(January 7, 2010 at 12:11 am)theVOID Wrote: I had to vote no, but only because you didn't have a "they're detrimental" option.

You don't think emotions are beneficial contributers then?
I don't know exactly what you mean by detrimental, to whom, or what??

Detrimental to how one could apply their intelligence, under certain situations of course. Emotions often get in the way of rational thinking, they can cloud judgement, induce bias and destroy even handedness, accept satisfying appeals based

They're a great contributor to culture, art and interpersonal relationships however - the things that make being human exciting, so it's definitely a double-edged sword.

This is one of the greatest misconceptions. Not greatest as in "unreal!! mo-fo's " but greatest as in prevalence. What would your immediate reaction be to the idea that aggression actually increased concentration ability and led to increased learning??
It sounds contraversial because it is. First and foremost, the misconception. Emotions don't act against us all the time, only under extreem circumstances where our "vision" can become distorted as emotional content distracts the reasoning ability normally exercised. This is a can situation and doesn't imply will in any matter of fact way. Some are better at control than others and can put these feelings aside momentarily, for the cause of interpersonal communication-relationships.
But now you say emotions contribute to such areas as art, culture and relationships. What about scientific discovery, where do emotions come in to play during human invention and theoretical construction?

(January 7, 2010 at 2:28 am)TruthWorthy Wrote: This is one of the greatest misconceptions. Not greatest as in "unreal!! mo-fo's " but greatest as in prevalence. What would your immediate reaction be to the idea that aggression actually increased concentration ability and led to increased learning??

I could imagine that an intelligent culture without emotions would prioritise learning, namely because none of the emotionally inspired pursuits you and i partake in would appeal to them.

Quote:It sounds contraversial because it is. First and foremost, the misconception. Emotions don't act against us all the time, only under extreem circumstances where our "vision" can become distorted as emotional content distracts the reasoning ability normally exercised.

They also distract us from the important pursuits in favour of the activities we do for enjoyment, something the hypothetical emotionless beings would not have a problem with.

Quote: This is a can situation and doesn't imply will in any matter of fact way. Some are better at control than others and can put these feelings aside momentarily, for the cause of interpersonal communication-relationships.

I'm not quite sure who you're arguing against, i don't deny any of the above. But you asked if Emotions get in the way of intelligence (excluding "emotional intelligence" of course), and i believe they may do just that, without the emotionally inspired pursuits in theory we would be smarter, and probably more healthy, not swayed by bad dietary habits, drugs, gambling, dangerous thrill-seeking etc.

Quote:But now you say emotions contribute to such areas as art, culture and relationships. What about scientific discovery, where do emotions come in to play during human invention and theoretical construction?

Again, you aren't even getting close to my views here, you've gone all strawman on me. I am pro emotion - I just happen to believe that they are generally detrimental to intelligence, a worth while disadvantage imho.

Emotions do not factor in scientific discovery, they are not accounted for and weeded out with double blind trials, independent examination and experimentation, verified observation, rigid mathematical frameworks etc... Sure many scientists have been inspired by emotions to work towards an idea, but there is absolutely no reason to suggest that they are at all necessary, in fact it seems likely to me that non-emotional beings would probably thrive in the sciences, though that's speculation of course.

Sorry Void, that was a strawman sort of reply from me. Sometimes I don't think others leave things out deliberately and avoid the obvious. So I sometimes see the need to play pick up sticks, so to speak.

I always wonder where ppl are coming from tho. Interesting things like the hypothetical emotionless-organisms that excel in the sciences. I wonder whether they would explore the unknown without having an interest in the discoveries that are possible. Or whether they would remain so practical so as to form a sort of "perfect world" without diversity.

(January 7, 2010 at 4:30 am)TruthWorthy Wrote: Sorry Void, that was a strawman sort of reply from me. Sometimes I don't think others leave things out deliberately and avoid the obvious. So I sometimes see the need to play pick up sticks, so to speak.

I always wonder where ppl are coming from tho. Interesting things like the hypothetical emotionless-organisms that excel in the sciences. I wonder whether they would explore the unknown without having an interest in the discoveries that are possible. Or whether they would remain so practical so as to form a sort of "perfect world" without diversity.

They would be very rational and effective observers of nature.

I think emotions can have positive and negative effects on intelligence... this is perhaps why intelligent people aren't necessarily happy or sad because different effects can come.

P.S Symphony of Science does indeed ROCK....

If you are having an SOS moment just watch and listen to SoS LOL

EvF

Intelligence and emotions are two separate things aren't they? when you get emotional you don't use your head, you do whatever your heart tells you. Intelligence is not bounded to emotions.

(January 7, 2010 at 1:12 pm)A897 Wrote: Intelligence and emotions are two separate things aren't they? when you get emotional you don't use your head, you do whatever your heart tells you. Intelligence is not bounded to emotions.

Don't emotions guide intelligent decisions? Can't being angry, afraid, etc be the intelligent respose to a situation/problem?

No they would be the emotional responses.

Example;

There is some guy hitting on your girlfriend, you've told him to fuck off and he won't.

Emotional response: Go at him with your fists, risk getting arrested or losing the fight

Intelligent response: Realise that you have a risk of getting arrested and charged if you attack him, take the missus and walk away.