[David Goldstein (2003.06.30.1336 EDT)]
[From Bill Powers (2003.05.30.0637 MDT)]
David Goldstein (2003.06.30 EDT)
Bill,
I know that not everything I perceive is neutral emotionally. I look at
some faces, and I have a positive emotional reaction based on past
experience with a person. I look at other faces, and I may have a
negative emotional reaction. Still others may result in a completely
neutral emotional reaction.
What is the HPCT explanation of this?
I would think that we are dealing with the memory component of control
systems.
Why couldn't the perception of approaching a car too fast and too close
have the same kind of emotional reaction based on memory?
David
ยทยทยท
-----Original Message-----
From: David Goldstein [mailto:davidmg@mail.snip.net]
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 1:43 PM
To: Control Systems Group Network
Cc: davidmg@snip.net
Subject: Re: Ruminations on Importance
[From Bill Powers (2003.07.01.2235 MDT)]
David Goldstein (2003.06.30.1336 EDT) --
I know that not everything I perceive is neutral emotionally.
I would prefer to say "I experience emotions when perceiving some things."
I look at
some faces, and I have a positive emotional reaction based on past
experience with a person. I look at other faces, and I may have a
negative emotional reaction. Still others may result in a completely
neutral emotional reaction. What is the HPCT explanation of this?
According to my theory of emotion, this "reaction" is really the result of
preparing to take some kind of action with regard to this person, the
action reflecting your goals or desires and the degree to which your
perceptions fail to match them. The emotions become particularly strong if
you can't actually act to correct the errors. If the control systems in
question happen to be operating outside consciousness, those systems that
are conscious might simply experience an inexplicable change in bodily
state (a feeling) without seeing the goal and error that explains the
change. They might then conclude that the emotional sensations are being
caused by something external, and attach the emotion to whatever cause
seems plausible.
I would think that we are dealing with the memory component of control
systems.
Why couldn't the perception of approaching a car too fast and too close
have the same kind of emotional reaction based on memory?
It could, but I think my explanation is simpler. And of course I would say
that emotion always follows from error, rather than causing actions directly.
Best,
Bill P.
from [ Marc Abrams (2003.07.02.0734) ]
[From Bill Powers (2003.07.01.2235 MDT)]
I would prefer to say "I experience emotions when perceiving some things."
I think you 'experience' 'emotions' with everything.
According to my theory of emotion, this "reaction" is really the result of
preparing to take some kind of action with regard to this person, the
action reflecting your goals or desires and the degree to which your
perceptions fail to match them. The emotions become particularly strong if
you can't actually act to correct the errors. If the control systems in
question happen to be operating outside consciousness, those systems that
are conscious might simply experience an inexplicable change in bodily
state (a feeling) without seeing the goal and error that explains the
change. They might then conclude that the emotional sensations are being
caused by something external, and attach the emotion to whatever cause
seems plausible.
I think your theory of emotions is wrong. Plain and simple.
It could, but I think my explanation is simpler.
It might be, but it's at the expense of being accurate.
And of course I would say that emotion always follows from error, rather
than causing actions directly.
I believe just the opposite.
I happen to like my hand waving better then your hand waving.
Marc