Preferring emotions

[Lauxa]

So I was trying to explain LoA to my very skeptical friend, and I started with the proposition that some emotions feel better than others. And he didn't agree! He said that to him, emotions are just tools and he doesn't really give any preference to one emotional state over another, although he does acknowledge physical states like pain, hunger, and sex.

I was floored, because I definitely distinguish "good" and "bad" emotional states. And so I wanted to bring it back to the board and ask if there is anyone else who really doesn't care about emotions and doesn't prefer one emotion over another or if he is just a freak of nature or maybe I am not asking the question properly.

[wolfgang]

Ask him what he does with his emotional "tools" and he might see that some emotions work better than others for certain purposes, in his mind. If he sees them as tools, then he would prefer to have a hammer when there's a nail and a saw when there's wood to be cut - so even in his analogy he would probably have preferences.

but also emotions directly effect our cells. science find this out too. stress (emotions we don't really like) cause tightness all over our body and love and other positives like peace, cause relaxation and cells that are able to operate better.

Something I heard/read was saying even our DNA uncoils in the presence of peace and love and twists up in the presence of anger and hate. But that might be to much to say to a skeptic.

[niche]

Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.

This is a symptom from "Profile of a Sociopath." Having only one symptom and maybe not even really having it does not make this person a sociopath. It's just what your post reminded of.

[Liara Covert]

Scientists understand unfolding events based on their conditioning just like each human being does this in his or her own way. Emotions are also conditioned. They can be learned and unlearned and each is a choice. If someone doesn't agree with you on a subject, you can always decide to 'agree to disagree.' There is no need to exert effort ot prove anyone is 'right' or 'wrong.' These perceptions themselves can be seen as illusions.

[Angela]

Well, some people don't feel physical pain. They usually die pretty young, though. If this guy has no preference but can recognize emotions usefulness as a tool in his life (as Wolfgang noted, maybe his perspective is more one of works/doesn't rather than feels good/feels bad), then you don't have to worry about him.

For me, I prefer that my friends enjoy feeling good rather than having no opinion about it, but it's not my choice to make. Oh no wait... I guess being friends with them is my choice!

[Jarrod]

I'm pretty similar to the guy you mention I think. I guess you could say I prefer the absence of any emotion (awareness).

I see them as not essentially me even though they contain a bit of me. Ie. The emotion is like a wrapping around a present.

I look at emotions, unwrap them and extract more of 'me' if you like.

From this I can act with greater understanding, and the emotions don't make me lose sense of now.

[The Cloud]

To have good emotions, you have to have bad ones. There's nothing wrong with depression, because it balances happiness. There is nothing wrong with any emotion. What becomes wrong is when I tell myself that I shouldn't be feeling a certain way. Once I stop accepting what I'm feeling, that is when pain turns into suffering.

I can't control my emotions, not directly. I can only change my perspective. My emotions are what tells me that I'm looking at things from the right perspective. If I'm depressed and unhappy, then I know that it is because my perspective isn't serving me unless that is what I want. There's nothing wrong with the feeling, it's simply telling me something about the current state that I am in. If happy were universally good and sad was universally bad, then mania and heroin addiction wouldn't be diseases. Both make you feel good, to a fault.

As a side note, I am also extremely skeptical of the LoA. My opinion is that things don't work in the way that it proposes, and even if they did the only people that would be able to use it without pushing the things they want away are the people that didn't bother with it.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by The Cloud

To have good emotions, you have to have bad ones. There's nothing wrong with depression, because it balances happiness. There is nothing wrong with any emotion. What becomes wrong is when I tell myself that I shouldn't be feeling a certain way. Once I stop accepting what I'm feeling, that is when pain turns into suffering.

You know, The Cloud, I agree with you that there's nothing wrong with any emotion, and completely concur with you about resistance turning pain into suffering. And I don't think you have to have bad-feeling emotions to have good-feeling ones. It's not a requirement, and feeling good doesn't need to be balanced by feeling bad. It may be helpful in pointing the way, but you can feel good on purpose all the time, if you're willing to, in my experience. I believe Infinite Joy is our natural state. Which is not to say that bad-feeling emotions are wrong -- just that if you choose to, you can feel good any time you want to, even in circumstances that we're taught are "bad." That's kind a moot point if you don't have a preference, though.

[Jarrod]

Originally Posted by The Cloud

To have good emotions, you have to have bad ones. There's nothing wrong with depression, because it balances happiness. There is nothing wrong with any emotion. What becomes wrong is when I tell myself that I shouldn't be feeling a certain way. Once I stop accepting what I'm feeling, that is when pain turns into suffering.

I can't control my emotions, not directly. I can only change my perspective. My emotions are what tells me that I'm looking at things from the right perspective. If I'm depressed and unhappy, then I know that it is because my perspective isn't serving me unless that is what I want. There's nothing wrong with the feeling, it's simply telling me something about the current state that I am in. If happy were universally good and sad was universally bad, then mania and heroin addiction wouldn't be diseases. Both make you feel good, to a fault.

As a side note, I am also extremely skeptical of the LoA. My opinion is that things don't work in the way that it proposes, and even if they did the only people that would be able to use it without pushing the things they want away are the people that didn't bother with it.

We must be talking of different types of happiness because depression is certainly not the opposite of happiness in my experience.

Depression (although I guess I've probably only experienced it mildly) is when nothing seems to be going right and there is practically no hope. Where thoughts and feelings put one through a spiral of increasing negativity.

Happiness on the other hand I don't find to be caused by a spiraling increase in positive thoughts and emotions (although it does produce an enjoyable state I call it something else, just don't have a name for it).

What I call happiness is a natural state that occurs free from any thoughts and emotions. It starts with peace and then grows.

I change my perspective if I find myself unhappy to. I am only ever unhappy when caught inside a series of thoughts and emotions, so I change to being outside of them and send them on their way.

[The Cloud]

Bonus points for Angela and Jarrod. At least I was beaten by the best.

I didn't mean that you have to sit and be depressed and miserable when you feel those emotions. You don't have to be what you feel. It merely points where the perspective you are using breaks down and doesn't work. Bad feelings tell us that we're looking at things from a perspective that blatantly contradicts reality. That may be why mania is so dangerous: even though the person can be extremely happy throughout the whole thing, they do stupid irresponsible things because their emotional checks and balances are messed up. They can't tell the difference between a realistic goal and a flight of fancy, because both feel good.

Also, I've had some semantic issues lately. Sometimes when I say happy, I mean the kind of happy like "Yay I'm going to Disney World!" Other times, I mean the state of bliss where you are a part of everything and resisting nothing. They aren't the same thing. If a close relative dies, you're not going to be Disney World happy. However, you can still be "happy" in the sense that you accept what has happened and don't fight it.

[Jarrod]

Originally Posted by The Cloud

Also, I've had some semantic issues lately. Sometimes when I say happy, I mean the kind of happy like "Yay I'm going to Disney World!" Other times, I mean the state of bliss where you are a part of everything and resisting nothing. They aren't the same thing. If a close relative dies, you're not going to be Disney World happy. However, you can still be "happy" in the sense that you accept what has happened and don't fight it.

That is exactly the difference I was talking about .

When I say 'happiness' I am always referring to the state of bliss. The other 'happiness' is fleeting, coming and going and taking you away from bliss. In bliss you can find joy.

Thanks for talking about the distinction Cloud.