extremely simplistic answer and I am afraid I don't accept that.

---

That is the beauty of logic :-)

Quote:

---

You keep referring to "context", but subjectivity is really what it comes down to.

---

Even logic requires a context to work with.

Quote:

---

There are some things that may be measured on an objective scale and there are some that are simply subjective. I think you are grasping at straws a bit here. Vitamin C levels? Pfft. :)

---

I am clutching at logic of straws ;-)

Quote:

---

The fact remains that humans are not the only creatures that experience emotions. Other species feel at least anger, contentment and fear.

---

Yes. They do all these things. But most animals survive on instincts.

Quote:

---

However, if an emotionless state was "better" wouldn't every species here already reflect that?

---

Plants and bacteria - the largest group of living things on this planet live without any emotions. And they thrive quite well.

Quote:

---

If there was some biological state of not feeling that was advantageous, would it not exist in nature already?

---

It does and in abundance.

Quote:

---

The fact that it doesn't suggests to me that the ability to feel emotion is possibly necessary to survival.

---

Emotions not necessary for survival.

"Is red better than green?"

Not really...I'm one of those that genetics had the fortune to :p endow with
colorblindness.....red and green look...welll... very much alike in my color spectrum...:lol:
Now blues and yellows and various shades of what can only be described to a non color blind person as multitudes of shades of all the other colors kind of blended.......used to know a website where apparently people could see digitally enhanced photos that replicated what we see...oh well..short term memory or is that considered long term?.....:lol:

oops :)
back to the subject..
I really wouldn't like to have a life without emotions....
even those that are painful...death of loved ones....
I tell people that there are things that I should not have done in the past and things that I should have done,,,
but those moments and emotions have shaped me into the person I am today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueSkyGB

back to the subject..
I really wouldn't like to have a life without emotions....
even those that are painful...death of loved ones....
I tell people that there are things that I should not have done in the past and things that I should have done,,,
but those moments and emotions have shaped me into the person I am today.

---

Have you ever felt an intensity of pain of emotions that you wanted it to go away because you can't bear it?

Several in fact...
death of my father from a long bout with cancer....is the most vivid....a multitude of emotions...pain, sadness, loss...relief for his freedom from pain...then the guilt of havings those feelings ...then the emotions of a very nasty divorce....time has mellowed those.....:flare:
another a long ago...memory....that I prefer not to discuss in public, sorry.

so yes...I think ..to quote and old song by the Band
Life is a carnival...

Enjoy it while it lasts...
as my tagline/sig says :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Plants and bacteria - the largest group of living things on this planet live without any emotions. And they thrive quite well.

---

Yes, I knew you were going to bring that up. :) Humans are just a weensey bit more complex than plants and bacteria. Insects too, actually. However, your opening post is would we be better off without emotions...unless you are a plant (is a Lote-Tree considered a plant?) then I suggest that the discussion be confined to sentient complex humans and leave plants and bacteria out of it. Humans have for better or worse shaped the planet to fit their needs and would this have been possible without the development of social structures driven by emotions and need. Emotions can and do drive need, all though they are not the only imperative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Emotions not necessary for survival.

---

Yes, so you keep saying. You can repeat it 60,000 more times and your argument won't hold any more weight with me than it does now. I'm sorry Lote, you are a bright guy but you are not omnicient and all knowing, and the fact is I don't agree with you and I am not changing my mind based on the arguments you present. They simply aren't compelling enough...because there is no definitive proof and there never will be. All there is, is your opinion and while I think you're cool, your opinion doesn't equal fact. ;)

Humans have always had emotions and will continue to have them. Arguments declaring life would be better without emotions or not are based on sheer speculation....speculation based on the thinking of a complex brain that has always experienced emotion and thus is somewhat biased? How do you know your argument isn't based on emotion...even an emotion you don't care to admit to?

Bluesky, yea...I agree. While I would not want to ever live over events and emotions in my past, they have shaped me into the person I am today, for better or worse. :) (probably a great deal more worse than better!) :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueSkyGB

Several in fact...
death of my father from a long bout with cancer....

