What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-11-2014, 04:35 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 04:32 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  
(01-11-2014 04:29 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  LMAO of course neurochemicals don't experience chemical reactions within the brain... hilarious... and from such a credible source Tongue

That's... not at all what Mathilda said.

Are you intentionally misreading what is said, or do you lack reading comprehension?

Evidently its not me that lacks the reading skills... she said :

amgelamerkel Wrote:Even the use of the phrase 'chemical reaction' shows that you don't understand what is going on.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 04:37 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 11:33 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(01-11-2014 11:29 AM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  ONLY with the pics of the lovers... the others produced nothing. Yes there is a feeling associated with most lovers, in case you might not be aware Smile

Its right there in black and white. It is scientific finding... observance. The pics only of the lovers produced these reactions.

So no one has anything credible to debunk this source?

No?

Wait...? Consider

Are you thence saying that images of lovers... produces feeling of love... in lovers... ? Blink

Or is there something else you've posted that I've missed?

Much cheers to all.

wow...yes theres something you've missed lmao, youre not serious right? Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 04:57 PM (This post was last modified: 01-11-2014 05:02 PM by Wolfbitn.)
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
Ok... Iv shown 2 articles and 3 studies showing

1) Despite what you insist WITHOUT A SOURCE the jury is not in, and its still a debate (mostly by hardheads that don't know pictures can generate emotions which in turn cause chemical reactions to reinforce those emotions) Smile

2) Iv shown 3 studies showing that a feeling was experienced, triggered by stimuli, which then caused a chemical reaction to reinforce the feeling.

This is in comparison to zero quoted for you referring to studies to back YOU.

Here's 2 more

Quote:http://www.eoht.info/page/Love+the+chemical+reaction

In culture, love the chemical reaction is a view that the process of two people meeting and "falling in love" is purely a chemical reaction or what is better termed a "human chemical reaction". It is a fundamental question that even seven year old children want to know the answer to. [1]

The conception of love as a chemical reaction is view of life that people, over the the last two-hundred years, beginning generally with the publication of the 1809 novella Elective Affinities, have speculated on, mused over, and debated to no end. [2]

In modern terms, the debate continues,

See that??? THE DEBATE STILL CONTINUES... You've got NOTHING but theory to back you... nothing, so stop acting like youre the expert on all there is to know, when you didn't even know THIS. Big Grin

Quote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/articl...istry.html


But doctors have begun to unravel the mystery of why love can make us giddy, irrational and even ridiculous.

Scanning technology allows neurologists to unearth incredible images of what happens in our brains when we fall in love.

NOTE the language... changes occurred because of someone falling in love... They did not fall in love because of the changes. We fall in love, chemical reactions occur, and THEN our love is reinforced by these reactions and age old instinct.

So... if some of you might want to come down off that high horse and just talk, I'm very happy to. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 06:32 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
Experiment for you, Wolfbitn. Grab a ball. Hold the ball at arm's length, with the ball towards the floor. You are going to be the cause of that ball falling. You're going to let go. See? Your hand was the cause of the ball falling, just like the pictures were the cause of the increase in dopamine levels.
What you fail to grasp in all your statements asking for sources is that we do have sources to contradict what you're saying. You've provided them to us. The studies you quote are our source. You don't understand what the studies are saying. When you view a picture, any picture, it causes a chemical reaction. First in your eye to the incoming light, then the optic nerve, the various areas of the brain. The exact chemical reaction depends on the specific picture you're looking at, and pre-existing conditions in your brain. The dopamine response is a part of the mechanism of the emotion of love, which is what this study is demonstrating. The subject has what we call love towards a person. This is chemically shown in the brain as a dopamine increase in the presence of stimuli that relate to that person. Pictures of those that the subject does not love do not produce this responce. Hence we can conclude that dopamine release is a part of the chemical reaction in a human brain that we colloquially call 'love'. Knowing this now, we could use it in future situations to determine by brain chemistry if you love something or not. In the study, the emotion felt by the subject to the person in the picture wasn't determined this way. Instead it was discovered by asking each subject 'Do you love this person?'. The study would, in principle, allow us to not bother with the question and be able to objectively determine the answer. Nowhere does the study say that the picture caused love, that dopamine causes love, or that love is anything other than a chemical reaction in the brain. All it says is that if you supply a certain stimulus, the result is an increase in dopamine levels. That's it.

Let's try a car analogy. The engine is the brain, the gas pedal is a picture of loved one, the brake is a picture of someone else. When you 'apply' the gas pedal stimulous, you 'cause' a reaction in the motor. Which then goes faster. 'Going faster' is the emotion of love. Applying the brake leads to a slower engine, the feeling of 'not love'. What you are suggesting is that there is some external 'essence of car motor' that 'looks' at the gas pedal being pressed, then tells the motor to go faster in response. A) the study doesn't say any such thing, and B) that's complete nonsense.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 08:18 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 04:37 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Wow...yes there's something you've missed lmao, you're not serious right? Einstein

Yes, I am serious (And don't call me 'Shirley' Tongue)

I... am not understanding your position.

