Posted by ghostshadow on December 20, 2005, at 9:39:39
In reply to emotional encapsulation, posted by alexandra_k2 on December 20, 2005, at 0:46:59
> encapsulation!
> brilliant.
> i'm still trying to get my head around it...
> lets see... lets see...
>
> okay so...
>
> fear. what is fear? fear is what you feel in response to a danger / threat or a perceived danger / threat. (apparantly thats an analysis of what 'fear' means)
>
> so... if thats right then if you are afraid of the spider then you must believe that the spider is dangerous.
>
> but if you have a phobia of spiders then you can have a fear response to spiders even though you say that you know the spider cannot hurt you.
>
> hence... the thought that emotions may be irrational.
>
> because the person says they believe the spider isn't dangerous, but their fear shows us that they believe the spider is dangerous. (so there is a contradiction)
>
> but...
>
> is that analysis of the meaning of the term 'fear' enough to tell us more about what emotions really are (ie irrational?)
>
> (depends on your theory of reference)
> :-)
> probably not. not if emotion terms are supposed to be natural kind terms like 'oxygen' and 'spider' and 'heart' and 'neuron' and 'belief')
>
> what emotions really are would be an empirical matter... and the findings may require us to revise our criterion of application for the concept...
>
> we aren't consciously aware of believing that the spider is dangerous. we say that we know full well it isn't dangerous. so then the theory goes that you must unconsciously endorse the belief.
>
> what crap is this?
>
> emotional responses may be (but are not always) encapsulated from cognition.
>
> conditioning...
>
> need not be conscious.
>
> though it gets a little f*cked up with some stuff that does require cognition.
>
> but then sometimes cognition can't modify it because it is encapsulated from cognition.
>
> the way to change it...
>
> is experience.
>
> (alteration of the reinforcement contingencies)
>
> so...
> if there is emotional encapsulation going on...
> then they aren't (strictly speaking) irrational.
> just like if there is thinking encapsulation going on in delusions then they aren't (strictly speaking) irrational.
> there is perceptual encapsulation too...
> the parts of your brain that function as 'edge detectors' their verdicts aren't accessible to consciousness...
>
> hmm.
> i do believe i'm stoned :-)
>
> but anyways...
> the point was...
>
> that some emotions...
> aren't able to be modified by thinking.
> when the emotions get too intense...
> thinking goes off line.
>
> so what are ya supposed to do?
> i'm f*cked if i know.but phobias are, by definition, irrational. (and i want some of whatever you're on)
poster:ghostshadow
thread:590579
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20051216/msgs/590644.html