On emotions

Sartre says that emotions allow people to transcend the self. What he means in his complex philosophic kind of way is that that emotions opens up your experience of the world, whatever that emotion might be; anger, kindness, love, hate, etc... You feel something and it makes your life larger in a way. Emotions are not necessarily logical, but some emotions do step from logical hypothesis. Yet, while people tend to assign the heart as a responsible driver of said emotions, one has to remember that this is a persisting myth.

Emotions are, at the end of the day, mental acts.

Take a few seconds to consider this.

Then, Sartre also says that all mental actions are intentional as they require mental consciousness, and unlike Freud, Sartre does not believe in the subconscious, and even when he refers to something that not of a reflective nature, he labels it as a pre-reflective.

Not to digress...

Given that emotions are mental actions, and mental actions are intentional. Then we can conclude that emotions are intentional. So, in order for you to feel something, you have to intend it into existence.

I do not disagree with it, and I find it pretty convincing.

Remember when someone gets angry and they suddenly blurt out the truth. How come? If emotions are a result of some mental discrepancy, then how come a completely correct mental action came out of it?

So, in conclusion, if you feel something, it is probably because you intended it, maybe it was pre-reflective or reflective, in any case, you are responsible for it.

If we really apply this, then human beings have to accept that they are in fact in control of their actions, thoughts and emotions. Then, there would be no room left for blame. You will be the only one responsible.


Anonymous said…
Well, I think it's a matter of control. We intend our feelings into existence, yes; but the thing is, sometimes it goes out of control. I think patience here can be a good measure.

Thought provoking post, though :)

Popular Posts