Friday, October 23, 2015

Hunter Maats — The Rational Case for Emotions

Perhaps, in our excitement over our technological progress, we have trained ourselves to worship a false idol. We have gone so far in the direction of being obsessed with technology, robotics, big data—the cold, calculated, and rational— that we have forgotten that the most valuable asset we have in solving human problems is, in fact, our humanity.
This is not a recent development. Since the time of Plato, the West has worshipped reason. It is the ability to think critically that separates man from the beasts. Reason allowed Plato to philosophize, Pythagoras to perform his mathematics, and Aristotle to explore the precursors to science. Reason was considered to be pure, unsullied by our animal instincts.
The natural implication, then, was that emotions were the enemy—base and dirty, coming from our most animal selves. Emotions like fear and shame could shatter the philosopher’s stoicism and turn him into a cringing wretch. Even celebrated emotions, such as love (be it romantic or filial), drew contempt for being “irrational.” With the Scientific Revolution, our reverence for reason has only grown. And today, we depend on computers and technology more than ever before, using them to reduce or eliminate what we call “human error.” Plato seems poised to emerge the victor.
There are myths in every field and this a one of the chief myths of philosophy. The ancients were not under the spell of reason as most people think. Rather, this occurred in Europe at the time of the rise of modern philosophy beginning especially with Descartes and the success of modern science.

Nor were modern philosophy and modern science as separate as some imagine either. Descartes is considered the originator of analytic geometry and Leibniz of the calculus, although Newton took it a step further. It is at this stage that reason began to be differentiated from passion in the way described above. Kant then writes a critique of "pure reason." Cognitive science reveals what the ancients realized. Reason and emotion are bound up and cannot be disentangled.

Ancient thought and the medieval thought that was based upon it were more nuanced about the relationship of reason and emotion than modern rationalism. In Republic Book IV, 426-435, Plato distinguished four "virtues" or excellences — prudence (φρόνησις, phronēsis), justice ((δικαιοσύνηdikaiosynē)), temperance (σωφροσύνηsōphrosynē), and fortitude (ἀνδρεία, andreia).

These are also found in the Bible.
The deuterocanonical book Wisdom of Solomon 8:7 reads, "She [Wisdom] teaches temperance, and prudence, and justice, and fortitude, which are such things as men can have nothing more profitable in life." Wikipedia
To these virtues, Saint Paul added the three theological virtues — faith, hope and love — Πίστις, Ἐλπίς καὶ Ἀγάπη (Pistis, Elpis, and Agape). Medieval Scholastic philosophy was founded on the four "cardinal virtues" of ancient Greek thought and the three Pauline "theological virtues."

The ancients and medievals held that there are two types of feeling, one associated with the "animal passion," which arises from the sense appetite. It was symbolized as the stomach and its virtue was temperance, which is the ability to socialize animal passions.

The second type of feeling was taken to be particularly human. It arises from the rational appetite, the perfection of which is unconditional altruistic love. It was symbolized by the chest, specifically "the heart." "The heart" in this sense is not the physical organ on the left side of the body, but the center between the breasts. It is where one points when one points to oneself. This is the seat of the self, so to speak, although self is non-localized.

Prudence or practical wisdom was symbolized as the head. Justice is the harmony and balance of these three in an integrated human being.

It was not until after the Scientific Revolution that this view changed to blaming the dichotomy between reason and emotion on Plato and the ancients. Nor were all moderns under its spell. William Blake excoriated it in "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell." However, there was a divide between rationalism and romanticism that opened into a chasm. "Thinking people" inhabited on side of academia, for example, and "feeling people" the other. This battle is still being fought in the halls of education.

In The Abolition of Man, C. S. Lewis criticized the modern Western conception of human nature as overlooking the rational appetite, conflating emotion with sense appetite as animal passion that reason must overcome.
“We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
This is a major flow at the heart of the contemporary conception of rationality that has infected many important areas of thought, including economics.

John Stuart Mill criticized the naïve approach to Utilitarianism on these grounds.
“It is indisputable that the being whose capacities of enjoyment are low, has the greatest chance of having them fully satisfied; and a highly endowed being will always feel that any happiness which he can look for, as the world is constituted, is imperfect. But he can learn to bear its imperfections, if they are at all bearable; and they will not make him envy the being who is indeed unconscious of the imperfections, but only because he feels not at all the good which those imperfections qualify.

It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is only because they only know their own side of the question.” — Utilitarianism
Evonomics
The Rational Case for Emotions
Hunter Maats

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

There is the KNOWER, organs of knowledge, field of knowledge. FEELER, organs of feeling, field of feeling. There is also desire (evolution) which leads to action.

In the external world, feeling (touching) begins with the five senses (extensions of touching) and ability to sense the forces of the physical world. Feeling extends to the emotions and an ability to feel the forces of the emotional world. It then extends to the heart and the ability to feel the energies (light) of the Feeler. It then extends to the Spirit and the ability to feel the power of that which sustains the hidden world and by extension, foundation of our world.

Knowing begins in the lower mind that deals with the physical world and its forces, (creating a sense of self - the 'I'), freedom from which entails control over the senses and their physical forces; the complete subjugation of the physical body to the Knower.

Knowledge of the emotions means recognition of the pairs of opposites, positive and negative, between which poles most people swing. The pivotal point is the 'I'. The Knower requires control over this oscillating force in order that sentiency may deepen to the point where the heart can be felt, and the energies within it become the reality; so that the Knower may be seen, like the jewel in the lotus, or perfume of the most beautiful of flowers - revealed to the man in the physical world. Complete stabilisation of the emotional body and attunement of the emotional body to the vibration~energies of the heart, and knowledge of the Self is the goal.

Control over the mind begins with the Knower being able to discriminate between the organs of knowledge, the field of knowledge and Itself. The goal is control over the mind-stuff (mental body) so that it is not thrown into activity by the senses, intellect, or the 'I'; but is held still, focused, concentrated and contemplative – a blank screen awaiting impression from above, from the Knower. In complete harmony, it is open to the Will of the Knower and the will of the 'I' is no more. It is both an organ of vision and window into the lower world, and a receptive plate of impression.

It is from this point that the Knower can begin safely to build one end of the bridge to the world of its genesis above, fulfilling desire, whilst maintaining a clear channel to the physical brain (physical putty which has to change over time in response to the new energies).

According to Patanjali (lived some 10,000 years ago, say the Hindus) ….

Anonymous said...

That was an epic post, Tom. Should be a stickey.