Where or what causes our moods? Emotions come from where?
Personally I hate the scientific answer of "chemicals in the brain", and though it is more realist, it’s not romantic, aesthetic, artist. I like to think my emotions mean something other then chemicals fizzing in my thinking box- I think of something more ‘color’.
(English just doesn’t have the right words I’m looking for. ‘Color’ I mean a flowing array of identity radiating from the physical origin of the body, it’s music like lines on a staff of sheet music, like playing the saxophone the colors blaring out of the bell swelling and shrinking at every note and tone.) I don’t know, speak and be heard.
Emotion is a biological trait that provides a catalyst for investigation. The investigation should be both external and introspective. If you miss the cue, you live as a slave to your emotions. That’s why there are so many unhappy people. It comes back to understanding your animal self.
“Hammer-minded intellectuals love to state facts arrogantly, falsely assuming that science has preeminence over everything, and that by sticking with science, they are intellectually invincible.”
Love this line Jason. Completely sums up a number of people I have met over the years.
Our emotions make sense to me as an evolutionary trait. I don’t disagree with synesthesia, but that still seems a lot like chemicals in the brain.
Feel the present moment. The TRUTH is that you are here NOW. Do not worry about proving the details, and don’t bother arguing with people who try and devalue your experience.
^It is by arguing that we learn to understand idea’s and the universe. Why is it that wherever spirituality is involved we must turn off the left side of our brain and take it at face value.
Bertrand Russel summed it up best for me in Philosophy for Laymen.
“To endure uncertainty is difficult, but so are most of the other virtues. For the learning of every virtue there is an appropriate discipline, and for the learning of suspended judgment the best discipline is philosophy.
But if philosophy is to serve a positive purpose, it must not teach mere skepticism, for, while the dogmatist is harmful, the skeptic is useless. Dogmatism and skepticism are both, in a sense, absolute philosophies; one is certain of knowing, the other of not knowing. What philosophy should dissipate is certainty, whether of knowledge or of ignorance. Knowledge is not so precise a concept as is commonly thought. Instead of saying ‘I know this’, we ought to say ‘I more or less know something more or less like this’.”
i dont get this thread that much. but i do want to say that i am one extremely synthesistic person. i taste music and hear colors. my emotions are full of vibrations of all sizes, shapes and forms. this i feel indeed in my heart area and see it im my minds eye as color and form. i do wish i could control it , but i cant. at least i never tried. perhaps i should.!
i give a shit if it is chemical or not. that part does not interest me.
what interests me is how do others perceive?
it seems hard for me to imagine other people not being able to see forms and colors when they hear jazz music for example. or not see dark blue and brown triangles in the chest area when they are sad…
@martijn. i read your article and liked it very much. this topic is of great interest for me.
Chris, “It is by arguing that we learn to understand idea’s and the universe. Why is it that wherever spirituality is involved we must turn off the left side of our brain and take it at face value.”
That’s very absolute. There are many other ways to understand ideas and the universe that are not arguing. Often times people choose not to argue concerning matters of “spirituality” because you cannot tell someone what they do and do not experience, since you possess your own consciousness, and not theirs.
To spend time intellectualizing and attempting to defeat someone’s qualia sounds like a great waste of time to me, and makes no logical sense other than trying to make them look foolish and yourself smart by comparison. (this does not, of course, apply when this person’s qualia is negatively affecting others in concrete ways, e.g. religious terrorist acts of violence.)
Isn’t it funny that a human says that emotions are just chemical reactions, while he himself, the human, according to his own belief system (the Science religion), is also nothing but chemical reactions. Chemical reactions devaluing other chemical reactions. Now that’s a funny sight! :)
The topic of emotions is actually one that I am focusing the next 3 months on. I’m going through The Presence Process by Michael Brown and his all framework is based on the idea that emotions are the causal point for our actions and for everything that happens around us. Emotion -> thought -> physical action. And the idea is that we have suppressed emotions from our childhood which we didn’t know how to process and now, as adults, we are still running from those emotions and mess things up. Anyway, I’m in week 2 of the “bootcamp” and I am starting to see emotions coming up and hell if I know how to deal with them :)
@chris Synesthesia are not just chemicals in the brain, its the whole body acting as a coherent sense organ.
As a philosophy student myself i would recommend reading someone else than bertrand russell if you ever want to understand the limits of language and the landscape of perception. Phenomenology (merleau-ponthy is a good place to start) for instance deals with a much wider scope of experience as it is.
Also, your view on skepticism is quite limited, check out hegel if interested (all big philosophers after him were responding to his work)
@ Martijn.. Really wish I was mature enough to have a desire to understand those philosophers when I read them last year.. Maybe I’ll have to re read them.. Kind of defeats the purpose of paying for school, but that’s my fault I guess haha
@Ka that sounds like an amazing process you are doing. is it a book you are reading and you are doing some kind of emotianal therapy meathod from that book? tell us more about it.
i like that idea that emotions cause thoughts which cause actions. that i can understand and even believe… so indeed what do we do with this information im imagiinging it like this.
. ok we have a blocked up abandonment complex from childhood. our friend leaves on an airplane and we get super sad and depressed. and our thoughts are glum, our actions make us go in a bar and get pissed.
and we dont know why. but after this meathod we can then try to ascess the root of this. and change it. but indeed how to do this!
sounds like physco therapy to me!
