Post intrepretation

[Ahso!]

flopstock;1317929 wrote: You do that a lot, ya know? Rather then quote someone and argue the quote, you 'interpret/slant' and then make your point against your own statement rather then theirs. Kind of hard to lose a debate with yourself, that way. Would certainly be a lot harder to argue off what she actually says.



Very interesting to watch.I appreciate that, thanks. I'm not sure I've ever been told it before. How do you not do that? How do you not interpret meaning or implication to words?

[Ahso!]

I put this in the wrong forum, not that that matters here.

[flopstock]

Ahso!;1317938 wrote: I put this in the wrong forum, not that that matters here.


where would you like it dear?



one time only offer:sneaky::yh_rotfl

[Ahso!]

flopstock;1317942 wrote: where would you like it dear?



one time only offer:sneaky::yh_rotflI'll save the offer.

[littleCJelkton]

Ahso!;1317933 wrote: I appreciate that, thanks. I'm not sure I've ever been told it before. How do you not do that? How do you not interpret meaning or implication to words?


In person it is much easier I guess, as in person you can see when some one is being sarcastic or says thing with a joking matter with a smile on there face, but I am not sure how or why you would be expected to have the same interpretations of words typed in a forum as you would if you were taking face to face. Yeah sure we have emoticons but even those are used out of context and can be taken a number of different ways

EXAMPLE:

if someone were to post this in reply to another persons post

I am going to F(*&ing punch your face in :wah: :yh_rotfl



Is that supposed to be funny, sarcastic, or taken as a serious threat,

I believe the problem comes from, certain individuals that type as if they were talking, then have an expectation that everyone reading is to understand the emotions and intricate details like when there serious and when there not, just as if it were face to face. Then there are certain individuals that type knowing that through words unless you want to take the time to write out every little detail about each emotion you are trying to convey to back what your writing up you can't really display those emotions or sarcastic wit as well as you could in person unless you want to leave 5 page books as replies, so you use words and interpret words and their implications when you type to best convey your ideas leaving most emotion out. As words tend only to have not much more than 2 definitions to them, where as a persons emotions can't fully be explained or understood in a paragraph, and when explained in such a matter tend to be able to get interpreted in a number of different ways.

[Ahso!]

Concerning interpretation and intuition; its interesting to note that many pet owners tend to believe that when the family member who is classified as the dog or cat has a negative reaction to a stranger, that reaction is often interpreted as: There must be a reason for that, he/she/it is usually welcoming to people. That person is giving bad vibes off that the animal is picking up.

Do you think a human gets as much of a benefit of the doubt?

I wonder if sanitizing a conversation with pure objectivity is as useful as many believe it to be. I can see its advantage in negotiating. However, stripping emotion and emotional interpretation from all conversations, I think, is not only impossible, but undesirable. We are emotional beings, its part of our make up and evolution and therefore must be vital to our existence. I'm not trying to take anything away from cognitive thought, its also vitally important.

Do any of you think emotion has served its evolutionary purpose and is now only a lingering and useless.......thing? :-2 .......................A disorder?

[G#Gill]

Never. Emotion is vital in a human being. It is also vital in animals to a lesser degree. Dogs wagging, cats purring. Emotions.

[theia]

Ahso!;1317961 wrote: Concerning interpretation and intuition; its interesting to note that many pet owners tend to believe that when the family member who is classified as the dog or cat has a negative reaction to a stranger, that reaction is often interpreted as: There must be a reason for that, he/she/it is usually welcoming to people. That person is giving bad vibes off that the animal is picking up.

Do you think a human gets as much of a benefit of the doubt?

I wonder if sanitizing a conversation with pure objectivity is as useful as many believe it to be. I can see its advantage in negotiating. However, stripping emotion and emotional interpretation from all conversations, I think, is not only impossible, but undesirable. We are emotional beings, its part of our make up and evolution and therefore must be vital to our existence. I'm not trying to take anything away from cognitive thought, its also vitally important.

Do any of you think emotion has served its evolutionary purpose and is now only a lingering and useless.......thing? :-2 .......................A disorder?


Ahso, what would emotion's evolutionary purpose have been, do you think?

[Ahso!]

G#Gill;1317965 wrote: Never. Emotion is vital in a human being. It is also vital in animals to a lesser degree. Dogs wagging, cats purring. Emotions.I'm under the impression that animals depend on emotion based on past experiences pretty much exclusively since they don't possess the gray matter brain portion humans do.

[flopstock]

Ahso!;1317967 wrote: I'm under the impression that animals depend on emotion based on past experiences pretty much exclusively since they don't possess the gray matter brain portion humans do.


