What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$45 & up: Huge Hotel Sale view!
travelzoo.com - Great discounts on rooms for the holidays and beyond!
50 Comments
- bleonard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+24You talkin' bout women, Willis?
- cliffzdude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18If this were NOT true, there would be little or no:
Unwanted teen pregnancies...
Road rage...
STDs...
Wars...
Fist Fights...
Open hand fights...
Jerry Springer Hair Pullin' fights...
Jerry Springer...
Racism...
Racists...
Michael Moore...
Ann Coulter...
We could go on forever... - NoahVail, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Yes, but more so in some, than in others.
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8"Yes, but more so in some, than in others."
As in... When dealing with a Zen Buddhist warrior monk that is about to break your arms with jujistu... Well at least he does it without emotion clouding his martial arts.
But seriously, it is why Buddhism is so appealing to me. It is kind of stepping back and watching your emotions and figuring out what they are doing even if you aren't controlling them. That way you can keep yourself from being overcome by impulse and irrationality.
Not that I am any good at it. - Klisk, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11I disagree. People don't have enough empathy these days.
- ModernTenshi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Study: beer does the same thing.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I've always viewed emotions as the 'machine code' of the brain. Everything you think boils down to raw emotion at some point.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+17Yes and everybody knows Republicans are completely logical in all their thinking right?
- Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why is he getting Dugg down? I know a lot of people who have made a number of foolhardy decisions because they don't stop and think things through...they simply act out of impulse. The problem is, human emotion is frequently short-sighted, self-biased, and irrational. It has its capacity for good, but it needs to be balanced by intellect. At the present, humanity is leaning too far toward emotion. A shift to the logical is long past due.
Although I agree that the world could use more empathy, emotion isn't the only potential source of compassionate behavior. Most of the times that I've made a donation of time or money to a charity or person in need, it hasn't been because I felt something, it was because it's my sincere belief that doing so is the right thing. Many of these were cases where I sincerely did NOT want to give, but belief overruled emotion, and I did so anyway. This is one of our greatest advantages over animals: we can choose to act in spite of our desires, in accordance with what we think.
I can't count the number of conflicts, failures, and bad decisions I've avoided in my own life because I chose not to give in to my emotion. Choosing to suppress one's temper and act calmly in spite of anger can save a relationship. By not allowing ourselves to be controlled by momentary desires, we can avoid a great number of pitfalls, from alcoholism to STD's to much of the violence we see today.
Don't read me as saying that emotion is evil. It can be both beneficial and harmful, depending on the situation. However, I have to agree with the parent comment: there is far too great an emphasis on emotion at present. I don't suggest we eliminate emotion altogether, but it's a simple truth that the world would be a much better place if people would stop and think before they acted. - Optimus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'll elaborate. A lot of those people you describe (murderers, "evil" people) are sociopaths, drinkGreen; they lack empathy for the suffering of others. That's the reason they behave the way they do. It has nothing to do with "too much emotion". They experience a *limited range* of human emotions.
- BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8This is a neat little mind hack to turn off you amygladia and think more logicaly instead of insticitvely http://www.viewzone.com/brain.magic.html
- zephc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4its very interesting what emotion provides in terms of decision making. I remember reading a case about a guy who, because of some sort of trauma to his head, had essentially lost his ability to feel emotion.
On the one hand he could drive a car in an icy mountain road skillfully because he wasn't freaking out about it.
However, given two or more virtually equal choices, he could spend a half hour and not be able to make one choice over another because his mind's ability to go "oh the hell with it, I pick option A" was not functioning - that is, his emotional homeostasis wasn't pushed into frustration by needing to decide, and logic alone could not come to a conclusion by itself. - hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Impulse and emotion are two different things.
- cogitocogito, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Of course emotion rules the brain's decisions - in a sense. The intellect can't "want" anything. Reasoning is a tool to further the "wants" supplied by emotion. The gist of the experiment is that the experimentors' words influenced the as yet undetermined desires of the subjects. It wasn't as if each subject antecedently wanted to maximize his or her expected value. Pure expected value is seldom what's wanted: risk aversion and risk seeking are quite common stances.
And this is silly because reasoning WAS used in the decision making. Once someone adopted a risk-averse stance, reason dictated he not role the dice. And vice versa for those who wanted risk.