---

My condolences. I lost my brother aged 18 to leaukemia. He was never ill in his life...

Quote:

---

is the most vivid....a multitude of emotions...pain, sadness, loss...relief for his freedom from pain...then the guilt of havings those feelings ...then the emotions of a very nasty divorce....time has mellowed those.....:flare:
another a long ago...memory....that I prefer not to discuss in public, sorry.

so yes...I think ..to quote and old song by the Band
Life is a carnival...

Enjoy it while it lasts...
as my tagline/sig says :D

---

And you still don't think we would have been better off without emotions?

How about getting rid of negative emotions?

Like jealousy? Hatred?

Without the mix, whether it be a large perentage or small...all of those together make me what I am...granted I'm not perfect....
far from it:p ....and probably a little crazy to boot.....
I wouldn't subtract any emotion from my life..
The lows have made the highs ..that much sweeter.

I don't know that we would be better off without emotions. Some emotions keeps us in check don't they?

If I had to go without, I'd like to get rid of some certain memories that cause certain emotions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

However, your opening post is would we be better off without emotions...unless you are a plant (is a Lote-Tree considered a plant?) then I suggest that the discussion be confined to sentient complex humans and leave plants and bacteria out of it.

---

OK - my question is to them - would sentient complex humans be better off without emotions?

I say yes - because there would no hatred, jelousy, envy etc that causes some much strife in human relationship with other humans.

Quote:

---

Humans have for better or worse shaped the planet to fit their needs and would this have been possible without the development of social structures driven by emotions and need.

---

This is speculation of course on your behalf because we don't know how we would have evolved without emotions.

Quote:

---

Emotions can and do drive need, all though they are not the only imperative.

---

Emotional derive needs to be controlled by reason.

Quote:

---

I'm sorry Lote, you are a bright guy but you are not omnicient and all knowing, and the fact is I don't agree with you and I am not changing my mind based on the arguments you present.

---

LOL :-) I am not that vain to claim omniscience :-)
Kath I am not trying to change your views. That would be arrogant of anyone to do this! I am just providing a counter argument to yours. It may not be correct or to your liking but an argument nevertheless.

Quote:

---

They simply aren't compelling enough...because there is no definitive proof and there never will be. All there is, is your opinion and while I think you're cool, your opinion doesn't equal fact. ;)

---

I have not stated any facts. This thread is just an speculation from the begining Kath :-)

Without speculation humans would still be living in caves... :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shalot

Some emotions keeps us in check don't they?

---

Which emotions would those be?

Quote:

---

If I had to go without, I'd like to get rid of some certain memories that cause certain emotions.

---

I can sympathise with that!

I think getting rid of all negative emotions like jelousy and hatred would be a good thing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

This is speculation of course on your behalf because we don't know how we would have evolved without emotions.

---

And that is why I used the word "would"...as that implies speculation. Terribly sorry I forgot the question mark, I figured it *would* have been easy to see that I was also speculating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Emotional derive needs to be controlled by reason.

---

And that is why I said there were other imperatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

It may not be correct or to your liking but an argument nevertheless......I have not stated any facts. This thread is just an speculation from the begining Kath :-)

---

You sometimes state things as if they are fact....You stated this earlier "Emotions not necessary for survival." That seems a bit definite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Without speculation humans would still be living in caves... :-)

---

And I have never said otherwise...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shalot

I don't know that we would be better off without emotions. Some emotions keeps us in check don't they?

If I had to go without, I'd like to get rid of some certain memories that cause certain emotions.

---

Do you mean emotions like guilt or remorse?

It would be nice to get rid of some negative emotions, but how do we know they don't serve some purpose? People say guilt is a negative emotion, yet I would feel guilty if I did something bad...even if I knew I could get away with it...so the guilt serves a purpose? It prods my conscience....Certainly unhealthy guilt is not productive but what of "normal" guilt?