Are you asking.. where emotions come from? Or are you asking... what causes emotions?

Also... You did ask for opinions. So to then turn around and ask for more than opinions is a tad rude.

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 10:09 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 08:18 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(01-11-2014 04:37 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Wow...yes there's something you've missed lmao, you're not serious right? Einstein

Yes, I am serious (And don't call me 'Shirley' Tongue)

I... am not understanding your position.

Are you asking.. where emotions come from? Or are you asking... what causes emotions?

Also... You did ask for opinions. So to then turn around and ask for more than opinions is a tad rude.

Much cheers to all.

Not trying to be rude at all.. just humor... Shirley lol Tongue

Heres the points... theres only 2

1) The jury IS still out as you've seen in several articles now.. so these guys cant be telling my I don't know my chit on this, nor can they state with the certainty they state that this is a done deal because theyre simply WRONG... their opinion doesn't matter, when you have before you scholars and doctors telling you theyre simply wrong. These articles state in no uncertain terms.

2) The REASONS the jury is still out revolve around the fact they cant prove what they are saying AT ALL, and the evidence supports those of us who believe the feeling causes the chemical reaction.

For instance the pictures... THIS is clear support, AND the article is very clear. They had several pictures of acquaintances and other people and 1 picture of their lover... they were ALREADY IN LOVE... None of the pictures showed a response... except the pictures of the lover that they were ALREADY in love with. As soon as they saw the pic, there was an emotional response and THEN the chemical reactions occurred which in turn reinforced the feeling of love... rewarding it. Its very simple, and this is exactly what the article shows.

So they cant make their sure assertions, and the evidence certainly leans my way. They haven't even been able to produce a quote that backs their view over mine in how many pages now? Why? I'v had no problem at all finding credible sources for everything iv said, and I can give you a lot more, but im perfectly fine with all these in the face of not another single quote debunking them.

Its not about me being right though. Its about being told I know nothing about science when they don't even know me, and its about the fact theyre simply WRONG...as both points here show. They CANT say their view has been scientifically proven as they have chosen to say.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 10:15 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 06:32 PM)OddGamer Wrote:  Experiment for you, Wolfbitn. Grab a ball. Hold the ball at arm's length, with the ball towards the floor. You are going to be the cause of that ball falling. You're going to let go. See? Your hand was the cause of the ball falling, just like the pictures were the cause of the increase in dopamine levels.
What you fail to grasp in all your statements asking for sources is that we do have sources to contradict what you're saying. You've provided them to us. The studies you quote are our source. You don't understand what the studies are saying.

Yeah yeah tell me what I don't understand again and youll be challenged with that genesis 1 vs the big bang and string debate. You WILL be put in your place :pthe pictures did nothing without the emotion they created INSTANTLY... they were ALREADY IN LOVE... what don't you understand? The chemical change did NOT CREATE THE LOVE, it was already there. It was the EMOTION that stimulated the chemical change.

And what about "STILL STRONGLY DEBATED" mean to you? It damn sure doesn't mean youre right when you haven't even provided a single quote that backs you. It means YOUR WRONG... your view ISNT proven AT ALL and you cant find a single CREDIBLE paper saying it is.

Get it if you can or move along and stop beating your dead horse.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 10:18 PM (This post was last modified: 01-11-2014 10:21 PM by Peebothuhul.)
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
One of my favorite "Shirley's" (Sad R.I.P.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nvth-kGtQ8 Sorry for the poor quality. Can't find anything better.



Okay then. So... again, I think there is a language use issue here.

Could you please explain,

1) What is a 'Feeling'

2) What is a 'Emotion'

I admit to using the words rather interchangeably in common parlance, but think yourself is striving for something more... 'singular' when you are using the two in this thread.

Hoping your response will clear somethings up.

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 10:21 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 10:15 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Yeah yeah tell me what I don't understand again and youll be challenged with that genesis 1 vs the big bang and string debate.

As an aside, in case you've missed it, some one has asked for your presence already in the debating area. Smile

All the best in the back and forth.

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2014, 11:47 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(01-11-2014 10:18 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  One of my favorite "Shirley's" (Sad R.I.P.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nvth-kGtQ8 Sorry for the poor quality. Can't find anything better.



Okay then. So... again, I think there is a language use issue here.

Could you please explain,

1) What is a 'Feeling'

2) What is a 'Emotion'

I admit to using the words rather interchangeably in common parlance, but think yourself is striving for something more... 'singular' when you are using the two in this thread.

Hoping your response will clear somethings up.

Much cheers to all.

I sometimes use them interchangeably too. There is some difference though as feeling can involve sight smell and touch. FeelingS however, plural, I use to refer to emotion like love and hate. We associate these feelings with other individual people many times, and it is THIS response... this FEELING for THOSE people associated with our love or hate, the objects of our emotion, that produces the chemical reactions once we "think" about them. These chemical reactions then go on to reinforce those feelings.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: