Originally posted by Goddess Kali
some emotions to DO NOT FEEL GOOD, and yet people still cling to them. Your claim is mute.
That wasn't my point at all, people will only Seek emotions that gratify them. No one seeks attachment to an emotion that hurts them, that's a false claim.
Oh, and the word is "Moot"
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Again that is not true. We also cling to emotions which make us feel bad. Like infatuation, or obsession, or anger for example.
Since when does :
Infatuation feel bad?
Obesseion feel Bad?
People who are obsessed stay obsessed because it feels good. No one has an obsession that feels bad to them. It may hurt them, but it's a good feeling.
Anger only feels bad when it's contained.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Intellect and Emotions are equally important, we must utilize both. Intellect cannot create courage. Only emotion can. Emotion alone cannot win a war. Only intellect can. Do you understand ?
Like I said before, you can easily change your emotions with mental techniques utilizing intellect. One of them is called "Reframing", I do it all the time. You can easily stimulate courage by positive thinking.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Yes.It's far better than abandoning the person. To try and understand the person's state of mind is far greater and more productive then abandoning them.
Even if the person is abusive and drags you down?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Abandonment of this person is harmful, and abandonment is an action based on the rational that this person is hopless. That decision you make based on intellect is harmful in this case.
Feels harmful, it can actually save your life. Again, your too emotional.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You give them the money because you care. That's an emotional response. Not a purely intellectual one.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You use both. I would help someone because I cared. That is an immediate emotional response, not an intellectual one.
Nevermind if you do not know how to help or you can make the situation worst.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
If I didn't care, then I wouldn't help.
If I didn't know I could help, I wouldn't help.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
FireFighters utilize [b]two things:1) Intellect- strategies which allow them to most successfully rescue a person/people.
2) Emotion- which supplies the courage and concern a Firefighter needs to do his/her job.
Please do not delude yourself into thinking that courage or compassion (both emotions) don't play a part in rescuing someone, especially from a fire. [/B]
So, your telling me that if I have a fool proof strategy it's seperate to my emotional state? 😕
Tell me, if a firefighter has no plan, and is overwhelmed by a fire would his confidence be the same as firefighter who know's exactly what to do?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
That wasn't my point at all, people will only [B]Seek emotions that gratify them. No one seeks attachment an emotion that hurts them, that's a false claim."[/B]
That was not your earlier claim. You said we only adhere to emotions which make us feel good.
People cling to heartbreak all the time. Instead of letting to go, they hold on to it, torturing themselves over a lost loved one.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Since when does :Infatuation feel bad?
Obesseion feel Bad?People who are obsessed stay obsessed because it feels good. No one has an obsession that feels bad to them. It may hurt them, but it's a good feeling.
Infatuation feels bad when the feeling is not returned, yet even after heartbreak, some people still cling to the infatuation and the person for a very long time, even though it hurts.
Same with obsession. obsession does NOT feel good at all, you are not free when you are obsessed. When someone is obsessed, thier will power is very weakened, and they have a strong tendency to remain obsessed instead of snapping out of it.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Anger only feels bad when it's contained.
Anger feels bad either way. No one actually enjoys it, only people who enjoy power trips enjoy Anger.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Like I said before, you can easily change your emotions with mental techniques utilizing intellect. One of them is called "Reframing", I do it all the time. You can easily stimulate courage by positive thinking.
Courage is still an emotion. What is your point ?
And no you cannot easily stimulate courage. Get drafted to a war where you will most likely get your arms blown off, and see how easily you can acquire courage.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Even if the person is abusive and drags you down?
What if the person truly needs your help ?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
No, I do it to set an example and encourage that type of behaviour for a healthy society.
Why ? Because you care, that is why. Stop pretending otherwise. Giving someone who is poor money to survive, is an act of compassion, NOT intelligence.
A stupid person can do the same. It has nothing to do with intelligence.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Nevermind if you do not know how to help or you can make the situation worst.
If you do nothing at all you can ALSO make the situation worse.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
If I didn't care, then I wouldn't help.
Exactly my point.
You need to care to help someone. Caring is an emotional response, not an intellectual one. Intellect comes later.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
So, your telling me that if I have a fool proof strategy it's irrelevant to my emotional state? 😕Tell me, if a firefighter has no plan, and is overwhelmed by a fire would his confidence be the same as someone who know's exactly what to do?
