Posted by Estella on May 19, 2006, at 7:28:25
In reply to Re: three factors of emotion pulled apart, posted by Estella on May 19, 2006, at 7:20:10
though of course that is getting all confusing...
and it relies on different emotions being differentiated by different patterns of bodily change which is an empirical matter and might well turn out to be false.
he tries to do something dodgey with calibration files but f*cked if i can understand it as yet...
but...
er...i quite liked that theory.
'cause it credits our intutions re phenomenology
(though more work needs to be done)
and it credits our intuitions on bodily changed
(which some people do have - and i do think james subtraction argument of subtracting bodily feelings and one is left with a cool cognitive state that is not an emotion at all is kinda compelling)
and 'cause cognitions are kinda pushed to one side...(though calibration files are supposed to play that role though it is not clear how they can...)
and 'cause i like causal informational theories of mental representation 'cause they lead nicely into the function of emotion and what emotions evolved for etc.
the bodily changes are supposed to explain our 'tendancies to behave' intuitions too... 'cause the bodily changes are supposed to prepare us for response. our hearts race to prepare us for fight or flight and so forth...
:-)
poster:Estella
thread:645293
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060513/msgs/645821.html