Irrational Emotions
"A human being is a bundle of useless passions." John-Paul Sartre, Philosopher “Show me a guy who has feelings, and I'll show you a sucker.” Frank Sinatra, Singer and Movie Star dificar. |
Emotional Wisdom
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of." Blaise Pascal, Philosopher "Your intellect may be confused, but your emotions will never lie to you." Roger Ebert, Film Critic |
For years we have heard to follow our heart, but not let our emotions get in our way.But more recently we've heard that emotions are wise and must not be ignored.
Emotions are present and an universal feature in our human nature. So, this makes it hard to believe that our emotions emerged through evolution just to cause us disruption in judgmente and decision-making. But the other view, is that emotions are irrational, and we must get them under control.
Adaptationist perspective
An adaptationist perspective is guided by the simple assumption that the mind is
comprised of many mental adaptations, each of which is the product of natural and sexual
selection operating over many generations during the course of human evolution
It is reasonable to expect that humans haveevolved a multitude of distinct emotions, each designed to deal with a specific set ofadaptive problems.
Emotions affect the way that we think and behave in a variety of personal andsocial contexts
Emotions as Commitment Devices
Humans can be coldly calculating and selfish, and like many animals, humans
have preferences for immediate gains due to heavy discounting of the future
The effects of guilt on social decision-making observed in this study are consistent with
the claim that individuals under the influence of certain emotions often make decisions
that forego immediate benefits in favor of more profitable long-term outcomes
In sum, the immediate rewards or punishments that we feel when we experience
certain emotions can serve as a potent counterweight to our tendency to overweight shortterm
gains. These emotions may appear irrational in the short run because they lead us to
forgo sure gains, but ultimately they lead us to acquire still greater long-term benefits.
Other theory claims that the emotions serve precisely this sort of governing function by orchestrating systems of perception, attention, goal pursuit, and energy and effectiveness, as well as by activating specialized inferences, recalibrating decision weightings, and regulating behavior.
Why we fear insignificant small animals rather than cars, cancergeneric objects that cause us death?
Human fears are the result of domain-specific mechanisms that correspond to ancient sources of harm such as dangerous animals, bodily insults, heights, social evaluation, and the risk of social exclusion
Irrational emotions aid rather than hinder reasoning
A central assumption of an affectiveinformation
view revolves around the idea that emotions can influence decision-making
by virtue of providing information about outcomes. Research from this perspective
shows us that individuals routinely consult their emotions (How do I feel about this
choice?) before acting. Although this approach suggests that affective feelings provide
valuable information for decisions, it does not tell us what this “information” actually
refers to.
Conclusion
Our emotions are wisely
adapted to potent ancestral threats—dangerous animals, hostile humans, strategic conflict
arising in mating—and to ancestral opportunities—pursuing attractive mates, cementing
cooperative alliances. It is the case, however, that because emotions have evolved to
operate in ancestral worlds different from our own, we will often observe a mismatch
between our evolved emotional responses and the novel modern environments in which
they currently operate).
This can lead to
outcomes that appear to be suboptimal or irrational in the modern world. Moreover,
evolution operates to maximize reproduction, whereas our personal aspirations might
instead be to maximize other outcomes, such as subjective happiness (Fessler & Haley,
2003). In pursuing our personal goals, we may therefore wisely choose not to always
follow the mandates of our emotions. This tension between the strong pull of our
evolved adaptations and our differing current goals is a potential solution to the paradox
of emotion
Emotions are present and an universal feature in our human nature. So, this makes it hard to believe that our emotions emerged through evolution just to cause us disruption in judgmente and decision-making. But the other view, is that emotions are irrational, and we must get them under control.
Adaptationist perspective
An adaptationist perspective is guided by the simple assumption that the mind is
comprised of many mental adaptations, each of which is the product of natural and sexual
selection operating over many generations during the course of human evolution
It is reasonable to expect that humans haveevolved a multitude of distinct emotions, each designed to deal with a specific set ofadaptive problems.
Emotions affect the way that we think and behave in a variety of personal andsocial contexts
Emotions as Commitment Devices
Humans can be coldly calculating and selfish, and like many animals, humans
have preferences for immediate gains due to heavy discounting of the future
The effects of guilt on social decision-making observed in this study are consistent with
the claim that individuals under the influence of certain emotions often make decisions
that forego immediate benefits in favor of more profitable long-term outcomes
In sum, the immediate rewards or punishments that we feel when we experience
certain emotions can serve as a potent counterweight to our tendency to overweight shortterm
gains. These emotions may appear irrational in the short run because they lead us to
forgo sure gains, but ultimately they lead us to acquire still greater long-term benefits.
Other theory claims that the emotions serve precisely this sort of governing function by orchestrating systems of perception, attention, goal pursuit, and energy and effectiveness, as well as by activating specialized inferences, recalibrating decision weightings, and regulating behavior.
Why we fear insignificant small animals rather than cars, cancergeneric objects that cause us death?
Human fears are the result of domain-specific mechanisms that correspond to ancient sources of harm such as dangerous animals, bodily insults, heights, social evaluation, and the risk of social exclusion
Irrational emotions aid rather than hinder reasoning
A central assumption of an affectiveinformation
view revolves around the idea that emotions can influence decision-making
by virtue of providing information about outcomes. Research from this perspective
shows us that individuals routinely consult their emotions (How do I feel about this
choice?) before acting. Although this approach suggests that affective feelings provide
valuable information for decisions, it does not tell us what this “information” actually
refers to.
Conclusion
Our emotions are wisely
adapted to potent ancestral threats—dangerous animals, hostile humans, strategic conflict
arising in mating—and to ancestral opportunities—pursuing attractive mates, cementing
cooperative alliances. It is the case, however, that because emotions have evolved to
operate in ancestral worlds different from our own, we will often observe a mismatch
between our evolved emotional responses and the novel modern environments in which
they currently operate).
This can lead to
outcomes that appear to be suboptimal or irrational in the modern world. Moreover,
evolution operates to maximize reproduction, whereas our personal aspirations might
instead be to maximize other outcomes, such as subjective happiness (Fessler & Haley,
2003). In pursuing our personal goals, we may therefore wisely choose not to always
follow the mandates of our emotions. This tension between the strong pull of our
evolved adaptations and our differing current goals is a potential solution to the paradox
of emotion