Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions

**Biomech** · Subject: Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:23 am

I've recently re-realized the arbitrarity of subjectivity. The reason why the concept of beauty for example is so widely varied is because it's so superficial. Most things that people think about subjectively is really nothing more that a reflection of their own narcissism. It's natural for people to love themselves to a certain extent. It keeps us alive in nature when we care about our selves. So really, a closed mind is nothing more than a box of mirrors.

I'd be willing to state that the floor of that box is the most obvious form of narcissism because it's the basis on which the other walls are built, the value of one's self and one's own life by extension.

Morality is also a wall. Morals stop us from doing certain things if our morals are strong enough. Morals are generally something that helps keep us alive (and we want to live because we love ourselves, yet more narcissism) and those walls are generally made of fear. If our morals are not strong, those walls can be broken. It's a struggle between the id and the super-ego.

The id is the part of us that wants instant gratification and pleasure. The super-ego is the side that reinforces the idea that may not always be best for us in the long run by imposing feelings of guilt when we do something against our morals. The super-ego is what creates the wall of morality and subjectivity. The ego however is what makes the final choice, it's the more rational side that weighs the outcome.

So really, emotions only serve to manipulate us.
It's intended to be to our advantage for survival but there are obviously times that they can be to our disadvantage.

So my question is:
Is emotional manipulation required for survival?
Without the id craving pleasure there is no motivation.
Without the super-ego causing pain there are no boundaries/cautions.

All that is left is the ego, but without either of those... it's probably useless.

_________________
Testing Testing...

**mcr666** · Subject: Re: Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:03 pm

I'm a bit confused........

_________________
The worst kinda guy to argue with

**Nation** · Subject: Re: Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:50 pm

I don't think you need emotional manipulation to SURVIVE.
Survive isn't the right word to express that need we feel to dish it and take it.
If I were to go into a clean room, and live there my whole life from birth, with no emotional manipulation, I'd still have emotion, but they wouldn't be manipulated by who and what is around me.
I don't even think we need emotional manipulation to lead a satisfactory existence.
Emotional manipulation is all anyone knows, but what if we started from the beginning again...? What if life didn't center around social and emotional happiness?
What would emotion,morals, and subjectivity be THEN? Non-existent? Scarce?

_________________
Welcome to Demon Forest! Got a question? I've got the answer.

**Biomech** · Subject: Re: Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:33 pm

Nation wrote:

I don't think you need emotional manipulation to SURVIVE.
Survive isn't the right word to express that need we feel to dish it and take it.

Well, actually as it turns out, you do.
If you have no emotions you have nothing to dictate your actions. Sure you may logically "know" that you have to eat to survive but if you have no emotions you don't care whether you live or die.

Nearly every action we make is to remove suffering. Even self mutilation is an act that "removes suffering" from the individual in their own mind because they feel as if they require punishment in some form. If they punish themselves they feel less stress. It's mental pain manifested into physical pain. Though this doesn't make sense to those of us who realize that harming one's self doesn't actually improve the situation.

Quote:

If I were to go into a clean room, and live there my whole life from birth, with no emotional manipulation, I'd still have emotion, but they wouldn't be manipulated by who and what is around me.

That's an interesting theory, though I'd say that in order to have emotion you have to have a stimuli to react to. If you feel guilt when someone uses the "sad puppy eyes" it's only because they are there to make you feel that way.
Even if you talk about things that a person imagines and has emotional reactions to that's still just a memory. I can imagine a green horse for example but I can probably only imagine that because I've seen horses and I've seen the color green before so my imagination can combine the two into something that doesn't actually exist. If I had never seen anything similar to either one it's unlikely that my mind would be able to come up with that on it's own.

Quote:

I don't even think we need emotional manipulation to lead a satisfactory existence.

Satisfaction is an emotion. Razz

Quote:

Emotional manipulation is all anyone knows, but what if we started from the beginning again...? What if life didn't center around social and emotional happiness?
What would emotion,morals, and subjectivity be THEN? Non-existent? Scarce?

I've actually had the displeasure of experiencing this and yes you're right.
Personal morals do not exist if you have no emotions. To me, with emotions, dying is immoral. I can't blame people who die of no fault of their own but if someone does something particularly stupid (like the Darwin Awards) I consider them to have gotten what they deserved. When I care about myself, anything that disadvantages me is "immoral" or off limits because I dislike things that disadvantage myself.

When I care about myself I also care about other people, animals, plants and objects. Outside sources can bring me happiness or harm, this is why I empathize with animals or people who I perceive as a non threat. People that I do perceive as a threat to myself I obviously dislike.

Subjectivity means nothing if you have no emotions either. Without emotion everything is equally neutral whether it is harmful or helpful.

With emotions I highly dislike the color pink because I see it as symbolic of sexism and human female oppression. Without emotions it's just another color that happens to exist and it means nothing to me. It's the emotional associations that make things mean something to us.

_________________
Testing Testing...

**Nation** · Subject: Re: Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:49 pm

I disagree about needing emotion to survive.
What about Brain-dead people?

Quote:

That's an interesting theory, though I'd say that in order to have emotion you have to have a stimuli to react to. If you feel guilt when someone uses the "sad puppy eyes" it's only because they are there to make you feel that way.

But if their NOT there, what becomes of the mind?

Quote:

Satisfaction is an emotion.

Ah.. I meant an existence that would be worthwhile, not satisfactory to the individual themselves.

_________________
Welcome to Demon Forest! Got a question? I've got the answer.

**Biomech** · Subject: Re: Subjectivity, Morals and Emotions Fri Jun 12, 2009 7:57 pm

Nation wrote:

I disagree about needing emotion to survive.
What about Brain-dead people?

They're dead in medical terms.
People in long term comas are only alive artificiallly.

Quote:

But if their NOT there, what becomes of the mind?

Then you may either remember them or become unconditioned.

Quote:

Ah.. I meant an existence that would be worthwhile, not satisfactory to the individual themselves.

How would you define it as worth while?
Maybe worth your while if you benefited but if the person experiencing it was miserable then it would be pointless for that person so it wouldn't be worth while to them.

_________________
Testing Testing...