Maybe, maybe not, but your proving my point.
Intellect and Emotion both play a part in the rescue, and are both equally important.
Tell me something...if the firefighter doesn't care about losing a victim, would he or she even risk thier lives further to save as many people as he/she can ?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
People kill all the time, it's the motive that determines the cause not the act.
There is a major difference between a one-time murderer and a Serial Killer. Please educate yourself.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
What does multiple personality disorder have to do with anything?
People with MPD have suffered greatly, and have not become any stronger. In fact, they became not only weakened, but mentally disabled.
Suffering does NOT always lead to strength.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
That was not your earlier claim. You said we only adhere to emotions which make us feel good.
We do adhere to emotions that make us feel good. Someone who is obsessed/Infatuated is gratified by said feeling. He/she does not adhere/seek said feeling because it feels bad. They pursue it because it feels good, and even if it hurts them there doing what feels right. Someone who is obsessed/Infatuated only feels bad when they are depraved of their obessestion/infatuation, and not when they are obsessing.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
People cling to heartbreak all the time. Instead of letting to go, they hold on to it, torturing themselves over a lost loved one.
Because they still value the person that broke there heart, not the feeling of heart break itself.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Infatuation feels bad when the feeling is not returned, yet even after heartbreak, some people still cling to the infatuation and the person for a very long time, even though it hurts.
Because they have feelings for the person, it's not because infatuation feels bad the cling to it. That makes no sense at all.
Originally posted by Goddess KaliSame with obsession. obsession does NOT feel good at all, you are not free when you are obsessed. When someone is obsessed, thier will power is very weakened, and they have a strong tendency to remain obsessed instead of snapping out of it.
That's because they are obsessing over someting they like/want. There not obsessed with the feeling of being obsessed. That would make no sense at all.
Originally posted by Goddess KaliAnger feels bad either way. No one actually enjoys it, only people who enjoy power trips enjoy Anger.
No one seeks or adhere's to anger at all. They cling to it because they want appease it. Again, no one is angry because they wish to remian angry. They want something they are not getting.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
[b]Courage is still an emotion. What is your point ?And no you cannot easily stimulate courage. Get drafted to a war where you will most likely get your arms blown off, and see how easily you can acquire courage. [/B]
And, my point is your emotions are just strong feelings that manifest to a state of being. They do not comprehend and analyze. They are limited, so why use them to run your life?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
What if the person truly needs your help ?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Why ? Because you care, that is why. Stop pretending otherwise. Giving someone who is poor money to survive, is an act of [b]compassion, NOT intelligence. [/B]
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
If you do [b]nothing at all you can ALSO make the situation worse.
[/B]
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Exactly my point.You need to care to help someone. Caring is an emotional response, not an intellectual one. Intellect comes later.
Originally posted by Goddess KaliSure, if he wants to keep his job.Maybe, maybe not, but your proving my point.
Intellect and Emotion both play a part in the rescue, and are both equally important.
Tell me something...if the firefighter doesn't care about losing a victim, would he or she even risk thier lives further to save as many people as he/she can ?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
There is a [b]major difference between a one-time murderer and a Serial Killer. Please educate yourself. [/B]
Take your advice, you keep confusing correlation with causition. A murderer is a legal term appled by the state, would you call a soldier a murderer?
Originally posted by Goddess KaliPeople with MPD have suffered greatly, and have not become any stronger. In fact, they became not only weakened, but mentally disabled.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Suffering does NOT always lead to strength.
I never said it always did.
a word of caution people. emotions are extremely complex, ambiguous and mysterious things. lets each not profess to talk and make such definite conclusions about them because that would almost inevitably ignorant and not encompassing the whole picture. also, i emotion/intellect are classic examples of words with ambiguous and heavily debated meanings. i think each poster here thinks of different components and characteristics of the word EMOTION/INTELLECT as it signifies different characteristic phenomenon to different people. it is the limitation of human language that makes them seem like theyr all talkin about the same thing. when infact its almost impossible that they are.
and another thing. although id never definitively deny it. MPD has almost never been proven to exist{i think it does, but im just mentioning facts here}. and any cases there are are all almost completely exclusive to the usa. there is only non definitive anecdotal evidence{thre faces of eve etc. classic example}
Originally posted by leonheartmm
a word of caution people. emotions are extremely complex, ambiguous and mysterious things. lets each not profess to talk and make such definite conclusions about them because that would almost inevitably ignorant and not encompassing the whole picture. also, i emotion/intellect are classic examples of words with ambiguous and heavily debated meanings. i think each poster here thinks of different components and characteristics of the word EMOTION/INTELLECT as it signifies different characteristic phenomenon to different people. it is the limitation of human language that makes them seem like theyr all talkin about the same thing. when infact its almost impossible that they are...
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
We do adhere to emotions that make us feel good. Someone who is obsessed/Infatuated is gratified by said feeling. He/she does not adhere/seek said feeling because it feels bad. They pursue it because it feels good, and even if it hurts them there doing what feels right. Someone who is obsessed/Infatuated only feels bad when they are depraved of their obessestion/infatuation, and not when they are obsessing.
We seek out good feelings, yes, but my point is when the feeling starts to become bad and cause us to suffer, we still have a tendency to cling to it, hoping we will have the "good" part of that feeling, or object of the feeling back.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Because they still value the person that broke there heart, not the feeling of heart break itself.
The reason is irrelevant. The point is they still adhere to the Heartbreak instead of just letting it go. They feel life isn't worth living, or that they aren't supposed to be happy without the object of thier infatuation/obsession.
A very misguided, but experienced, mind set.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Because they have feelings for the person, it's not because infatuation feels bad the cling to it. That makes no sense at all.
Like I said before, the reason is irrelevant. They still cling to the person/object , the thought of the person/object, and therefore the heartbreak/obsession.
Many of them aren't motivated to be happy. They delude themselves into thinking the only way they will be happy is through success with the other person/object.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
That's because they are obsessing over someting they like/want. There not obsessed with the feeling of being obsessed. That would make no sense at all.
Like I stated before, they are still lingering on the obsession, whether they want to or not is irrelevant, because either way they are fueling thier own obsession by hanging onto it.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
No one seeks or adhere's to anger at all. They cling to it because they want appease it. Again, no one is angry because they wish to remian angry. They want something they are not getting.
I never said people are angry because they want to be, but that's not what were are arguing. Why are you changing the point ?
You earlier stated that people enjoy anger. That's not always true. Anger can be very toxic and negative, and a lot of the time people in Anger are suffering while in it, despite gaining any remnant of "victory" through the anger.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
You don't kow what your talking about, I get myself psyched up all the time. That helps you build the feeling of courage.
Like I said before, sign up for a war, and see how much courage you can build up by yourself. See how "easy" it will be, as you stated before.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, my point is your emotions are just strong feelings that manifest to a state of being. They do not comprehend and analyze. They are limited, so why use them to run your life?
I never said use them to run your life, I think you are misintepretting.
I said emotions and intellect are equally important, and you should utilize and analyze both. They keep eachother in check. They are both equally beneficial, and equally dangerous.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
You can help someone if they let you help them.
Your point ? If you don't care you won't help. Caring is an emotional response, not an intellectual one.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I'm not pretending, you just do not wish accept answer that goes against what you feel. I do not care about a bum in the street, but I sure would not want to be in that situation. So, I help because it would be convienent to encourage that kind of behaviour.
That is an act of compassion, not intellect. Face it. Intelligence has almost nothing to do with it.
I didn't say you were in love with the bum. But you empathize for his suffering. You just said, "I would not want to be in that situation"...that is empathy. That's an emotional response.
A uneducated or stupid person can still help another who needs help..again, Intelligence has little to do with it.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I'm not the owner of that individuals life.
That's not the point. Now you are trying to go off subject. I am not talking semantics here.
To do nothing, because your rationale dictates that this person is hopeless, is an act based on your intellect, and can be dangerous to this person.
To interfere, because you feel sorry for the person, is an act based on emotion, and can be equally dangerous or beneficial to this person.
My point was emotion/intellect can both be equally benevolent or malevolent.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Take your advice, you keep confusing correlation with causition. A murderer is a legal term appled by the state, would you call a soldier a murderer?.
