> [Original Message] > From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 4/24/2006 8:20:19 AM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Tune in and turn off > > > > > >That > > > there are 'four basic (sic) ways' for people to express their emotions > > > needs some evidence. > > I think it can be argued that there are three basic *negative* emotions, to > whit - anger, sadness, anxiety [all 'dysphoria' to the Greeks]. There are > many, many ways of *expressing* these emotions. It is a mistake to regard the > possible limited number of types of emotion as setting a limit to the ways of > expressing these emotions. I agree. Expressing in this context equates to acting out. Expression can be anything at all. I would also distinguish between emotions and feelings. Anxiety isn't really an emotion. It's the vague turbulence, for lack of a better word, for what goes on when an emotion is submerged. Get to the anger, hatred, grief or fear and the anxiety will go away. Sadness is a more nuanced emotion, it's also important. > > >Why the 20th century was the > > bloodiest in history, and on and on. > > Because of mass destruction and mass population. Yet, per capita - and war > aside, the murder rate has gone down markedly in the last several centuries. > But why the mass destruction? Per capita or not, there were many tens of millions killed. Tens of millions. I think the problem might be that tens of millions is an abstraction. To think about it is too hard, it shuts one down, numbs one out. > >We think in words. If we don't > > have a language, we literally can't think. > > We sometimes think in words, but many of our thoughts are not in words - for > example, I could recognise [in thought]if the creases in my trousers were > altered even if I would struggle to describe in language the differing > character of the creases. I might clearly recognise my assailant though I > would struggle to describe him in language that would clearly allow another > to recognise him (that's why the police hire artists to translate such > descriptions into a picture). > Yes, but you know the word crease. You know the word assail. How would you think about these situations if you had no words? Turn off the volume on your television and follow the action and see how far you get. That's what living without language is like every day for one's whole life. > To think all thought is language-dependent is just one of the prejudices of > the cunning linguists who have deformed rational thought on this topic. > Rather than prejudice, I would say it's egocentric to think that someone who has no language can think the same way as someone with language. How do you ask for lunch if you don't have a language? > Donal > Hi Mike > Nice poem > England > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Switch an email account to Yahoo! Mail, you could win FIFA World Cup tickets. http://uk.mail.yahoo.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html