Well, I think here's a cool theory on how emotions fit into all of this stuff... when I wrote the post about making fun of things to get through stuff that's hard:
How to get through pointless stuff Quote:
Some more points I want to include later after I experiment with this more:
-emotions let you do stuff
-link this idea to the heirarchy, and how your brain chooses to do things
-link in what fun vs hate does
|
This is Nick Pagan's theory from
Nick Pagan. Here's his explanation here:
How to operate your brain perfectly.
In a nutshell he explains:
Quote:
The mechanism works quite simply as this: First, we set a desire. Second, we
take action to fulfil the desire. Third, we interpret our results to see if we have
fulfilled the desire. Fourth, we feel emotion as a result of the difference
between our desired result and our actual result.
|
Quote:
To counteract the effect of attempting to do what our emotional guidance
system indicates is impossible we must change our objective desires in the
moment to things that we can do already or to fulfil things that we can almost
do so that we stretch and grow ourselves but with a high possibility and
probability of fulfilment.
|
This agrees with Steve's views that learning happens when expectations are not met
http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/200...-really-works/ Quote:
|
Learning is what naturally occurs whenever your expectations are not met. When you experience something new where you don’t know what to expect, or when something occurs which conflicts with your expectations, your mind will strive to identify and store new patterns.
|
And also with a bit of neuroscience:
Neuroscience of Leadership Quote:
The same cognitive dynamics come into play when people face other types of stressful experiences, including any strategic or organizational change. Much of what managers do in the workplace — how they sell ideas, run meetings, manage others, and communicate — is so well routinized that the basal ganglia are running the show. Trying to change any hardwired habit requires a lot of effort, in the form of attention. This often leads to a feeling that many people find uncomfortable. So they do what they can to avoid change.
The second reason change is hard relates to basic brain functioning. Human brains have evolved a particularly strong capacity to detect what neuroscientists call “errors”: perceived differences between expectation and actuality. When a child (or an adult, for that matter) is promised a sweet-tasting treat and then discovers it tastes salty or bitter, the brain emits strong signals that use a lot of energy, showing up in imaging technology as dramatic bursts of light. Edmund Rolls first illustrated this at Oxford University in the early 1980s, with a study involving monkeys. Dr. Rolls found that “errors” in the environment produced intense bursts of neural firing, markedly stronger than the firing caused by familiar stimuli.
These error signals are generated by a part of the brain called the orbital frontal cortex. Located above the eyeballs, it is closely connected to the brain’s fear circuitry, which resides in a structure called the amygdala. (The amygdala is the source of the “amygdala hijack,” the sudden and overwhelming fear or anger response described in layman’s terms by Daniel Goleman in his popular book Emotional Intelligence.) The amygdala and the orbital frontal cortex are among the oldest parts of the mammal brain, remnants of evolutionary history. When these parts of the brain are activated, they draw metabolic energy away from the prefrontal region, which promotes and supports higher intellectual functions. The prefrontal region is particularly well developed in humans, and doesn’t exist at all below the higher primates. Error detection signals can thus push people to become emotional and to act more impulsively: Animal instincts take over. |
In my rough model, it doesn't explain desire well yet, it goes:
1. I want to do something = desire = conciousness searches for best sets of IRs to exectute to fullfill the action
2. Exectute the IRs by making expectations and prediction that flow down the heirarchy... yea, still not explained well... The IRs might not be well defined yet, because it might be a new action/skill that you are doing
3/4. So that if what is expected doesn't occur then your mind usues up energy to refine the IRs = learning. This is the feeling of failure, its your mind marking off that those configuration of IRs did not do their job so don't try them again = associate a bad emotion with that so you dont try it again. And good emotion is assocated with the IR configuaration if the action that it caused did what was expected so that it is reinforced.
The model thus explains why "Getting Things Done" works well, because it tells you to constantly ask yourself what the next physical step is, so you think in steps of what is possible instead of trying to do something impossible in the moment.