Question Can you separate reason and emotions in your mind ?

[Maciamo]

Just to make things clear, Lexico, "chastise" is a rather dated word for "punish", and the proverb is generally used by parents or teachers to justify their strict approach to education. In another context, like here with people or things with like, the proverb can be understood in this way "people who care (about someone/something) tend to be more protective or demanding for the own good of the person/thing they care about".

If on the other hand, all criticism were reational & discreetly separated from personal bonds, then one would grow up with a positive view on criticising. One fictitious example from the popular TV series would be Mr. Spok, the Vulcan, who is ready to give a cold evaluation of Captain Kirk's idea without ties to either tradition or human emotions.

Good example. If you have seen the series "24", the president's private advisor (especially Mike in the first season, or David Palmer's brother in the third one) don't hesitate to to criticise his decisions for his own good (well, we could argue that they have interests in saving his presidency, but yet).

 

[bossel]

One fictitious example from the popular SciFi series would be Mr. Spok, the Vulcan, who is ready to give a cold evaluation of Captain Kirk's idea without ties to either tradition or human emotions.

Fictitious, you say? My great idol - Mr. Spock - is not real? :shock:

For the original question:
I don't think a human can separate emotion from reason, it's too closely connected in the brain. What you can do though, is to examine whether your reasoning is close enough to the facts. If it is, any criticism shouldn't pose a problem, even if the interpretation of facts may vary widely form person to person.

 

[cicatriz esp]

That would be almost impossible for me to do.
My mind does not work that way.

This was a bit shocking to read. Throughout my upbringing, I have always been taught that you do not truly love someone/something unless you can point out their flaws and then attempt to fix them. I can't count the number of times my Dad said to me, "nothing in life gets done except through confrontation".

It just goes to show how different people can be.

 

[lexico]

Self glorifying Vulcan ?

Fictitious, you say? My great idol - Mr. Spock - is not real? :shock:

I am genuinely surprised at your response, Bossel. How can Bossel, the embodiment of absolute, pure reason, could engage in such petty human emotions as admiration, love, and idolatry ? :shock:
Could it be that Mr. Spok is with us under alias Bossel ???? :bikkuri: Self-admiraion is understandable; for Spok, too, is only human, oops, illogical, Vulcan ! :evil:

For the original question:
I don't think a human can separate emotion from reason, it's too closely connected in the brain.

I want to agree. (Being human, I am emotional, and not ashamed to say it. Vulcan pride of detachment is, IMHO, illogical. Wouldn't you say ... Spok ?)
However, do you have any support from the brainy brain scientists ? Or any abstract theorizing from psychologists with the philosophical bent ?

What you can do though, is to examine whether your reasoning is close enough to the facts. If it is, any criticism shouldn't pose a problem, even if the interpretation of facts may vary widely form person to person.

Wise, wise, remarks again. Could have come from only Spok himself and no other. Taking one step further, genuine criticism must be said, not to diminish what is being criticised, but to enrich the object of criticism. In this regard, the bastardised concept of 'criticism' calls for a new name that is quite free of emotional charges against it. Any suggestions ?

btw, I was always under the impression that Spok was into Asian cultures. His porverbial sig. to live long and prosper must have derivrf from his Chinese studies, a loose translation of ?????ݐ?. I could be wrong. Could have been Korean, or even Japanese. :chinese:

 

[CC1]

For the original question:
I don't think a human can separate emotion from reason, it's too closely connected in the brain.

I totally disagree...I can and do separate the two. In my old job it was absolutely necessary! If I allowed emotion to get involved, quite often someone would wind up getting hurt!

 

[lexico]

Which emotion(s) are we talking about ?

I totally disagree...I can and do separate the two. In my old job it was absolutely necessary! If I allowed emotion to get involved, quite often someone would wind up getting hurt!

Interesting clashing of ideas going on between you two. Quite probably talking about two separate things which are assumed to be referred to by emotion.

Let us try to define what ideas may be involved here.

1A. Instinct: innate forms of unconditional reflexes regarding social interaction
1B. libido (life force) & thanatos (death force)
1C. aquired forms of conditional reflexes regarding social interaction
1D. suppressed instinct, libido, thanatos, & conditioning
1E. idea of what is good & bad, better & worse, pleasing & disgusting, etc.
1F. structured path of aligned responses, not based on reflexes
1G. unstructure path of previously undefined responses, not based on reflexes, and in the process of being defined

All these can be considered emotional depending on the situation, the individual, and the particular interaction bewteen a person and an entity, human or material. Another way to frame the question would be; Does emotion refer to;

2A. an internal perception, reflexive judgement (decision), subjective judgement, or rational judgement ?

2B. the mental drive to initiate the passing of a judgement, or to put into action as a response ?

Another related question would be,

3A. "How is a person't thoughts, experiences, personality, goals, interests, ideals, faith (in each possibility of the word) influence 'emotion' ?"

note: Please criticise, as this is a very crude attempt to list emotional components.

