What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-10-2014, 03:22 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:02 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Bam... The photos were the CAUSE of the chemical reaction... THIS is what most Theists believe, and THIS is what science shows us simply by observing test results. This in fact seems to falsify the theory that it's the chemical reaction causing the "feeling". In the case above, the photos cause the feeling and then we see the chemical reaction.

Absolutely no "bam" at all.

You are using a strawman argument that relies on equivocation. You are saying that atheists claim that chemical reactions causes the feeling as opposed to some other trigger. What people are referring to as 'causing' is emergent phenonena. This has been pointed out to you multiple times on this thread already and you are ignoring it. We can explain what it means if you do not understand.

As has been explained to you already, what this means is that the chemical reactions are the feelings and emotions.


(31-10-2014 10:27 AM)OddGamer Wrote:  The chemical reactions _are_ the feelings, as well as the thoughts. In a computer the changing electric signals don't 'cause' the stored information and logic states, they _are_ the store information and logic states (rough analogy, I'm a bit tired).


As I explained earlier:

(31-10-2014 02:05 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  The problem is that you are understanding it as single events, A -> B.

Instead it's a cycle:

A -> B -> more A -> more B

So there is a trigger from your senses. In your source it was a photo. You are relying on equivocation with the word 'cause' and claiming that atheists are claiming that chemicals are the trigger when they are not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mathilda's post
31-10-2014, 03:25 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:21 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:07 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You do not understand the study.

The "feeling" is the chemical reaction. And of course it occurs in response to stimuli and conditions.

There is no ghost in the machine.

I "don't understand the study"? That's rather condescending don't you think? Especially in light of the fact you come with zero studies to back you Wink

I DO understand the study perfectly well Smile

Refer to the last one... They were monitored, they were given pictures of their lovers, the feeling resulted, and then they began to produce a chemical reaction. I even bolded the very words that the pictures were the CAUSE. Do you suppose they sat there looking at the picture for minutes waiting for the chemical reaction to cause their feeling? Of course not. They looked at the picture, it produced a feeling, which in turn produced the reaction. Smile

People live in stress and this sometimes produces ulcers, it isn't the ulcer causing the stress.

The only thing you need to make your point is to produce said article making the clear claim that the feeling doesn't cause the chemical reaction... Although I would agree the chemical reactions can enhance feelings... adrenalin and serotonin for instance. Youre going to be hard pressed though to find anything to debunk all 4 articles. Our opinions certainly don't do it Wink

The pictures were the stimulus which elicited the response; the chemical response was interpreted as a feeling.

Your citation attests my claim, not yours. You do not understand the study.

There is no ghost in the machine.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
31-10-2014, 03:25 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:21 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  I "don't understand the study"? That's rather condescending don't you think? Especially in light of the fact you come with zero studies to back you Wink

I DO understand the study perfectly well Smile

But it's true. You do not understand it. Condescending or not.

I have lots of references that are consistent with the sources you have presented which I could put here. Evidence is that you wouldn't understand them either.

And we are now getting more evidence that you are deliberately ignoring comments which refute your claim.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 03:29 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:25 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:21 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  I "don't understand the study"? That's rather condescending don't you think? Especially in light of the fact you come with zero studies to back you Wink

I DO understand the study perfectly well Smile

But it's true. You do not understand it. Condescending or not.

I have lots of references that are consistent with the sources you have presented which I could put here. Evidence is that you wouldn't understand them either.

And we are now getting more evidence that you are deliberately ignoring comments which refute your claim.

How does that last article posted support you if the pictures produced the feeling and the feeling produced the chemical reaction?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 03:33 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:29 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:25 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  But it's true. You do not understand it. Condescending or not.

I have lots of references that are consistent with the sources you have presented which I could put here. Evidence is that you wouldn't understand them either.

And we are now getting more evidence that you are deliberately ignoring comments which refute your claim.

How does that last article posted support you if the pictures produced the feeling and the feeling produced the chemical reaction?

The feeling is the chemical reaction. This is the attitude of the article.

You and only you are insisting they must be different.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
31-10-2014, 03:34 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:29 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:25 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  But it's true. You do not understand it. Condescending or not.

How does that last article posted support you if the pictures produced the feeling and the feeling produced the chemical reaction?

Because it didn't say that the feeling produced the chemical reaction.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Mathilda's post
31-10-2014, 03:36 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:22 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:02 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Bam... The photos were the CAUSE of the chemical reaction... THIS is what most Theists believe, and THIS is what science shows us simply by observing test results. This in fact seems to falsify the theory that it's the chemical reaction causing the "feeling". In the case above, the photos cause the feeling and then we see the chemical reaction.

Absolutely no "bam" at all.

You are using a strawman argument that relies on equivocation. You are saying that atheists claim that chemical reactions causes the feeling as opposed to some other trigger. What people are referring to as 'causing' is emergent phenonena. This has been pointed out to you multiple times on this thread already and you are ignoring it. We can explain what it means if you do not understand.

In other words, it was the TRIGGER... that caused the FEELING (you call it emergent phenomenon), which then caused the chemical reaction... right or wrong? Wink

Quote:So there is a trigger from your senses. In your source it was a photo. You are relying on equivocation with the word 'cause' and claiming that atheists are claiming that chemicals are the trigger when they are not.
I don't know WHY you seem to miss that's what Iv been saying... Smile

You say the trigger caused the chemical reaction which caused the feeling... I say the trigger caused the feeling which caused the chemical reaction and that last article said exactly that, as well as the study on mating and dopamine.

So tell me how this backs you when it backs ME? Wink The pictures caused the feeling, which caused the chemical reaction.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2014, 03:38 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:34 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:29 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  How does that last article posted support you if the pictures produced the feeling and the feeling produced the chemical reaction?

Because it didn't say that the feeling produced the chemical reaction.

It didn't say the chemical reaction caused the feeling ... but it DID say the picture caused a feeling... and this occurred before the chemical reaction.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Wolfbitn's post
31-10-2014, 03:40 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:36 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  I don't know WHY you seem to miss that's what Iv been saying... Smile

You say the trigger caused the chemical reaction which caused the feeling... I say the trigger caused the feeling which caused the chemical reaction and that last article said exactly that, as well as the study on mating and dopamine.

The article said nothing of the sort.

If you are rejecting the consensus in the literature that the feeling is the chemical process, then the onus is on you to coherently define just what the "feeling" is, if not neurochemistry, and then go on to isolate and demonstrate such a phenomenon to the satisfaction of others.
(note that this is necessarily a dualistic argument and essentially self-defeating, but good luck to you)


(31-10-2014 03:36 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  So tell me how this backs you when it backs ME? Wink The pictures caused the feeling, which caused the chemical reaction.

That isn't what the authors claim. If you think so, you are wrong. Perhaps that seems condescending to you; it is not. It is merely true.

If you are unable to process the source material and continue to refuse to listen to those who can, this discussion is entirely pointless.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
31-10-2014, 03:41 PM
RE: What are "feelings" and "emotion"?
(31-10-2014 03:38 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(31-10-2014 03:34 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  Because it didn't say that the feeling produced the chemical reaction.

It didn't say the chemical reaction caused the feeling ... but it DID say the picture caused a feeling... and this occurred before the chemical reaction.

Yes, the picture caused the brain to start the chemical reaction. It's wired this way. It's quite simple. There's no other mediator (feeling) in between.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like undergroundp's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: