View Full Version : Primary Emotional Response Systems (Serious discussion split from Fun & Games thread)


Greyhound1
06-04-15, 11:42 PM
How about some experiences which use all 7 Primary Emotional Responses.

Would that cause an emotional overload?

mildadhd
06-05-15, 12:26 AM
How about some experiences which use all 7 Primary Emotional Responses.

Would that cause an emotional overload?

(Layman)

We don't play when we don't feel safe.

Safe (positive) feelings promotes development SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, prefrontal cortex, etc.

Unsafe (negative) feelings promote development of the distress response systems, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF, etc.

When we feel threatened distress response takes over, specifics depends on the type of threat.

RAGE/Fight

FEAR/freeze or flight


Humans, like other animals, alter their behavior depending on whether a threat is close or distant.

We investigated spatial imminence of threat by developing an active avoidance paradigm in which volunteers were pursued through a maze by a virtual predator endowed with an ability to chase, capture, and inflict pain.

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we found that as the virtual predator grew closer, brain activity shifted from the ventromedial prefrontal cortex to the periaqueductal gray.

This shift showed maximal expression when a high degree of pain was anticipated.

Moreover, imminence-driven periaqueductal gray activity correlated with increased subjective degree of dread and decreased confidence of escape.

Our findings cast light on the neural dynamics of threat anticipation and have implications for the neurobiology of human anxiety-related disorders.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/317/5841/1079.full

namazu
06-05-15, 02:06 AM
Safe (positive) feelings promotes development SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, prefrontal cortex, etc.

Unsafe (negative) feelings promote development of the distress response systems, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF, etc.

I'm confused --
I thought these 7 primary emotional states
(SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF)
were instinctual/inborn in all mammals?

If so, what do you mean that safe/positive or unsafe/negative feelings "promote [their] development"?

Isn't it the secondary or tertiary emotions that develop from experiences in conjunction with activation of the primary emotions?

(Erm...game...uhhh...too tired to be funny!)

SB_UK
06-05-15, 09:18 AM
How about some experiences which use all 7 Primary Emotional Responses.

Would that cause an emotional overload?

The obvious one:
:confused::p


SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF

Pair-bonding employs these 7 bad [ps excellent point] boys ?


Why else would men have sheds and dogs ?

SB_UK
06-05-15, 09:30 AM
pair-bond formation
wisdom
attaining the sensory information reward scheme

- all 3 (partic. together) should shift us away from those 7 (often unpleasant) emotional states.

Would rather find than seek, if seeking associates with 'hunger'.

Abi
06-05-15, 09:37 AM
pair-bond formation


What about the estimated 70 million people who are asexual / aromantic?

SB_UK
06-05-15, 10:02 AM
pair-bond formation - reward eg prairie voles when bonded
wisdom - reward via empathy
attaining the sensory information reward scheme - reward from quality


We know that seeking a partner, understanding our context and experiencing beauty are desired - and are generally encouraged in society as a good thing.

Perhaps the combination (all as demonstrated by science as activating the reward mechanism) leads to bliss.

Abi
06-05-15, 10:05 AM
You didn't answer my question.

SB_UK
06-05-15, 10:16 AM
What about the estimated 70 million people who are asexual / aromantic?

Might one of the three be enough ?

Possibly easier to encourage all 3 together -

but mind should unlock empathy (social reward) and so if forced - I'd probably place completion of mind, to become enforcedly moral as the most important of the three.

Does the human pair-bond have to involve a physical relationship ?
I don't know that it does.

Yes - is difficult.

Mind creates the knowledge that we're just 1 extended family.

That undermines pair-bond and suggests species bond formed through mind.

From mind through to quality/empathy ? ie feeling reward from making the world better (more beautiful) for one and all ?

Being able to bypass pair-bond formation / children might be dangerous for species continuation ?

