[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by nvictor

why?

I also suppose that the caveman would die first because of all the daring things he will be doing since his mind is not developed. An average modern human would live longer, because he experiement more fear.

I'd expect a caveman to adjust to the jungle environment faster because he is used to outdoor, dangerous, untamed environments. Most of us have never been in environment more dangerous than a well worn path through a national park.

I don't believe a caveman's under-developed mind would make him do daring things. I believe his fear would make him cautious.

Originally Posted by nvictor

Is fear an element for surviving? (yes?...)

I think so, yes. I think fear is the label we apply to the emotion we experience when we're faced with something that could hurt us. If we didn't evolve that emotional response, then we could have been killed by the thing we should have feared.

Originally Posted by nvictor

Your second article states that emotion is a body reaction to an event in our mind. This can prove that intellect and fear are linked. [Mark?]

I found this essay which says a lot of interesting things about emotion. I haven't read all of it yet, but here's a few noteworthy points:

Our natural way of thinking about these standard emotions is that the mental perception of some fact excites the mental affection called the emotion, and that this latter state of mind gives rise to the bodily expression. My thesis on the contrary is that the bodily changes follow directly the PERCEPTION of the exciting fact, and that our feeling of the same changes as they occur IS the emotion. Common sense says, we lose our fortune, are sorry and weep; we meet a bear, are frightened and run; we are insulted by a rival, are angry and strike. The hypothesis here to be defended says that this order of sequence is incorrect, that the one mental state is not immediately induced by the other, that the bodily manifestations must first be interposed between, and that the more rational statement is that we feel sorry because we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble, and not that we cry, strike, or tremble, because we are sorry, angry, or fearful, as the case may be. Without the bodily states following on the perception, the latter would be purely cognitive in form, pale, colourless, destitute of emotional warmth. We might then see the bear, and judge it best to run, receive the insult and deem it right to strike, but we could not actually feel afraid or angry.

This supports the suggestion that emotions don't just arise from the conscious mind, but are the physiological responses to certain stimulus, and that stimulus is our perception of a certain event, and finally, that stimulus may be external (i.e. sensory perception), or internal (so yes, intellect and fear are linked):

"Stage-fright" is only the extreme degree of that wholly irrational personal self-consciousness which every one gets in some measure, as soon as he feels the eyes of a number of strangers fixed upon him, even though he be inwardly convinced that their feeling towards him is of no practical account. This being so, it is not surprising that the additional persuasion that my fellow-man's attitude means either well or ill for me, should awaken stronger emotions still. In primitive societies "Well" may mean handing me a piece of beef, and "Ill" may mean aiming a blow at my skull. In our "cultured age," "Ill" may mean cutting me in the street, and "Well," giving me an honorary degree. What the action itself may be is quite insignificant, so long as I can perceive in it intent or animus. That is the emotion-arousing perception; and may give rise to as strong bodily convulsions in me, a civilised man experiencing the treatment of an artificial society, as in any savage prisoner of war, learning whether his captors are about to eat him or to make him a member of their tribe.

...the nervous system of every living thing is but a bundle of predispositions to react in particular ways upon the contact of particular features of the environment.

So the important thing to note is that regardless of the stimulus, the stimulus occurs first, then the nervous system's reaction, then the conscious mind's identification of the feeling.

So when we experience fear, our conscious identification, and therefore our ability to consciously override that fear, comes last. To truly be free of fear you'd need to either remove all stimulus that creates fear (which it sounds as if you're doing, illusions), or remove all neurological associations between stimulus and the fear response (which NPL or EFT or similar practices can help do).

Or, as you said Victor, allow ourselves to feel the fear, but don't let it stop us from moving forward.