Exploring Emotional Rationality in Decision Making

[maximus]

okay, emotional logic is a bad title. how about emotional rationality?
I've recently read a study in which "rational thought" was shown to be a result of cooperatively using the limbic systems and the anterior cingulate cortex (basically meaning between emotional centers of the brain and 'logical' areas). apparently the age old belief that totally rational behaviour would be a result of firings in the 'logically' thinking areas in the brain is wrong. to make a decicion anymore complex than the most basic decicions we need to employ the emotional centers of the brain to prioritize, modivate, and provide a form of inductive logic in which past emotional reactions to success/failure are utilized to make rational decicions about what to do. just thought it would be worth noting. probably a lot of you already know this.

 

[b11ngoo]

So there must be a change of shape in the logical and emotional brain for there to be thought.
So at times we think not, but potentialize. Maybe by multitasking by priority.

So memories are thought that changes when thought about. We need thought to change thought.

So sensation must be thought. That changes when sensed, etc...

That pool game you played is different every time you play it. No two games are the same. But you may want to change some other thought you have. Maybe thirst.

 

[Dissident Dan]

This is an interesting topic. Firstly, what kinds of "rational thought" were tested for?

I would bet that there would be less activity in the emotional areas of the brain when solving an algebra problem (unless the stress factor starts kicking in) than when deciding which car to buy. Obviously, emotional factors are needed in order to make any decision. We are driven by our desires.

You can use your logical abilities to accomplish your emotional goal, or your emotional states can impede the use of logic in accomplishing your emotional goal.

 

[Dayle Record]

I read a really interesting piece among easily a dozen, regarding mapping of the brain. This piece discussed that the "Falling in love phase" of relationships, happens in the planning and strategy section of the brain. (This is probably the car-buying area of the brain as well.) Older and more established relations happen in the "Love" section of the brain. Then I realized that super computing will make all this mapping a breeze, and whatever evil that absolute knowledge of these matters will bring, is coming right up. But anyway, another interesting study I read in almost the same day had to to with prejudice, decreasing the IQ of the prejudicial. The study showed that conversing with an individual against whom you harbored prejudice of any kind, made your frontal cortex work over time in emotional control tasking, and intellectual prowess diminished due to overload.

A balanced being has to tap both logic and emotion to be in a good steady state. Logically we can get ourselves into a terrible grind, if we ignore our basic feelings about decisions we make. Realistically we can be in a big mess if our emotions rule in situations where math skills would do a better job.

The news I am reading about the mapping of the brains chemistry, and energy flows, and resultant use of this info for weaponry, and mind control; is the most serious threat to our personal security, ever. This is a classic case of logic, overruling basic human rights of spirit and privacy.

 

[jammieg]

Most likely all thoughts are spurred by emotions, and few thoughts occur that don't have the end result of stimulating the emotions, so that when one finds reasons not to be prejudiced that emotion's function looks further and in other areas for new ways to stimulate itself- reason would control emotion in this way but to what end I don't know.

 

[wuliheron]

Emotions provide context, that is what distinguishes us from our computers. As you already pointed out, they help us prioritize and motivate. "Pure" logic is merely a mechanical tool, by itself it cannot do anything whatsoever, just as my monkey wrench cannot do a damn thing by itself. The same holds true for "pure" emotion and, as far as anyone can tell, the two are actually just extremes of one and the same phenomenon, thought.

The foundations of formal logic are entirely composed of arguments based on reductio ad absurdium. In other words, on the principle that some things are patently absurd. My home computer has no concept whatsoever of what might be absurd, thus it has no sense of humor and will do anything and everything I tell it to do.