SB_UK
06-05-15, 10:19 AM
If we could simply develop morality and then make the world more beautiful for one and all without some force driving pair-bond formation / children - then we will die out as a species ?

Question - not statement.

SB_UK
06-05-15, 10:28 AM
I don't think we can get around

pair-bond formation/children
mind -> morality

collaborative generation of beauty

unless we're on the verge of generating an immortal species which no longer needs to procreate.
None of the messy material world stuff.
Does appeal strangely enough ... ...

That option has come up several times over.

Not really advocating it though - a little too sci-fi perhaps ??

-*-

Would you want to live forever ? in a functional body ?

I don't think so - but the meditative mind could handle that proposition.
So maybe we would.

Is it realistic for human beings to retain a body which reaches a certain stage and then doesn't age ?
Bit challenging to imagine that mechanism.

SB_UK
06-05-15, 11:33 AM
Try again.

Might pair-bond just be an easy path into developing a reward scheme which helps to shift the way that we obtain reward away from direct personal gratification and into the wellbeing of others ? So - that'd be partner, children ... ... species.
The individual's emphasis shifts from themself onto their partner onto their children - there's a loss in emphasis on the self. It's a neat way in de-emphasising self.

However if that's the point - then mind can generate a 'bonded' species also ie to feel reward when one helps others (any others). We can arrive at the same place without pair-bond / children.

So - does the capacity to obtain reward from a non-pair bond related mechanism mean that obtaining reward from a pair-bond related mechanism (which leads to the same place) will be discarded ?

As long as enough people take the pair-bond related mechanism which leads to species-bond formation, there will be room for others to bypass pair-bond and through mind arrive directly at species bond ie generate reward from helping other people.

I'd certainly like to be able to see a mechanism of attaining bliss without pair-bond - but pair-bond/children must also be consistent with attaining bliss.

Finding this all a bit messy.

For sure - a mind which knows morality is key. When moral - reward is obtained through making the world better. A large part of this will be through making the world more beautiful for the reward we gain through the senses when we see (natural) beauty.
There's nothing uglier than the usual human concrete tower block.

Abi
06-05-15, 11:38 AM
I'll discuss later. i have a birthday party to get to :)

SB_UK
06-05-15, 01:29 PM
The point I'm stumbling over is would somebody with a mind ever choose to have children ? or is having children just part of our unconscious programming which we're required to push into/through/past on our way to morality ?

Little Missy
06-05-15, 01:31 PM
Yes, people with minds do choose to have children. :)

SB_UK
06-05-15, 01:44 PM
phrased better - is the drive to have children borne through conscious or subconscious mind ?

SB_UK
06-05-15, 01:52 PM
Wouldn't you have to be mad or at least not have a mind to introduce a child into a life of slavery ? on a dying, polluted planet ?

[wage slavery] or is that the incentive to do something about it ?

Unconscious urge to have kids precedes completion of mind forces individual to make species clean up its act

mbrandon
06-05-15, 02:30 PM
phrased better - is the drive to have children borne through conscious or subconscious mind ?

In this age, in a developed country, the choice to have a kid is all subconscious.

In the past, it was still subconscious but it was also logical—free labor. Seriously.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 04:32 AM
How about some experiences which use all 7 Primary Emotional Responses.

Would that cause an emotional overload?

(SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF)

prelude to pair-bonding
job promotion - more power
job promotion - more money
competition

'selfish' pursuits - a prelude to 'social' functioning where none of the 7 are required.

I don't think post-mind, that seeking is the word - more 'peak experience' through happening upon - no need for ... ... seeking isn't compelled by need.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 04:36 AM
(SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF) In a fair world, where we behave morally, rationally - and life is improved for one and all with everybody's every act -
that world would be a place to bring children up in, and a world in which the 7 emotions wouldn't really be required.

CARE/PLAY - if you care about it all defined by the need to care about it all - then the word care no longer applies.
Without compulsion - everything you'll do is 'play'.