You are going off subject again. There is a major difference between a murderer and serial killer.
Your standard murderer kills one or a few people in one event for a very specific reason. Could be revenge, greed, anger, etc.
A serial killer kills people for no reason other than his or her own pleasure. Serial killers minds are physiologically different from the rest of ours. This is not opinion, this is science.
The part of a serial killer's brain which promotes hesitation and empathy does not work. A serial killer has no empathy. They tie little to no emotional response to what they do. They can kill a human as easily as they can kill a cockroach.
They go based on impulse and intellect, thier rationale is completely self centered with no emotion to stop them.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
MPD isn't even cause by suffering, nevermind how rare it is
You don't know what you are talking about. Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder) is most commonly caused by constant sexual abuse as a child.
Suffering so immense causes the mind of the child to fragment so that they have no memory or record of the event.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
We seek out good feelings, yes, but my point is when the feeling starts to become bad and cause us to suffer, we still have a tendency to cling to it, hoping we will have the "good" part of that feeling, or object of the feeling back.
We cling to feelings that make us feel good, The End. Sure, they may make us feel bad at times, but were still pursue them because we want to feel good. We do not cling to them because they feel bad.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
The reason is irrelevant. The point is they still adhere to the Heartbreak instead of just letting it go. They feel life isn't worth living, or that they aren't supposed to be happy without the object of thier infatuation/obsession.
No, the reason is entirely relevant. Why else would they cling to a feeling if it they did not do it in the pursuit of pleasure? The feelings of pain simply correlate with Heart Break, it is not the reason why the cling to it case closed. Just because they feel like shit, doesn't mean they wish to feel that way. It comes with the territory, but your going to ignore this fact as long as it refutes your bogus claim.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Like I said before, the reason is irrelevant. They still cling to the person/object , the thought of the person/object, and therefore the heartbreak/obsession.Many of them aren't motivated to be happy. They delude themselves into thinking the only way they will be happy is through success with the other person/object. Like I stated before, they are still lingering on the obsession, whether they want to or not is irrelevant, because either way they are fueling thier own obsession by hanging onto it.
That's the biggest load of crap I've ever suffered to read. What person purposely seeks emotions that are painful? I already explained it to you, and I'm not gonna bother again.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I never said people are angry because they want to be, but that's not what were are arguing. Why are you changing the point ?
What are you talking about, you listed anger as one of the emotions people purposely cling too. Now you magically forget what you posted?
Originally posted by Goddess KaliAgain that is not true. We also cling to emotions which make us feel bad. Like infatuation, or obsession, or anger for example.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You earlier stated that people enjoy anger. That's not always true. Anger can be very toxic and negative, and a lot of the time people in Anger are suffering while in it, despite gaining any remnant of "victory" through the anger.
People enjoy emotions that are destructive all the time. Emotions are not objective in how people react to them.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Like I said before, sign up for a war, and see how much courage you can build up by yourself. See how "easy" it will be, as you stated before.
I don't have to sign up for since I've spoken to many war veterans.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I never said use them to run your life, I think you are misintepretting..
I accused you of that, I said emotions should not run people's life.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I said emotions and intellect are equally important, and you should utilize and analyze both. They keep eachother in check. They are both equally beneficial, and equally dangerous. ..
And, your wrong.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Your point ? If you don't care you won't help. Caring is an emotional response, not an intellectual one.
You do not have to care about an individual to help them ,and caring is a feeling. Emotions are complex feelings that give way to states of being.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
That is an act of [b]compassion, not intellect. Face it. Intelligence has almost nothing to do with it. [/B]
According to you.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I didn't say you were in love with the bum. But you [b]empathize for his suffering. You just said, "I would not want to be in that situation"...that is empathy. That's an emotional response.
A uneducated or stupid person can still help another who needs help..again, Intelligence has little to do with it.[/B]
Wrong, the bulk of empathy relies on yo associating your self with another. "Putting yourself on someone else's shoes", By doing this you inadvertantly associate emotions with thoughts. When I emphasize with a bum, I imgaine myself in his stead. Emotions are simply an effect of associating myself with said individual not the root.
When I imagine being unable to supoort my life emotions rise up, and only after.