So words influence desires. Big news, I think not. - TheKillDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Doctor: You see sir these dark spots, they are cancer and you have 6 months to live.
Whoatemydigg: I don't think so you quack where did you get your degree from cracker jacks! Those are just spots and don't mean nothing! - NGNR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At first I thought that this study is stating the obvious. But its more of a confirmation than anything else, the obvious things might be correct unless proofen otherwise.
- mohrr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"To hunt a species to extinction is not logical."
"Whoever said the human race was logical?" - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+12too bad... we need less emotion and more intellect these days
- mistshadow2k4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Next, a study will reveal that people take shelter during rainstorms because they don't want to get wet.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is no emoticon to describe how I am feeling!
- drinkGreen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3so anger, greed, revenge, jealousy aren't the primary factors of alot of crimes?
Crimes of Passion anyone? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's called rage. It's been around for a while now.
- visualdensity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I've long believed this. If you want to know more about this, read up on "Emotional Intelligence" by Daniel Goleman:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/055338371X/sr=8-1/qid=1154994338/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-5732357-7546420?ie=UTF8 - smurfmaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Interesting. And proof that men who think that they are always rational (as opposed to women) are deluding themselves. All human actions are eventually driven by emotions.
- Sp1k3d, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Thank you, now I understand why neo-conservatism exists!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Before a baby can talk, how does it think and make decisions? Using pure emotion.
- Pyrogenesis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This was hardly proven recently. Those interested in neurology and human cognition and thinking have known this pretty much conclusively for over a decade. There are even several popular science books on this, most notably Antonio Damasio's "Descartes' Error".
I think this news speaks more about the myths we still have about ourselves than the actual state of neurology today. It is also pity that the report still relies in the outmoded clear distinction between emotion and intellect or reason. This very distinction has been undermined. - fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Precisely. Also, emotions have been guiding actions for hundreds of millions of years, but a reasoning intellect has only been around perhaps a few million. Intellect has a lot of momentum to overcome.
- hoopers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1First, and most importantly, personal emotional management is a hallmark of maturity.
To that, when faced with a difficult decision I try to look at it this way:
Which way is easier, faster and/or sucks the least? Once I've identified that...I choose the other. So, generally, I go with the one that sucks the most. It's kind of like a macro version of eat your vegetables. Some call it self discipline, but really that's such a nebulous concept I felt the need to more specifically define it for myself.
Obviously it's situational and a personal strategy at best, but it's worked for me. Over time I've seen my decisions pay off more when I chose the harder, "suckiest" path, and I mean in big things like relationships(stay or go), real-estate (stay or go), job (stay or go), etc. I could also be fooling myself. I'll let you know when I'm dead.
As a side note, I found when I used my negative emotions, such as fear, to help me identify which decision elicits the strongest response, I had more information to work with. Given that, I was able to make a better decision in the long run.
My motto: If a decision is difficult, you don't have enough information.
Now I'm going to get a cup of decaf coffee and see if someone stole my Lean Cuisine from the fridge. *sigh* - drinkGreen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4file this under duh.
alot murders, affairs, and other evil wouldn't happen if people actually thought out what they were doing, and left emotion out of it - DougieD, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Straight from the "no *****" department.
- Nitro2985, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Ignoring the if to an ought problem that has arisen in Philosophy, I see numerous problems with this sentence, "The evidence has been piling up throughout history, and now neuroscientists have proved it's true: The brain's wiring emphatically relies on emotion over intellect in decision-making," given what was said in the article.
First, we must consider that this is a particular sort of decision. Relevantly, it's the sort that one cannot arrive at a solution logically without inputting emotional values into the equation. There is no method by which one might determine whether an action is worth or not worth some risk based upon logic alone. So of course, the human mind will make use of emotion to sort out things of chance.
The degree to which this use of emotion is not yet determined. There are two methods one might propose that the mind goes about deciding whether it should take the bet or not. One would rely entirely upon emotion. The person hears the chances and is given the choice. They feel "good" on one and "bad" on another without any intervening processes except those relating to the actual understanding of the utterance of the researcher. There is another though, and that one relies upon the mind making a logical argument which includes the emotion it might feel in with it's premises. It might go something like this: "Chances which evoke in me a negative feeling should not be acted upon. This chance evokes in me a negative feeling. Therefore I should not act upon it." This is actually an argument using reason. It also happens to reference some emotion. Emotion is then relevant to decision making in decisions of chance, but not the whole method by which choices are made.