I don’t think I would ever have understood them without the lectures, introductions and discussion groups. Some of them are just unreadable. But once you understand them, it’s definitely worth it imo. Except for not being able to talk about it with just about everyone :P
@stonedragon, So the book is called The Presence Process and is written by a guy called Michael Brown. After a 100-page introduction, you get assignments for each of the following 10 weeks. Each week you have to do connected breathing which is basically meditation twice a day, to read the materials for that week and you have a Presence Activating Statement that you need to say whenever you remember (sort of a mantra). The whole point of this is to become more aware and as you become more aware, you start noticing emotions as they come up, you start seeing how reactive you are and then you deal with them. I’m describing this in very simplistic terms of course. I can’t say more because I’m only at week 2.
But I do resonate with a lot of what this guy is saying and as my current goal in life is to become as aware as possible, this work seems to fit perfectly. I’m now discovering that emotions do play an important part in my life and I’m even starting to understand women (just maybe 1% :p) because they live more in the emotional plane while the men are very mental. It’s funny that I’m with a girl now and I am telling her all these “discoveries” that I am making about emotions and about how I can ride an emotion or transform it into something else, and she says “Dooh!” :)) It seems I need to catch up.
All this process reminds me of transpersonal psychology and holotrophic breathing. There too, you had to breathe in a certain way while special music was played in the background and you then had various emotions and pains from the past appearing in your body and you had to somehow release them.
If I start crying when I see a baby, I know I’ve gone a bit too far :)
Why can’t it be a simple cause/effect relationship between thought and emotion and the resultant mood? I like some music because it stirs a positive emotion. I know some songs that I get a positive emotion from only because of the novelty of the song, and its ability to open up a part of my memories from my past. So why not, when you hear certain music it opens the memory to good times past. It doesn’t have to be something you heard before, just something that cues your memory to something to which you have attached a positive emotion.
You can make yourself feel happy merely by thinking about something positive from your past. Emotion on demand. Some people learn to display moods, as a way of manipulating people around them. Some people parade their moods around as a form of identity. Mood is a decision.
I think if we take the time to analyze our moods we will, more often than not, find that it is merely a reflection of the past and a resurgence of the emotions attached to that past.
I disagree, if you accept an idea without question then your wasting your intellectual ability.
It seems that your misinterpreting, (and to be honest we have drifted from), the original point, the Origin of Moods. Qualia are subjective experiences, input digested by the brain. Mood is output, something coming from the brain. At least as far as I understand it. If this is a misconception let me know.
Ill give them a look. Thanks.
Wikipedia’s Definition: Synesthesia is a neurologically based condition in which stimulation of one sensory or cognitive pathway leads to automatic, involuntary experiences in a second sensory or cognitive pathway.
The way we gather input from our body is through our brain, still sounds like chemical reactions to me.
That’s false reductionism, which is quite a common fallacy if you’re a hardcore physicalist. Have you read my article that discussed Mary’s Room?
Also, scrap the first recommendations: if you have the opportunity, read: spell of the sensous.
@ka that book sounds amazing. i might order it on amazon and join you in this project. as a woman i feel totally enveloped in my emotions so much that it is as if im under water and just swim around in them. being aware of them as they come up would provide me perhaps a better grip, and help me from sliding downwards which i tend to do at times.
Dick. i agree with you about the moods.that they are a reaction from the past, they are something like the clothes that the emotion wears. it is the action of the emotion.
it is a bummer if people get all moody and ruin the ambiance of a household, perhaps they indeed do it to get attention or sometimes they cant help it. like morning moods.
how many of you have that.
dont talk to me before my coffee and all that.
personally im fine in the morning but i know some people who arent!
“I disagree, if you accept an idea without question then your wasting your intellectual ability.”
If you reject all other ideas because you’re enamored with the materialistic view, you’re wasting you ability to enjoy life. At least entertain other ideas, be open that you may not know. And also, the intellect is just one tool to experience and make sense of this reality. Try to make use also of some other tools.
“Qualia are subjective experiences, input digested by the brain. Mood is output, something coming from the brain.”
So, how on Earth are subject experiences fed as input into the brain?There is a huge gap that science fails to address.
I literally JUST recorded a podcast that is right in line with the last page of this discussion;
“Thinking With A Hammer: The Binary Fallacy and Intellectual Arrogance: http://www.thinknowlivenow.com/media
Didn’t say I rejected all other idea’s, I simply believe that NOTHING should be accepted at face value and that EVERYTHING deserves at least one blink of the skeptics eye.
According to Martijn they are felt with more than just the brain, also with the body itself. So if were talking about input and output its felt via the nervous system, up the spinal cord, and into the brain which processes the information.
I await vehement replies.
Wow, intense guys.
So the idea came from last night and from two years ago: Two years ago I was in a concert band playing saxophone, and the connection I had playing that was spiritual, but I noticed that as I played the sheet music certain notes would be certain colors, not strongly, but just light colors. I didn’t care much at the time; but so last night I was siting around reading, and I hit the lights, room dark. I just started thinking. What are my moods? And after a stupid long time of meditation I saw rivers of color erupting from the lowest part of my rib cage that ebbed and flowed swelling and shrinking like a living part of my being that continued outward slowly fading off. It was so cool I hoped on HE and posted this thread dumbfounded.
I told my friends who looked at me stupid and kept saying the words “aura” over and over, but I just didn’t see it the same. To me aura is too static.
The best idea I can give you was this image I found, but it doesn’t scratch the surface. http://desktopwallpaper-s.com/19-Computers/-/Aura_color/
@chris, Cool, I also prefer to be skeptic but I am open to anything and I took down science from its pedestal because I realized it is really limited. I have the feeling that you are quite attached to the science dogma and as a consequence you have a blind spot. As the Zen saying goes “Empty your cup” ;)
Regarding emotions, I prefer to dive deep into them and to experience them and then I’ll see what conclusions I come up with.