You ask questions, but offer no answers. How about assuming that there
is
an answer and trying to see what it is? When questions like these are
raised, the implication is that you don't think there is any answer,
because you've already said you find the theory unconvincing regarding
the
positive emotions. What made it seem unconvincing? Do you have some
basis
for assuming that the same theory can't explain positive emotions?
Could
positive emotions be included by adding something to the theory? I
think
it's poossible, but perhaps you have some reason why it isn't, or
shouldn't
be, possible. What say you?
If I were clever enough to think of a fix, I would suggest it. I have
no reason to believe that a fix is impossible in principle.
Bruce Gregory
"Great Doubt: great awakening. Little Doubt: little awakening. No
Doubt: no awakening."
My proposition about emotion is that whatever emotion you're feeling,
detailed examination of the experience will show that it consists of
experiences you can trace to changes in bodily state, in the context
of some reference perception you're trying to achieve. Since in this
model reference signals are not themselves directly perceived, you are
most likely to be aware of the physiological preparations and the
efforts you are making to reduce some error without at the moment
knowing what the error is.
I don't find your description very convincing when it comes to positive
emotions. Why is sunset beautiful? Why do we like to look at beautiful
things? What evokes the positive emotions we associate with the
presence of some others? What is the source of the satisfaction we
achieve when we do certain things? Where is the error when look at the
Grand Canyon and what are the physiological preparations we are making
to reduce it?
Positive emotions: How about the bodily sensations associated with the
reduction of error? Conflict = perceptions of error (guilt, anxiety,
fear). The process of resolving error = perceptions of positive feelings
(satisfaction, joy, etc.). The state of no error, anywhere, about anything?
Possibly not possible in the balancing act of being a living system.
However, some people over time have reported moments of an indescribable
state of ... I've heard it called Cosmic Consciousness. Appearing very
briefly and out of context with what was going on at the time. I can't
cite - Sam Randlett, who some of you knew, had a collection of such
incidents, but I don't.
some people over time have reported moments of
an indescribable
state of … I’ve heard it called Cosmic Consciousness. Appearing
very
briefly and out of context with what was going on at the time. I
can’t
cite - Sam Randlett, who some of you knew, had a collection of such
incidents, but I don’t.
The classic work on the subject, with many examples, is Cosmic
Consciousness by Richard M. Bucke, MD., published in Philadelphia in
1901, praised by William James, who called it “an addition to
psychology of first-rate importance”. It’s gone through countless
editions. His initial inspiration was his friendship with Walt
Whitman.