Not Everyone Is Capable of Experiencing and Expressing Emotion

[Faustian Dreams]

...Particularly "love."

For those of us who rightly observe the physical correlates (biological, genetic) of human behavior and characteristics, which include intelligence, happiness, and the sum of all our faculties, it is evident that there are variable limits to every man's capabilities which are directly related to the qualities they've inherited from their predecessors.

If "intelligence" is a manifold quality, then it should rightly follow that there is a bell curve relating the ability for individuals (or rather families) within population to express and experience emotion. Not everyone is capable of "love," just as not everyone is capable of fostering burning hatred, and so it is that persons with poor emotional intelligence meet with folly at most of any point in their life.

This is why morals must be impressed upon the common man, because he breeds without emotion--all while not even having reached into the depths of human desire!

The intermarriage of castes (I am still wondering whether this term may be used interchangeably to classes; I am of the mind that the former applies to Hindu society in particular, whereas the latter is simply a general observation for naturally occurring hierarchies among human beings) is what leads to the variability in intelligence; there are many among us who may be brilliant when it comes to analytic thought, there are those who may perform exceptionally well in their studies, yet cannot maintain healthy, deep relationships with others. From my perspective, intelligence appeals to the lowest common denominator, so a person who lacks in one department forfeits their right to all others (continuity of being leads to an emergent, absolute intelligence).

Are not the most beautiful poems written by men who loved women more than they were loved in return? Was this not testament to their own grave, lasting errors, borne upon the rest of mankind?

This may lead to questions of: when a hierarchy is reestablished, how to we bring about a heightened experience of emotion in ALL castes, as the aforementioned beings are unfit for existence (lest they repopulate the Earth)? There are many others which I am sure will arise in the course of debate.

[Jogminas]

Are you arguing that some people cannot experience "certain" emotions? Do you attribute this deficiency entirely to genetics? Is the incapability of expressing emotion exclusive to the incapability of experiencing it? Naturally, if someone is incapable of experiencing a certain emotion, such as remorse, they will be incapable of expressing it. But I would say that everyone is indeed capable of expressing emotions (unless they are paralyzed or vegetaged, of course) that they are capable of experiencing even if their inability to "properly" express it is considered immature, destructive or inappropriate. Their reaction to the feeling is the expression, even if it is to do nothing.

[Faustian Dreams]

Are you arguing that some people cannot experience "certain" emotions?

In short, yes.

Do you attribute this deficiency entirely to genetics? Is the incapability of expressing emotion exclusive to the incapability of experiencing it? Naturally, if someone is incapable of experiencing a certain emotion, such as remorse, they will be incapable of expressing it. But I would say that everyone is indeed capable of expressing emotions (unless they are paralyzed or vegetaged, of course) that they are capable of experiencing even if their inability to "properly" express it is considered immature, destructive or inappropriate. Their reaction to the feeling is the expression, even if it is to do nothing.

The ability for a person to express their emotions is inextricably related to their intelligence. From this, it can be drawn that when one is unable to express their emotions, it is because they are not experiencing them as deeply or passionately as a more emotionally mature person.

Is everyone capable of being philosophically-oriented? No. Yet again, this is another facet of one's personality that finds its correlated in the human mind, and only emerges when the genetic conditions are met.

There is a difference in quality, which while a simple enough concept to grasp in itself, is the major point I'm trying to make.

[Fade the Butcher]

There is a movie called Equilibrium about this that I have been meaning to watch.

[daisy]

There is a movie called Equilibrium about this that I have been meaning to watch
the ability for a person to express their emotions is inextricably related to their intelligence. from this,
it can be drawn that
when one is unable to express their emotions,
it is because they are not experiencing them as deeply or passionately as a more emotional personsorry didn't mean to mess up a thread
with another welcome to the jungle sample story
i often forget that everyone hasn't been to the jungle

[Helios Panoptes]

What. The. Fuck. :crazy:

:rofl:

[Anarch]

Daisy is Crazy.

On a more serious note....