Enforcedly moral - from the level of mind - defines the organism as CARING.
Enforcedly moral - from the level of mind - removes compulsion (money) - defines the organism as living a life of PLAY.

SEEKING - will still apply, but without the selfish compulsion. Not to need to take personal credit for finding something.

Enforcedly moral - from the level of mind - removes selfsh motivation - so 'SEEKING' redefines from eg in science finding something to attribute one's name to, one's fame to - to finding something which makes life better for people.

So - care, play and seeking still apply - but they're different in an enforcedly moral society.

In our society - care is defined by those we don't care about, play is defined by winning and the eneration of losers, seeking is defined by personal success in finding - and then taking advantage of one's findings for personal gain

- in an enforcedy moral society - care, play and seeking would imply that all people are cared for, play and are gifted the rewards of new findings by virtue of a different reward system (the thing that's different about the ADDer).

What's the fundamental difference between ADDer and nonADDer ?
The ADDer can not not see when we're behaving in a manner which compromises species survival; the simplest, smallest change which'd explain the difference between ADDer and nonADDer is a shift from a mind based on OR to a mind based on AND.
OR generates logically disconnected models of reality, AND generates 1 model of reality (connected).

It's impossible for the ADDer to partition people into good and bad.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 04:56 AM
In this age, in a developed country, the choice to have a kid is all subconscious.

In the past, it was still subconscious but it was also logical—free labor. Seriously.


Yes - send the kids down the mines - parents would benefit from child labour.
Then we moved into a period - from industrial to informational revolutions - where children 'd spend the first 25 -35 years of their life in education.
Increasing costs of education, housing - payment for the two would break the backs of parents.

And even when complete - highly educated people would find an absence of jobs to pay their large University and Mortgage bills.

-*-

All wrong - we're entering a phase of ascendancy of the moral/wise mind in which people will only have children if they can be sure that their children will be gifted a better life.

This cannot occur without eliminating money off the face of the planet.

We can't be equal unless we're of the same worth.

Money (despite the garbage we're forcefed about in a democracy we're all equal because we all have 1 vote (for 1 of many parties all of which that aim to maintain the economic system and thereby human incarceration/wage slavery)) is the great unequalizer.

If equality is considered desirable - then money must be eliminated.

People need to apply themselves based on personal reward obtained from making a contribution as opposed to selfish reward gained from payment.

When it came to war - there was the famous saying - 'ask not what your government can do for you, but what you can do for your government' -

- well it's the same basic idea - 'ask not what you can get out of it, but what you can contribute to it' ... ... and feel reward from making as significant a contribution as possible.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 05:07 AM
All wrong - we're entering a phase of ascendancy of the moral/wise mind in which people will only have children if they can be sure that their children will be gifted a better life.


An interesting point often comes up.
Is adversity required to make the individual ?
Can we gift a child a better life ?

The solution to this basic problem is that if we have a level playing field in which all people are aligned in their desire to make the world better - then there's no need for suffering to shape (force motivate) an individual into making a personal contribution.

My personal experience of people with plenty of money - is - yes - they lack the motivation to apply themselves - because the money that they'll gain through working is already in hand.
Though - of poor people who've had to struggle to become educated - that they often have a stong motivation to apply themselves - though it's all through the urge to make personal gain - as much money, power as possible.

Some would say that the poor child that has used the adversity they've suffered to rise up to great things (money,power) - as the reason why a better world cannot be gifted - but that wouldn't be correct - as motivation in the poor, in this case, isn't social but selfish in nature.

Whether the wealthy child that does or does not succeed or the poor child that does or does not succeed requires adversity is all a consequence of an environment of money.
Eliminate money - make all people equal - and not offer any method of discriminating self other than through making a voluntary contribution to society - and what we'll observe is an environment in which personal adversity is not required - and instead we'll mobilize an individual's desire to be as good as they can be, within the paradigm of social improvement

- and not selfish gain.