I also wonder about whether the people actually understood that each wording of the chances resulted in the same probability. It seems likely that if they did, they would act the same way both times since they would remember how they responded the first time and repeat their action knowing that the chance has not changed. - Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@Optimus - A lot of them, but not all of them. Perfectly normal people get into fights all the time. They get overwhelmed with rage, and submit to it rather than control it. Sometimes there are other factors such as alcohol, but not always. Empathy alone can't solve all of the world's problems - we have to be able to control negative emotion with willpower during the times when there isn't a positive emotion present to balance it. Furthermore, it's not like you can simply flip a switch and turn on emotions such as empathy and compassion. You have to be able to make yourself behave in an acceptable manner even when you want to do otherwise.
- NETMIndBodyDrT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Humans have three brains in one. The Reptilian Brain in the stem is the unconscious and controls survival instinct, responding to danger and the such. The Mammillian Brain is the limbic system, the subconscious, and the the emotional center. The Neocortex Brain is what separates us from animals and is the consciousness. It allows us to do mathematics, use language, and executive decision making. The Mammilian brain helps use with short term memory and storage into long term memory. It is timeless. All that ever was simply is. This is why love songs have so many, love you forever and always and the like. When the Reptilian and the Mammilian are both charged together such as in life or death situations or in abuse of children and such highly emotional states or confusion, it can set up a pattern of damaged reasoning and decision making for a long time. I think it is estimated that we make something like 80-90% of our daily decisions from our emotional brain and lower. This is one reason why so many people were buying Hummers and other huge vehicles they really did not need...it's a survival thing.
- CrazyWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's true that many already assumed that the hypothesis this study supported was true. However, science has shown repeatedly that we cannot assume that our common sense beliefs about psychology are true. Too many ideas have been proven wrong to put credit in what 'everyone knows to be true.' So it is important that studies like these be done so that we can actually know that this is the case rather than just assuming it is so. This way we can build a stable base of knowledge on which to build a greater understanding.
- NETMIndBodyDrT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Good point CrazyWolf it does seem like a made up number (80-90%). Do you have formal training in the neurosciences?
- CrazyWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That's all rather simplified. The functions of the nervous system aren't divided up nearly that cleanly. Most mammals have a neocortex, and many survival descisions are made in what you are calling the mammilian brain. And your 80-90% estimate seems made up. This study is interesting because it is one of the first of it's kind studying this subject. So how would someone decide on that statistic?
- slippers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I emote, therefor I am.
- Metasquares, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think a lot of us knew that already, but it's interesting to see scientific evidence for the Wizard's Third Rule :)
("Passion rules reason", for those who haven't read Goodkind's novels) - arkitect, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Yes because everything that are government does is logically thought out and debated on. And everyone who votes does so after meticulously thinking out every consequence of everything they are voting for.
Oh wait no they don't.
We would be much better off with less emotional thinking, not more. - cifer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Excerpts from the Obvious Chronicles:
Study: Breathing in Oxygen, good. Breathing in Dirt, not so good.
Study: Eating too much causes makes you full.
Study: Sugar is sweet.
I can't believe anyone's digging this crap. - Optimus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1>>alot murders, affairs, and other evil wouldn't happen if people actually thought out what they were doing, and left emotion out of it
Huh? Emotion should be your reason for not doing this *****. It's called empathy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0People aren't rational animals. They are animals with the capacity to be rational for limited periods of time
- ShooterMcGavin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Doh. I read that headline as 'emoticons'.
I gotta get off the damn computer. Sheesh. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@cliffzdude
i dont beleive STD's should be in there
if you've ever heard of the craziest and most stupid phase going on, "bug chasing"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugchasing
(those who are easily disturbed by ideas or concepts of morality, please dont click it) - Klisk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I think this is kind of well known. But I also think having hard proof should encourage more people to stop forcing others into situations they're against participating in.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2I've always viewed emotions as the 'machine code' of the brain. Everything you think boils down to raw emotion.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1... Damnit.
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is