Besides, I explained why I would Aid bum. You just keep harping about: "You act because you care" whilst ignoring what I said, and even edited my post.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
That's not the point. Now you are trying to go off subject. I am not talking semantics here.
To do nothing, because your rationale dictates that this person is hopeless, is an act based on your intellect, and can be dangerous to this person. but, sticking in a unhealthy relationship simply because you wish not to hurt said person is better?
To interfere, because you feel sorry for the person, is an act based on emotion, and can be equally dangerous or beneficial to this person.
I already explained to you that when it comes to me, it is not the case at all. I treat others how I would like to be treated my self, not because I feel an sad for someone. I act to set examples, sure I might feel sorry for a person. But, that's simply an emotion that correlates with my descion not the cause of it.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
My point was emotion/intellect can both be equally benevolent or malevolent.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You are going off subject again. There is a major difference between a murderer and serial killer.
Your standard murderer kills one or a few people in one event for a very specific reason. Could be revenge, greed, anger, etc.
Oh please, so a legal term makes the act any different?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
A serial killer kills people for no reason other than his or her own pleasure. Serial killers minds are physiologically different from the rest of ours. This is not opinion, this is science.The part of a serial killer's brain which promotes hesitation and empathy does not work. [b]A serial killer has no empathy. They tie little to no emotional response to what they do. They can kill a human as easily as they can kill a cockroach. [/B]
Right, because we all know serial killers have the same motive no matter what happens and, serial killers are not psychologically different from the rest of us. Depending on the motive, a serial killer can murder because he's a Sadist, Has some form of Psychosis which impairs his senses, or Schizophrenia.
Originally posted by Goddess KaliYou don't know what you are talking about. Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder) is most commonly caused by constant sexual abuse as a child.
Suffering so immense causes the mind of the child to fragment so that they have no memory or record of the event.
That's schizophrenia not MPD.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I already explained to you that when it comes to me, it is not the case at all. I treat others how I would like to be treated my self, not because I feel an sad for someone. I act to set examples, sure I might feel sorry for a person. But, that's simply an emotion that correlates with my descion not the cause of it.
"I treat others how I would like to be treated my self..."
That's an emotional response, not an intellectual one.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, you've failed to prove this, instead you've just ignored points constantly. They are not on equal footing.
What have I ignored ? I answered all of your points. They ARE on equal footing.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Oh please, so a legal term makes the act any different?
What are you talking about now ? A standard murderer and a serious serial killer are NOT the same.
A murderer has a motive, and one reason for killing one or more people.
A serial killer is physiologically different from the rest of us, and thier actions are based on the way thier brain is developed. They lack empathy of all things.
Not all murderers lack empathy, but serial killers do.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Right, because we all know serial killers have the same motive no matter what happens and, serial killers are not psychologically different from the rest of us. Depending on the motive, a serial killer can murder because he's a Sadist, Has some form of Psychosis which impairs his senses, or Schizophrenia.
Serial killers are psychologically different from the rest of us.
http://www.seattleluxury.com/encyclopedia/entry/serial_killer
It's an extended essay, but please read, you will be educated.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
That's schizophrenia not MPD.
http://www.mental-health-matters.com/disorders/dis_details.php?disID=39
Dissociative Identity Disorder
Also known as:
Description
Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), formerly known as multiple personality disorder, is a disorder in which a person has more than one discrete, separate identity. Each identity is unique, and has its own sets of memories, ideas, thoughts, ways of thinking, and purposes. One identity may be the protector, while another may be a child. On average, a person with DID has between 8 and 13 separate personalities. DID generally results from a severe traumatic experience during the early childhood years.
http://www.healthline.com/galecontent/dissociative-identity-disorder
Causes
The severe dissociation that characterizes patients with DID is currently understood to result from a set of causes:
an innate ability to dissociate easily
repeated episodes of severe physical or sexual abusein childhood
lack of a supportive or comforting person to counteract abusive relative(s)
influence of other relatives with dissociative symptoms or disorders
*******************
So yes, Emporer Ashtar, Emotional Trauma such as repeated sexual abuse causes Multiple Personality Disorder (a.k.a. Dissociative Idenity Disorder)
You are once again, incorrect.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
How exactly does that contradict what I said?