They say that animals smell fear. I would imagine that if that is a true statement, they can smell other emotions that we secrete unconsciously.

[Ahso!]

theia;1317966 wrote: Ahso, what would emotion's evolutionary purpose have been, do you think?


Fear = fight or flight

Anger = defiance to circumstance

Joy = pleasing - content

Pleasure = good - positive

sorrow = regret

Anxiety = caution

Depression = need for consideration of important matters



Thats what I came up with off the top of my head. If you have any others, I'll be happy to address them.

All these emotions have aided the humans species (and any other species that experience them) in survival. They are tools of the brain like hands are for acquiring food and placing it into our mouth or defending ourselves and so on.

[Ahso!]

flopstock;1317968 wrote: They say that animals smell fear. I would imagine that if that is a true statement, they can smell other emotions that we secrete unconsciously. Thats a good point that may be true, though the fear (or other emotion) emanating from the individual may have nothing to do with the current situation or environment. For example, a person may have just been startled by an unexpected event and become afraid prior to walking into the house which caused a hormonal reaction which the animal may have tuned into.

[theia]

Ahso!;1317969 wrote: Fear = fight or flight

Anger = defiance to circumstance

Joy = pleasing - content

Pleasure = good - positive

sorrow = regret

Anxiety = caution

Depression = need for consideration of important matters



Thats what I came up with off the top of my head. If you have any others, I'll be happy to address them.

All these emotions have aided the humans species (and any other species that experience them) in survival. They are tools of the brain like hands are for acquiring food and placing it into our mouth or defending ourselves and so on.


Thanks. So I would answer your question by saying that I think emotion continues to serve its purpose since we still need those outcomes.

What puzzles me is which comes first, the thought or the emotion.

[Ahso!]

theia;1317975 wrote: Thanks. So I would answer your question by saying that I think emotion continues to serve its purpose since we still need those outcomes.

What puzzles me is which comes first, the thought or the emotion.According to what I've learned, emotion occurs first, then jumps to the cognitive very quickly. In children, since the brain is always developing well into the mid twenties, the emotion is all thats there at first and as we age and the brain continues to grow, we become more cognitively able, but the first instance is emotional.

Think of it this way: When a person first says 'hello' to you, the initial incoming message is to get your attention (emotion) and then we tune in and converse, though everything said in the conversation is hitting us emotionally first and then jumping to the other portion of our brain. In some of us the jump is delayed. For whatever reason thats how evolution has treated some of us, and I'm sure there is/was a good reason for it, but we label those people as 'disordered'.

[fuzzywuzzy]

Post intrepretation = Hindsight

[K.Snyder]

Ahso!;1317961 wrote: Do any of you think emotion has served its evolutionary purpose and is now only a lingering and useless.......thing? :-2 .......................A disorder? Evolution comes as a result not as a conscious clause. Evolution is by definition "luck" in every context, it has nothing to do with characteristics at all. The characteristics defines the lucky not the lucky defining characteristics. The latter is a religious viewpoint while the former is one void of contemplation unless one wishes to take Xanax for the rest of their natural born lives

flopstock;1317968 wrote: They say that animals smell fear. I would imagine that if that is a true statement, they can smell other emotions that we secrete unconsciously.


"smell" in this context is entirely to do with minimizing one's innate responsibilities throughout all of their life not just the instances they "secrete unconsciously" the fact people are overly conscientious about life altogether.

[K.Snyder]

Ahso!;1317982 wrote: According to what I've learned, emotion occurs first, then jumps to the cognitive very quickly. In children, since the brain is always developing well into the mid twenties, the emotion is all thats there at first and as we age and the brain continues to grow, we become more cognitively able, but the first instance is emotional.

Think of it this way: When a person first says 'hello' to you, the initial incoming message is to get your attention (emotion) and then we tune in and converse, though everything said in the conversation is hitting us emotionally first and then jumping to the other portion of our brain. In some of us the jump is delayed. For whatever reason thats how evolution has treated some of us, and I'm sure there is/was a good reason for it, but we label those people as 'disordered'.


Well I suppose we're past the point of considering our little meetings here to be "strange" in the least so it gives me quite enough to ponder when I exclaim the fact I disagree. :yh_rotfl

Impulse comes first and then emotion follows. Emotion is developed by the sensory perception one experiences during them impulses that serves to suggest which is "favorable" and which is "detrimental" to themselves ultimately converting into "change" or more quintessentially "individualism".

Emotions cannot be interpreted without comparing the relevance between one's level of "good" and "bad" they couldn't possibly experience without impulse.

Thought is derived from the body through chemical processes which in turn leads to the comparisons between what their bodies enjoy on a necessary level to then relate that with what others "might" enjoy which leads to emotions.