I disagree, Faustian Dreams. The proles get emotional far more easily: just look at Nascar fanatics and baseball team supporters, for example. Stupid people become proles because IQ is a measurement of one's capacity to intellectually adapt to changing environments (ever heard of upper class people and upper middles being the primary customers of debt-consolidation companies?). Proles are short-sighted, their goals are easier to accomplish, and so they are more emotional. The higher the IQ the less emotions at some point this becomes a psychological disorder, see Asperger's.

[Ahknaton]

true my equilibrium was out of balance from an accident
and once this crazy cuban guy was running around high all the time and he fell and hit the floor
i didn't pay any attention to him and everyone asked me how i could just sit there eating a ham and cheese sandwich and not showing any emotion while he was oding on the floor

thank god it turned out that he was not even oding
he was having a slight epileptic seizure that didn't last long so i didn't feel so bad about eating the sandwich
yeah maybe i was just real hungry that day lol or maybe
i didn't want to stop eating my sandwich for a drug addict
INTP personality? :D

[daisy]

o.k so ya'll did not like my story which was about how
some people are more emotional than others because
some people are only emotional depending on the circumstances
__

[Northern_Paladin]

...Particularly "love."

For those of us who rightly observe the physical correlates (biological, genetic) of human behavior and characteristics, which include intelligence, happiness, and the sum of all our faculties, it is evident that there are variable limits to every man's capabilities which are directly related to the qualities they've inherited from their predecessors.

If "intelligence" is a manifold quality, then it should rightly follow that there is a bell curve relating the ability for individuals (or rather families) within population to express and experience emotion. Not everyone is capable of "love," just as not everyone is capable of fostering burning hatred, and so it is that persons with poor emotional intelligence meet with folly at most of any point in their life.

This is why morals must be impressed upon the common man, because he breeds without emotion--all while not even having reached into the depths of human desire!

The intermarriage of castes (I am still wondering whether this term may be used interchangeably to classes; I am of the mind that the former applies to Hindu society in particular, whereas the latter is simply a general observation for naturally occurring hierarchies among human beings) is what leads to the variability in intelligence; there are many among us who may be brilliant when it comes to analytic thought, there are those who may perform exceptionally well in their studies, yet cannot maintain healthy, deep relationships with others. From my perspective, intelligence appeals to the lowest common denominator, so a person who lacks in one department forfeits their right to all others (continuity of being leads to an emergent, absolute intelligence).

Are not the most beautiful poems written by men who loved women more than they were loved in return? Was this not testament to their own grave, lasting errors, borne upon the rest of mankind?

This may lead to questions of: when a hierarchy is reestablished, how to we bring about a heightened experience of emotion in ALL castes, as the aforementioned beings are unfit for existence (lest they repopulate the Earth)? There are many others which I am sure will arise in the course of debate.

I think we all have the ability to express love because love is simply a liking for pleasure that something or someone gives us. But we each have different means of expressing our love or hiding it.

[Ravenheart]

There is a movie called Equilibrium about this that I have been meaning to watch.

It's nice. Sort of a blend between The Matrix and 1984. It's about a society where emotion is institutionally suppressed. I especially like the scene where the protagonist's son sits in front of the TV and the program mentions their system has its roots in the revolutionary concept of the "hate crime". :D

[Omniel]

I once saw an episode of a respectable British documentary called Bodyshock. This one was about brain damage, with a very disturbing section about a family man in his thirties who was involved in a minor car crash. It turned out that the shock of the crash had shifted his brain inside his skull. The rough inside surface of his skull had scraped against his brain, but he seemed to recover, and at first they thought he was okay. He was still behaving oddly several months later though, and after a psychological evaluation, the doctors realised that he had lost the ability to love as a result of his brain damage. They could not explain this fact to him however, because without the ability to love, he had no concept of its meaning. He was baffled about why everyone kept mentioning this idea to him as if it meant something.

The documentary visited his house, and followed him as he roamed about with this weird creepy smirk on his face. They interviewed him a few times, and the narrator talked about his absolute inability to even grasp the concept of love. He couldn't even remember loving his wife and kids. The look on his wife's face was priceless as he plainly explained that she was just a person who he was familiar with, and his kids were pretty much the same, like 'furniture'. He reacted strangely when pressed to try to describe 'love'. He found it funny that his wife kept mentioning it to him, and seemed to be bemused that people kept asking him about it. He commented to the interviewer that he realised that it's a thing people talk about, but he didn't know why. He even acknowledged that something was wrong -but as he had no idea what he was missing, and was barely capable of caring about anything, that was as far as it went.