 

[bossel]

(Being human, I am emotional, and not ashamed to say it. Vulcan pride of detachment is, IMHO, illogical. Wouldn't you say ... Spok ?)

A simple human being, that's me. :bawling: My earlier desire to become as logical & rational as an ideal Vulcan has been disappointed. I had to settle with being some stupid little pseudo-monkey incapable of controlling his desires (& what's worse, stuck on this doomed little planet with its primitive societies, aaargh! kashii: ).

However, do you have any support from the brainy brain scientists ? Or any abstract theorizing fron psychologists with the philosophical bent ?

There is support for my position, although there is no definite conclusion yet. Neuroscience is still in its beginnings. It will take quite a while till we can be really sure.

What I based my previously stated opinion on, is more or less my own observation & conclusion. I know that perception & memory are influenced by emotions. Even if you would be able to completely cut off your emotions from reasoning (which is also not possible IMO), how could your conclusion be entirely rational if your information acquisition & processing is already flawed?

Regarding scientific support, I found this interesting article (PDF file).
Quote:
"If the extraordinary interpenetration of neural processes that are being discovered in the neurosciences is anything to go by, it is difficult to see why there should be more neatly separated systems on the psychological level. [...]
We should study these dynamically and in all their componential complexity: all have highly inter-related cognitive, affective, and conative aspects. Since these are difficult to disentangle one would need a good reason to try to do so. So far, this reason is not obvious."

I totally disagree...I can and do separate the two. In my old job it was absolutely necessary! If I allowed emotion to get involved, quite often someone would wind up getting hurt!

Maybe as Lexico said, you have a different definition of emotion than I do. Perhaps you only go for the big emotions (love, hate, anger, etc.)?
Your brain is a highly complex organ. The internal functions are still not understood entirely, but what seems clear is that many if not all these functions interact. I can't see, how you should be able to cut off certain functions entirely. You may be an exceptional case, but I doubt it.


Lexico made a nice attempt in defining emotions. There is a major problem, though. There are no clear distinctions (between higher functions) in our brain. Hence it is almost futile to try to distinguish between emotion & reason, let alone between varying emotions. The closer you look, the blurrier the distinctions will become. It's all one big continuum.

 

[alexriversan]

indeed lexicos attempt is very nice.
i can go into into, understand it, if i like.

however, many people are less-intellectual.
probably they can be described with such models, probably not.
but they are rather emotional, even affective.
the negative way of being affective is called reactive.

one much easier system i apply to myself is: START, CONTINIUE, STOP.

START is where i am now, current status of: environment, posession, relationship etc.

CONTINIUE is my action

STOP is where i want to get/what i would like achieve

anthing which does not support STOP is ABANDONED.

this is a little bit like programming, but i can work pretty nice.

in example, spending time with bad contacts/being lazy does not fulfill the STOP condition.

 

[callisto]

I guess I have difficulties in coping with the 2...I mean separate them. I need attention, concentration.

 

[Platinumbaby]

I can absolutely separate the two. As a rule, I leave emotion out of ANY major decision I am faced with, as I do not believe people make the best choices when emotion-driven. Emotions change, logic and facts do not. Stick to those, and even if you're wrong... you're still right. With emotion, you can do what you 'feel' is right, and it's completely wrong.
I would go as far as to say, separating the two is an essential survival skill.

 

[himagain]

Emotion is a function of the midbrain, while reason is a function of the
cerebral cortex. I merely assume this point so I may be wrong about it.

 

[Tiffany01]

look buddy, My brain or mind is not something stupid, I guess I can control my mind every minute I breathe. So, of course they are separated.

 

[BaltoHeritageNorway]

Most people use reason in a defensive way ,that is mostly attached to the Natural primitive ego. This probably increased as negative during the times of imperialism in history, as the ruling nations and empires easily would see themselves as more clever than other races, individuals etc, due to achieved power or wealth. Usually a small minority of clever thinkers and/or engineers within science, economy and philosophy history, have used reason in ways that gave strong progress to the human culture, but in their time of first innovation, they were all fought against by the ruling communities and the Public, seen as irrational... The fully rational person will be able to use reason totally neutral to mass cultural or power ruling impact. Another side is though that even perfectly unemotional reasoning, will only be one side of the coin in the human mind's function, resonnating to only some parts of reality for knowledge or adaptation. There may be and probably is, ways of interacting with reality that has to involve emotions or a Natural emotionality. This may be why women and men have very different relations to subjects like shamanism and healing. In the same way as women are naturally limited (historically but not always necessarily) in terms of analysis and logic and therefore often have less interest and capability in leadership and naturesciences than men, men may be naturally limited in ways that it is hard for the most intelligent men within analytical skills to comprehend or relate to.

 

[rosalynhill]

Its hard to say.