You say that we only adhere to feelings/emotions that make us feel good. That is not always the case. Many people are emotionally masochistic, and cling the emotions which they know are harming them, which make them feel bad, because they base thier happiness on something entirely conditional.
Instead of letting it go, they cling to it.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
We cling to feelings that make us feel good, The End. Sure, they may make us feel bad at times, but were still pursue them because we want to feel good. We do not cling to them because they feel bad.
You think that black and white ?
People cling to heartbreak. Heartbreak never feels good, yet people still hold on to it. Explain that.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
No, the reason is entirely relevant. Why else would they cling to a feeling if it they did not do it in the pursuit of pleasure? The feelings of pain simply correlate with Heart Break, it is not the reason why the cling to it case closed. Just because they feel like shit, doesn't mean they wish to feel that way. It comes with the territory, but your going to ignore this fact as long as it refutes your bogus claim.
A person who is in deep heartbreak does not wish to be happy unless they are reunited with the man or woman of thier infatuation.
They cannot imagine being happy otherwise, it takes them a long time to snap out of it. (especially if it's the first heartbreak a person has)
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
That's the biggest load of crap I've ever suffered to read. What person purposely seeks emotions that are painful? I already explained it to you, and I'm not gonna bother again.
Why are you getting so emotional now ? 😆
So much for intellect.... 🙄
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
What are you talking about, you listed anger as one of the emotions people purposely cling too. Now you magically forget what you posted?
You were changing the point. You are arguing whether or not people choose to be angry, that is not what I was discussing. I was talking about people enjoying being angry. Not all people enjoy it.
Everyone is different, not all emotions are the same, and you fail to understand that.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
People enjoy emotions that are destructive all the time. Emotions are not objective in how people react to them.
You claim this based on.....
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I don't have to sign up for since I've spoken to many war veterans.
That makes you a WAR EXPERT ! 😱
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I accused you of that, I said emotions should not run people's life..
I agree. Emotions should not run people's lives. People should be in charge of thier emotions and thier intellect.
Intellect, like emotions, are also easily influenced by external forces such as the opinions and knowledge of other people.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, your wrong.
I am right.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
You do not have to care about an individual to help them ,and caring is a feeling. Emotions are complex feelings that give way to states of being
A feeling is emotional, not intellectual. Stop nit-picking. 🙄
Secondly, Caring is emotional, not intellectual. Interest can be intellectual, caring is not.
You do not have to care about the individual, but you still empathize with thier suffering in order to help.
You wouldn't help if you didn't truly care about people's suffering.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
[B]According to you.Wrong, the bulk of empathy relies on yo associating your self with another. "Putting yourself on someone else's shoes", By doing this you inadvertantly associate emotions with thoughts. When I emphasize with a bum, I imgaine myself in his stead. Emotions are simply an effect of associating myself with said individual not the root.
When I imagine being unable to supoort my life emotions rise up, and only [B]after. [/B]
Empathy
http://www.answers.com/topic/empathy?cat=health
To show empathy is to identify with another's feelings. It is to emotionally put yourself in the place of another. The ability to empathize is directly dependent on your ability to feel your own feelings and identify them.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empathy
Are you trying to redefine what Empathy is ? Empathy involves intellect, ofcourse, but it is at BASE, an Emotional Process.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Besides, I explained why I would Aid bum. You just keep harping about: "You act because you care" whilst ignoring what I said, and even edited my post.
Just because you do not realize that you care does not mean you don't.
Secondly, it is actually YOU who ignores my point. I never claimed you care about the BUM...but you DO care about his suffering.
You know he is suffering..suffering is pain. You recognize pain. You empathize. Intellect has little to do with it, seeing as how any uneducated idiot can still see one's pain.
You don't help if you don't care. The desire to aid another is not intellectual. It's emotional.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You say that we only adhere to feelings/emotions that make us feel good. That is not always the case. Many people are emotionally masochistic, and cling the emotions which they know are harming them, which make them feel bad, because they base thier happiness on something entirely conditional.Instead of letting it go, they cling to it.
A masochist is an individual that takes pleasure in harming themselves. The pain that correlates with being a masochist is not the cause of said behaviour.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You think that [b]black and white ?