This condition of lovelessness was so crippling that he could not work, and the couple had no friends. His lack of love meant he had no empathy, passion or motivation, and would become angry and aggressive with anyone who disagreed with him. He had this dull, smirky face on all the time, and almost seemed quite cheery at times. He was fairly positive about the fact that he didn't feel stress or upset in his life at all, and so I assume he must have had a trace of memory of this, and that stress might be an indirect result of love. His wife looked permanently close to tears. At one point, they showed how he would fly into a spitting rage when she distracted him from his Playstation. Most of his time was spent with the curtains drawn playing this, and he became irrationally upset if this was tampered with. (not sure if they actually showed this happen, or his wife mentioned it).

It's one of the only documentaries I have found genuinely frightening. I felt physically nauseous from seeing it. Towards the end, his long-suffering wife (who seemed to be hoping he would suddenly recover) commented that she was finally considering leaving him, because he'd started talking about how irritating his children were, and that sometimes he'd like to kill them. The interviewer asked him this, and he blankly responded that, yes, he sometimes thinks about doing that when they are being noisy. A lot of parents say that kind of thing, but he clearly meant it. It was surprising to see that without the ability to love, not just his relationships, but his whole life was ruined. He was unable to function -and he seemed inhuman, but the most bizarre thing was that he had absolutely no idea that anything was wrong at all. I had no idea that mild brain damage could wreak such havoc.

[Kodos]

He had this dull, smirky face on all the time, and almost seemed quite cheery at times. He was fairly positive about the fact that he didn't feel stress or upset in his life at all, and so I assume he must have had a trace of memory of this, and that stress might be an indirect result of love. His wife looked permanently close to tears. At one point, they showed how he would fly into a spitting rage when she distracted him from his Playstation.

Sweet.

[Petyr Baelish]

Daisy is Crazy.

On a more serious note....

I disagree, Faustian Dreams. The proles get emotional far more easily: just look at Nascar fanatics and baseball team supporters, for example.

There is a difference between experiencing emotion and displaying emtotion, just as there is a difference between the borderline retarded extrovert who cannot shut up and spews nonsense, and the iintelligent introvert who doesn't say much, but whose opinions are infinitely more worthwhile. I think that people with high IQs experience emotions far more acutely than people with low IQs, but are more adept at controlling the experession thereof. The fact that emotional sensetivity, affectothymia, which is a measure of emtional intensity and introversion, which represents a high state of internal arousal, are all correlated with g (Source (http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7643)) seems to lend credence to my hypothesis.

The higher the IQ the less emotions at some point this becomes a psychological disorder, see Asperger's.

People with Asperger's actually tend to feel emtion's more acutely that others. Those afflicted with Asperger's simply have an extremely high amount of internal arousal and poor prepulse inhibition, which makes it literally overwhelming for them to empathize with others.

[daisy]

timothy leary posted
there is a difference between the borderline retarded extrovert
who cannot shut up and spews nonsense, and
the intelligent introvert who doesn't say much, but
whose opinions are infinitely more worthwhiledazy is crazy - well i am not too crazy because
even the shrink test showed that i am extremely introverted
introverts! rep for tim!

[Dienekes]

For those of us who rightly observe the physical correlates (biological, genetic) of human behavior and characteristics, which include intelligence, happiness, and the sum of all our faculties, it is evident that there are variable limits to every man's capabilities which are directly related to the qualities they've inherited from their predecessors.

If "intelligence" is a manifold quality, then it should rightly follow that there is a bell curve relating the ability for individuals (or rather families) within population to express and experience emotion.


There is significant debate about the extent of nature vs. nuture with regards to intelligence, and it seems that would be even more applicable in this case. The vast majority of the people I have known that have problems feeling or not feeling various emotions have almost always had an experince or experiences that led to their current state. Whether it be an abusive home, a bad relationship, death of a child, etc., all these have an enormous impact on the emotional intelligence of these individuals. I am not suggesting that genetics plays no part at all, but I do think it plays a much lesser role in emotion than intelligence.

