(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.
.