People cling to heartbreak. Heartbreak never feels good, yet people still hold on to it. Explain that. [/B]
I did explain Heart Break, but you once again ignored the cause. Your so hyper focused on using correlation to support your argument that your missing what I said over three times.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
A person who is in deep heartbreak does not wish to be happy unless they are reunited with the man or woman of thier infatuation. They cannot imagine being happy otherwise, it takes them a long time to snap out of it. (especially if it's the first heartbreak a person has)
Correction: An individual who is going through heart does not feel happy until they are reunited with the object of their affection.
Your contradicting yourself, if the individual does not want to be happy.
Why would they imagine being happy otherwise?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Why are you getting so emotional now ? 😆So much for intellect.... 🙄
Who's emotional?
I'm not the one that edit's people's post and responds to it. 😆
You must be psychic to be able to feel one's emotions from the comp.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You were changing the point. You are arguing whether or not people choose to be angry, that is not what I was discussing. I was talking about people enjoying being angry. Not all people enjoy it.
I'm not changing anything at all. Infact, I doubt you know your own point. What person seeks anger as an emotional attachment simply for the sake of being angry? You implied this in your argument which makes zero sense.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Everyone is different, not all emotions are the same, and you fail to understand that.
Emotions are not specified to an individual.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
You claim this based on.....
Common knowledge of Psychology.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Intellect, like emotions, are also easily influenced by external forces such as the opinions and knowledge of other people.
Only if your ignorant individual, it's hard to control someone who know's what your doing.On the other hand, no amount of emotions will ever protect you from emotional control.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I am right.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
A feeling is emotional, not intellectual. Stop nit-picking. 🙄Secondly, Caring is emotional, not intellectual. Interest can be intellectual, caring is not.
You do not have to care about the individual, but you still empathize with thier suffering in order to help.You wouldn't help if you didn't truly care about people's suffering.
Feelings are sensations, you know your five senses.
Emotions are complex reactions to sensations and are closely linked not the samething.
Intrest=Empathy
Can you empathsize with someone you canot even comprehend?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
[b]Empathyhttp://www.answers.com/topic/empathy?cat=health
To show empathy is to identify with another's feelings. It is to emotionally put yourself in the place of another. The ability to empathize is directly dependent on your ability to feel your own feelings and identify them.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empathy
Are you trying to redefine what Empathy is ? Empathy involves intellect, ofcourse, but it is at BASE, an Emotional Process. [/B]
Read that definition slowly, especially the part that mentions identifying with an individual. Is indentification a emotional process?
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Just because you do not realize that you care does not mean you don't.
Secondly, it is actually YOU who ignores my point. I never claimed you care about the BUM...but you [b]DO care about his suffering.[/bYou know he is suffering..suffering is pain. You recognize pain. You empathize. Intellect has little to do with it, seeing as how any uneducated idiot can still see one's pain.
You don't help if you don't care. The desire to aid another is not intellectual. It's emotional.
And, your wrong, I don't care. I explained my reasons, but you just keep ignoring them.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
A masochist is an individual that takes [B]pleasure in harming themselves. The pain that correlates with being a masochist is not the cause of said behaviour.[/B]
Point is they still cling to bad feelings, and mental/emotional pain. You have claimed that people only cling to good feelings, and that is untrue.
And btw, not all people who cling to bad feelings are masochist.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I did explain Heart Break, but you once again ignored the cause. Your so hyper focused on using correlation to support your argument that your missing what I said over three times.
Emotion and Intellect are interelated and can not be separated. Do you deny this ?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Correction: An individual who is going through heart does not feel happy until they are reunited with the object of their affection.
Either that, or they find a way to get over thier heartbreak.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Your contradicting yourself, if the individual does not want to be happy.
Why would they imagine being happy otherwise?
Many people who are heartbroken do not want to be happy otherwise, UNLESS they are reunited with the object of thier affections.
Instead of seeing a way to strengthen themselves and move on, they will cling to pain and the harm that comes with heartbreak.
So instead of setting themselves free, and trying to find another way to be happy again, they focus on the object of thier affections, further supplying thier heartbreak.
What do you not understand ?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Who's emotional?