I would also agree with Citizen One that the higher the intelligence, the less emotional one would tend to be. Greater intelligence might enable one to conceptualize emtion better, but I would argue that makes it harder to actually experience said emotion. Emotion by definition is arrived at without intellectual thought. The more one applies ones intellect, the less emotion is invloved.

“The very essence of literature is the war between emotion and intellect” (Isaac Bashevis Singer).

[Helios Panoptes]

What is your evidence for that claim? The relevant literature I have read has found a positive correlation between emotional sensitivity and intelligence. The emotional sensitivity of gifted people is well known in psychology.

[Dienekes]

What is your evidence for that claim? The relevant literature I have read has found a positive correlation between emotional sensitivity and intelligence.

My claim is more personal experince than from any real study of the issue. I think the terms of this discussion could cause a lot of confusion. For example, emotional sensitivity. What is that, exactly? If you are talking about the ability to recognize and respond to emotion, then I would agree that intelligence would be an asset. My point was that an intelligent person is more likely to temper emotion with intellect than a lesser mind might be. I guess I am referring more to behavior as a result of emotion, which might be a seperate issue.

[daisy]

dienekes posted
my point was that an intelligent person is more likely to temper emotion with intellect than a lesser mind might betrue i agree
too emotional=crazily out of control
reminding me of a girl that used to be too emotional
and i always thought she was nutty emotional

[Helios Panoptes]

My claim is more personal experince than from any real study of the issue. I think the terms of this discussion could cause a lot of confusion. For example, emotional sensitivity. What is that, exactly?

Emotional sensitivity is the ease with which a person is moved emotionally.


If you are talking about the ability to recognize and respond to emotion, then I would agree that intelligence would be an asset. My point was that an intelligent person is more likely to temper emotion with intellect than a lesser mind might be. I guess I am referring more to behavior as a result of emotion, which might be a seperate issue.

That is what Timothy Leary's post indicated, but you responded that intelligent people have a harder time experiencing emotions, which is not true. On the contrary, highly intelligent people are often easily moved, but they do not express their emotional states as demonstratively as others.

[Helios Panoptes]

Daisy, stop deleting and editing your damned posts 5000 times. You're lucky Ahknaton quoted that post because it was amusing.

[Draugen]

There is a difference between experiencing emotion and displaying emtotion, just as there is a difference between the borderline retarded extrovert who cannot shut up and spews nonsense, and the iintelligent introvert who doesn't say much, but whose opinions are infinitely more worthwhile. I think that people with high IQs experience emotions far more acutely than people with low IQs, but are more adept at controlling the experession thereof. The fact that emotional sensetivity, affectothymia, which is a measure of emtional intensity and introversion, which represents a high state of internal arousal, are all correlated with g (Source (http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7643)) seems to lend credence to my hypothesis.

I think the correlation between intelligence and emotional self restraint is at least as much due to the nature of the emotions felt as to the capacity the intellect has to neutralize exteriorization.

The unintelligent type directs his aspirations towards tangible goals, which possess a stronger connection with the realm of irreflective action; he is also more profoundly affected by empirical sensations and less resistant to euphoria, especially that aroused in social ambiences.

The intelligent one, however, is less affected by the contingent, in so far as it doesn't possess a superior meaning. He sees farther, uniting causes, constructing patterns and deriving principles, and that automatically broadens his scale of 'feeling', diminishing the lower-ranked phenomenons in the process. The intimacy of an intelligent man is placed on a higher level than that of the unintelligent one; he is, therefore, harder to reach.

I am using here an idealization of intelligence, of course, which can't be correspondent with a tangible concept of intelligence such as IQ, even though there exists(very logically) a verifiable pattern. By intelligence I mean the archetype of a healthy and properly developed intelligence. Being that intelligence walks parallel with emotional sensitivity, it is natural that all kinds of eccentricities rise exponentially with intelligence, especially in the preverted environment of our society(there is much to say about this, though). It is possible for the above examples to be completely inverse in some individuals.