How do we know there isn't a similiar purpose to other negative emotions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

Terribly sorry I forgot the question mark, I figured it *would* have been easy to see that I was also speculating.

---

No probs. omnisicence has granted you pardon :-)

Just kiddin :-)

Quote:

---

You sometimes state things as if they are fact....You stated this earlier "Emotions not necessary for survival." That seems a bit definite.

---

In the context of trees for example it is not :-)
In the context of humans we can only speculate ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Yes. They do all these things. But most animals survive on instincts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Emotions not necessary for survival.

---

These quotes are at odds, and I entirely disagree with the second point. Emotions are necessary for survival, particularly those nasty negative ones like fear, mistrust, suspicion. Without these emotions what would prevent us from stepping off cliffs? And I know you're going to make some comment about rationality, but show me a rational 2 year old? Even the best parents can't watch their kids 24/7 and rely on kids emotions - i.e. fear of getting told off, desire to please, to give them limits within which they are protected. Without emotion most people wouldn't make it past childhood.

Also, you said earlier on:

"Primal Emotions are instinctive. Others can be consciously evoked eg. compassion."

On which basis by getting rid of 'primal emotions', which you still define as emotion, we would have no instinct. So at least we need these 'primal emotions', and therefore couldn't exist without emotion.

So we're still back to the question of whether we'd be better off without emotion. I still feel that we wouldn't be. I'll accept sadness if I can have joy and, lets face it, most of the time we are neither one thing or the other, most of the time we are just being and this being is punctuated by periods of something else, happiness, sadness, anger, desire, you name it. It'd be no fun without it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

These quotes are at odds, and I entirely disagree with the second point. Emotions are necessary for survival, particularly those nasty negative ones like fear, mistrust, suspicion.

---

The second was in the context of Trees and bacteria and other lifeforms that have no emotions.

Quote:

---

So we're still back to the question of whether we'd be better off without emotion. I still feel that we wouldn't be. I'll accept sadness if I can have joy and, lets face it, most of the time we are neither one thing or the other, most of the time we are just being and this being is punctuated by periods of something else, happiness, sadness, anger, desire, you name it. It'd be no fun without it.

---

But imagine - there would not be any jealousy, hate, anger etc...we will be free from chaos of emotions :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

But imagine - there would not be any jealousy, hate, anger etc...we will be free from chaos of emotions :-)

---

Yes, and how boring it would be ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

Yes, and how boring it would be ;)

---

Will there be a concept of boredom without emotions?

Do trees get bored? :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lote-Tree

Will there be a concept of boredom without emotions?

Do trees get bored? :-)

---

Probably not, but perhaps that's the point. Without emotion it would just be existence, not life (before you shoot me down, I mean that figuratively!).

As for the trees, you'd have to ask one. Let me know what you find out.

Do you have a particular love of trees Lote? You refer to them alot!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bii

Do you have a particular love of trees Lote? You refer to them alot!

---

LOL :-)

Quote:

---

O profound,
Silent tree, by restraining valour
With patience, you revealed creative
Power in its peaceful form.
Thus we come
To your shade to learn the art of peace,
To hear the word of silence; weighed down
With anxiety, we come to rest
In you tranquil blue-green shade, to take
Into our souls life rich, life ever
Juvenescent, life true to earth, life
Omni-victorious. I am certain
My thoughts have borne me to your essence-
Where the same fire as the sun’s ritual
Fire of creation quietly assumes
In your cool green form.
O sun-drinker,
The fire with which - by milking hundreds
Of centuries of days sunlight –
You have filled your core, man has received
As your gift, making him world-mighty,
Greatly honoured, rival to the gods:
His shining strength, kindled by your flame,
Is the wonder of the universe
As it cuts through daunting obstacles.
Man, whose life is in you, who is soothed
By your cool shade, strengthened by your power.
Adorned by your garland –
O tree, friend
Of man, dazed by your leafy flutesong
I speak today for him as I make
This verse-homage,
As I dedicate this offering
To you.
-Rabindranath Tagore

---