Posted by Estella on May 18, 2006, at 21:30:43
In reply to Re: three factors of emotion pulled apart, posted by madeline on May 18, 2006, at 15:32:53
> "now if the theory is that certain kinds of bodily changes are necessary and sufficient for emotion then it would seem to be the case that people paralysed from the neck down cannot have emotions. does this seem plausible?"
> The primary nerves that control the "fight or flight" response and the "seat of sadness" come straight out of the brain.ah...
so emotions aren't the feeling of bodily changes...
they are the feeling of certain kinds of brain state changes (the kinds of brain state that are typically associated with bodily changes)?(that is where i was getting with that...)
it is interesting because studies have been done on paralysed people. the James-Lange theory of emotions... Well it was a bit hard to figure quite what they meant by emotions are the feelings of bodily changes. at one point I think james said something along the lines of:
our common sense intuition is that we cry because we are sad but really we are sad because we cry
(though i think he meant sadness is the phenomenology of crying)
but by bodily changes is he talking taxic responses (running away) or is he talking coarse grained responses (like crying) or is he talking relatively fine grained responses (like facial response and clenched fists etc) or is he talking very fine grained responses (like hormone and endocrine changes)
?
which of the above do paralysed people lack?
anyhoo...
someone or other did a survey of paralysed people because it was thought the James-Lange theory would predict that they wouldn't have emotional responses. They reported decrease in emotional responses. But then... Later studies came up with no decrease in emotional responses. Basically the data is mixed.
Basically the data doesn't show you squat anyhoo...
> Paralyzed people can mount a physical response to an emotion, because those nerves have not been severed.
depends on what kind of bodily changes are thought to be necessary and sufficient for emotion...
poster:Estella
thread:645293
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060513/msgs/645697.html