Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00079)

In a message dated 11/9/99 3:43:18 AM Central Standard Time,
hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes:

> Katinka (now):
>  The way I see it, emotions can be a major block for
>  understanding. Which is why I am rather wary of them. But
>  sentimentalism is something other than emotions.
>  Sentimentalism usually (in my experience) makes some things
>  bigger and others smaller: in short works as a sort of
>  *funny mirror* (if that is how those country-fair-mirrors
>  are called). Emotions in themselves are important to know
>  and examine in getting to know yourself (myself), and also
>  in trying to find truth it is important to know where
>  emotions are probably interfering, but you are right, I do
>  view them mainly as an interference, even the positive
>  ones.
>
This seems to be truncated view of emotions.  I make three
observations.  First, emotions are movers - e-motors.  They
had been evolved to be rapid bodily responses to situations.
Thus, they have a bodily aspect as moving or e-moting.  Muscles
are prepped to be flexed for action or relaxed by bio-chemical, neural,
and lymphatic signals sent to prompt for a line of action.  And they
have a psychological aspect where they are experienced as a
strong imperative "do this." At least in effect.  As evolved patterns
of almost automatic response, they are the legacy/replacement of
behavioural instincts.  They boot up body and urge the mind.  But
they stop.  Then it is time for mind and/or training to take over.
And further, as almost automatic patterns of rapid response, they
have to have been correct enough of the time to allow the body to
survive.  So, most the time (maybe with few defective bodies that
can't harm overall viability of a species) they correctly respond
appropriately to situations.  Imagine animal that had fear/flight
in face of food and anger/aggression at predator for which it
was food.  Soon the whole species would be dead.  The human
trick is to train and refine these patterns of emotional response
from their endowed primitive forms into higher and more nuanced
forms.  Because emotions are movers, they can enhance or interfere
or interrupt other mental processes in the mind.  This does not
mean that this is what they must always do.  More on this latter.

Besides being patterns of response, emotions are cognitive.  They
are forms of perception beyond the five senses.  There has to be
a correct recognition of a situation for the emotion to be a correct
response.  But what is more, without emotion, sometimes what
the situation is is left unknown especially if it is an emotional or
social situation.  A memorable night is not one where the flatware
is vividly remembered on its own  or whether ones female companion
had pearls or diamonds, or whether there were 10 or 15 courses.
No, these are remembered as part of a meaningful collage surrounding
the core memory of the evening as a meaningfully collage the core of which is
the felt meaning of the evening as an emotional event whether
pleasant or political/espionage.  Many brilliant people are
socially/politically
stupid because their are not emotionally tuned in.  Emotions can only
cognitively mislead us only if we are rightly relying on them to see or
get information.  The eye can deceive as well as the ear for same reason.
If we rely on them to perceive, they sometimes will mislead.  Same with
emotions.  Who has the most perceptive insight into a piece of music?
The acoustical physicist who is deaf or the emotionally enraptured conductor?

The problem with emotions as both movers and as perceivers in modern
society is that they are not trained.  Recently, Dan Goleman has done
research on Emotional IQ as an essential feature of intelligence as has
the brain neurologist Antonio Damascio (who says even certain logical
competences are inhibited in patients with brain damage that prevents
them from feeling).  All this the ancients knew and moderns have forgotten.

Third, modern ethics is rule-based deontological-rights ethics or
utilitarian-consequences calculation.  These are mainly how to
manage large social groups (despite Mr. Kant's emphasis on
inner decision of individual).  Ancient ethics, receiving new
attention now, was a virtue ethics.  A virtue is a well-crafted
competence that has been cultivated into a high degree of
excellence.  The Greek arete (virtue) literally means excellence.
Virtue ethics was not about finding correct rules to manage
large social group (decide how to behave in one) but often
said to be training persons to be of good character.  Goal
was to create not good rules but good people.  In Taoism,
Confucianism, Buddhism, and Greek philosophy, importance
component of ethical training was training emotions (dispositions
of heart, of thymos, etc.) into reliably and as excellent patterns
of emotional insightful response as possible.  There was
training of emotions.

This is part of any Buddhist meditation training as well as yogic
training.  First step, meditational separation of awareness from
the inner useless and usually negative chatter of thought driven
by emotional resentments and identifications until at least
dhyana (pure awareness without thought or emotional interference
or distraction) or samadhi is achieved.  Most westerners mistakenly
think this is the whole of meditation.  WRONG.  There are three crucial
aspects to first stage of spiritual training in every system.  Through the
practice of right concentration/awareness training, ability to
be purely aware is achieved (right concentration).  But there has
to be a discipline of thought by its learning correct information
correctly understood and logical training in non-formal mental
reasoning into a very high state of logical expertise (right views
or right discrimination/inferencing).  Third, there is crucial training
in ethical practices which are training of emotions, cleaning out
resentments/crap, etc.  Once these three absolutely necessary
and separate lines have reached a certain level of proficiency, they
begin to enhance the other lines.  Thought, instead of distracting
and clouding awareness, in its disciplined form sharpens it
into sharp analytic, clear, and distinct awareness.  Clear pristine
awareness that is a gathered and concentrated focus that cannot
be distracted can give enhanced attention to the implications
and ramifications of a line of logical inference.  Purified emotions
no longer disturb (in their moving aspect) reasoning processes
or awareing processes and no longer (in their cognitive aspect)
cause awareness to misperceive or reason to falsely or
fallaciously mis-infer.  Positively, they become enhanced forms
of insight integrating the five senses into a total empathetic
response or taking in of a situation in an insightful fashion.
Then, these three aspects of human development, beyond
enhancing each other, begin to fuse and interpermeate
each other.  They become fused into one consciousness.

So, from ancient perspective of living spiritual traditions which
in their authenticity were not products of a half--blind mix and
match process that is the basis of whatever mis-information most
modern people have about spiritual development, the status of
emotions is relative to where you are in the path.  The ultimate
objectivity is a Buddha's insightful compassion - the SOLE
emotion of a Buddha, and thus, the SINGLE-FOCUSSED
INSIGHT of a Buddha (the cognitive aspect) and SOLE
MOTIVE of a Buddha (the moving aspect).

Grigor