I'm not the one that edit's people's post and responds to it. 😆
You must be psychic to be able to feel one's emotions from the comp.
What the hell are you talking about now ? 😆
And yes, the Irony of this is that in your arguments you resort to name calling, sarcasm, and ridicule. The major Irony is that you are defending Intellect over Emotion, yet utilizing more Emotion than Intellect 😆
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I'm not changing anything at all. Infact, I doubt you know your own point. What person seeks anger as an emotional attachment simply for the sake of being angry? You implied this in your argument which makes zero sense.
I never said a person seeks Anger, you are confused. People cling to thier anger, they don't look for it.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Emotions are not specified to an individual.
And you being one individual person, how would you know that two people's emotions are exactly the same ? If everyone's perspectives, biases, and mentalities are different, then thier emotions and intellect would be as well.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Common knowledge of Psychology.
VERY Common 😆
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Only if your ignorant individual, it's hard to control someone who know's what your doing.On the other hand, no amount of emotions will ever protect you from emotional control.
If you are truly happy with yourself and your life, no outside person can destroy that just by attacking you with judgements and names.
Intellect can be used to manipulate emotions, but the vise versa is true as well.
Your own emotions also shape your intellect. If you find boredom in one particular subject, or discust in another, you will not learn.
Your intellect is only shaped by what you learn. You learn what you choose to learn, and what you are influenced by.
What you choose to learn is often dictated by how you feel about a certain topic.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Nope
✅
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Feelings are sensations, you know your five senses.
Emotions are complex reactions to sensations and are closely linked not the samething.
Caring is an Emotional Response. Not an Intellectual One. Yes or No ?
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Intrest=Empathy
Untrue. Interest and Empathy are not the same thing. Now you are confused.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Can you empathsize with someone you canot even comprehend?
If a person speaks a different language from myself I can still tell whether or not they are in pain. So yes.
I never said Intellect wasn't part of it, Intellect does play a role, but Emotion plays a bigger role in Empathy.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Read that definition slowly, especially the part that mentions identifying with an individual. Is indentification a emotional process?
Identification is intellectual, but you are identifyign one's feelings with your own. Empathy is all about emotion. Face it, get over it, and sleep well.
The definitions themselves regard Empathy as emotional. Stop whining, stop nit-picking, just face facts.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, your wrong, I don't care. I explained my reasons, but you just keep ignoring them.
If you did not care about suffering, then you wouldn't help. Quit trying to delude yourself just for the sake of being right.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
"I treat others how I [b]would like to be treated my self..."That's an emotional response, not an intellectual one.
What have I ignored ? I answered all of your points. They ARE on equal footing.
What are you talking about now ? A standard murderer and a serious serial killer are NOT the same.
A murderer has a motive, and one reason for killing one or more people.
A serial killer is physiologically different from the rest of us, and thier actions are based on the way thier brain is developed. They lack empathy of all things.
Not all murderers lack empathy, but serial killers do.
Serial killers are psychologically different from the rest of us.
http://www.seattleluxury.com/encyclopedia/entry/serial_killer
It's an extended essay, but please read, you will be educated.
http://www.mental-health-matters.com/disorders/dis_details.php?disID=39
Dissociative Identity Disorder
Also known as:Description
Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), formerly known as multiple personality disorder, is a disorder in which a person has more than one discrete, separate identity. Each identity is unique, and has its own sets of memories, ideas, thoughts, ways of thinking, and purposes. One identity may be the protector, while another may be a child. On average, a person with DID has between 8 and 13 separate personalities. DID generally results from a severe traumatic experience during the early childhood years.
http://www.healthline.com/galecontent/dissociative-identity-disorder
Causes
The severe dissociation that characterizes patients with DID is currently understood to result from a set of causes:
an innate ability to dissociate easily
repeated episodes of severe physical or sexual abusein childhood
lack of a supportive or comforting person to counteract abusive relative(s)
influence of other relatives with dissociative symptoms or disorders*******************
So yes, Emporer Ashtar, Emotional Trauma such as repeated sexual abuse causes Multiple Personality Disorder (a.k.a. Dissociative Idenity Disorder)
You are once again, incorrect. [/B]
Emporer Ashtar, you completely IGNORED my other responses to your previous arguments now.