-*-

It all comes out in the wash (we can realise a rational basis to having children) - if we eliminate money (power).

SB_UK
06-06-15, 05:17 AM
But why is any of this of use to a forum on ADHD ?

The ADDer can't pay attention to the pointless things people do for money.
There has to be a higher social point for the ADDer to derive reward.

This basic change [a switch to a society which employs social and not selfish motivation through eliminating money] completely eradicates the need for ADDer to find reward/motivation in a bottle - because we won't be required to take artificial reward/motivation in a world without compulsion ... ... we'll be able to find things to do which carry natural reward/motivation which of course will mean that we won't need to supplement with stimulant medication.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 05:30 AM
How about some experiences which use all 7 Primary Emotional Responses.

Would that cause an emotional overload?
So - I think that all of the various selfish acts we're compelled towards eg pair-bond formation, pursuit of money, pursuit of power, winning in competition

- can access all of the 7, some greater than 1 of the 7 simultaneously
- but not often all 7 at the same time.

And that emotional overload isn't really a worry - what we're trying to do is to escape irrational emotional responses - by pursuit of anything other than the moral mind eg multiple relationships, pursuit of money, pursuit of power, desire to win
- through pursuit of all of these 'addictive' pursuits - we grow ever moer addicted - show ever increased emotional reactions when we fail to have our selfish way ... ... that the overly irrational emotional reaction is self-defeating - will destroy us ... ... and that the goal is to overcome the problem through acquisition of wisdom.

I'm more suggesting that leading a life which increases emotional reactivity is bad for the individual and not that having an exaggerated emotional response through living that form of life will force a ?? shut-down ?? - perhaps a capacity to completely evade rational/moral/wise input eg the crime of passion which results in the predisposed individual exerting an emotional reaction which results in violently irrational behaviour.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 05:32 AM
To cut a long story short.

Knowing (becoming) morality through honest, objective personal enquiry overcomes all.

Does the moral/wise/rational individual still have emotions.

Yes -

but the goal is rational,moral mind > expresses itself > through emotions
<-- pursuit of 'right' (social) motivation through a personal enquiry into morality
not
selfish ego > expresses itself > through emotions
<-- pursuit of money,power

SB_UK
06-06-15, 06:13 AM
POST AMENDMENT
To cut a long story short.

Knowing (becoming) morality through honest, objective personal enquiry overcomes all.

Does the moral/wise/rational individual still have emotions.

Yes -

but the goal is rational,moral mind > expresses itself > through emotions
<-- pursuit of 'right' (social) motivation through a personal enquiry into morality
not
selfish ego > expresses itself > through emotions
<-- pursuit of money,power

<-- pursuit of money,power,beating other people as raison d'etre, serial,power,abusive relationships with females

Just choose the 'usual' politician famed for financial irregularities or female abuse - often associated with corporations with tendency towards fascism ... ... and you'll identify the very 'type' which arises through the pursuit of wrong (selfish) motivation.

The usual thing to be said is that feed selfish ego with those behaviours and you'll simply become ever more addicted.
In contrast - pursuit of 'right' (social) motivation through a personal enquiry into morality
- and upon acquisition of a moral mind you will be free,

We've described this as the state of free will previously - and it's where the rational,moral,wise mind through controling emotions determines the decisions we make.

The task that is set human beings is to escape from the selfish into a social state - both states have a relationship with emotions -
but the 7 emotions operate to a selfish (and become more volatile as we feed the selfish ego with selfish reward ie pursue money,power) Master pre-wisdom and a social Master post-wisdom ... ... where I'd suggest that the emotions (when wise) exert far less volatility.

If pushed perhaps to suggest that pre-wisdom, the emotions are more commonly encountered in physical reality (ie fear of seeing a bike mechanic because of the horrendous amount of money they'll charge) - ie fear reaction a standard part of normal life
- but post-wisdom ina moral world - fear will be an idea - constrained to the informational world of mind - where we might feel fear at the thought of swimming in a vat of poisonous snakes - but this fear reaction is entirely confined to mind and so will be encountered far less frequently than the fear reaction that we see in people in this current world
- where pretty much every interaction with people - particularly when money is involved - easily descends into eliciting the fear reaction.

SB_UK
06-06-15, 06:25 AM
How about some experiences which use all 7 Primary Emotional Responses.

Would that cause an emotional overload?

So - attempting another response.

Can we separate life into 'some experiences' or is it one process ?

Life sees us express all 7 of these states.

If not yet moral in an immoral social environment - then the selfish ego has control over whether we express these emotions; increased volatility with feeding the selfish ego.

If moral in a moral social environment - then moral concerns have control over whether we express these emotions; decreased volatility with acquisition of moral mind amongst moral minds in a moral society.

Generally, I want to state elimination of these 7 emotional responses - but I think that it's decreased volatility in emotional labilty if emotions are morally construed rather than loss of emotional character.

Or maybe it's because I'm looking at emotions as being by definition inappropriate emotions (which is wrong) which will be eliminated - any emotion which is moral in nature is appropriate.

-*-

So - in summary - life as not yet moral vs wise places two logical behavioural models for behaviour (one selfish and one social) as the determinant of an emotional response (the 7 emotions) - and it's not until the individual/species makes a transition to eliciting social emotional states (to feel good when we're working towards species betterment) that we'll be able to do something worthwhile (including having children) here.

Or in other words - if you're working for money you're wasting your time - at some point people with the right (social) motivation are going to have to undo all of the nonsense that you've contributed to society by way of pleasuring only yourself. Lie as you might in social situations - you know you're not working in the interests of anyone other than yourself.

“When it comes to work it is increasingly difficult to reconcile making money with making sense. People do work to make a living. Others do work to make meaning. But the two works are not the same work.”
http://unmonastery.org/

mildadhd
06-06-15, 03:43 PM
I'm confused --
I thought these 7 primary emotional states
(SEEKING, LUST, CARE, PLAY, RAGE, FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF)
were instinctual/inborn in all mammals?

If so, what do you mean that safe/positive or unsafe/negative feelings "promote [their] development"?




Yes.

If we where being chased by a thousand Buffaloes.

Which of the following primary emotional response systems would be exercised/developed?

SEEKING system
RAGE system
FEAR system
LUST system
CARE system
GRIEF system
PLAY system



.

mildadhd
06-06-15, 04:04 PM
Isn't it the secondary or tertiary emotions that develop from experiences in conjunction with activation of the primary emotions?



Yes.

At birth, primary processes + early experiences = secondary processes (implicit learning and implicit memories)


P

namazu
06-06-15, 04:29 PM
Yes.

If we where being chased by a thousand Buffaloes.
That depends...
1000 of these:
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTA2OFgxNjAw/z/DxsAAOSwv0tU6mOq/$_35.JPG

or

1000 of these:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5384833590_1dd85db012_m.jpg

?


Which of the following primary emotional response systems would be exercised/developed?

SEEKING system
RAGE system
FEAR system
LUST system
CARE system
GRIEF system
PLAY system


Assuming you mean the large, irritated kind, I'd have to go with
FEAR (of being trampled/gored)
SEEKING (a place to escape to)
and CARE (I'm worried about you being trampled/gored, too).

I guess what I'm wondering, though, is...

Are these primary emotions merely "triggered" by the experience,
by which I mean,
are these primary emotions naturally within us to begin with,
and automatically show up when the situation is right,
(I think, based on their presence in all mammals and them being "instinctual", the answer would probably be "yes"?),
or do they also "develop" with repeated use?

I guess there could be a strengthening of FEAR/fear (or other types of) circuits in the brain with repeated instances of buffalo stampedes (or other alarming events).

But then if that's the case,

I get confused as to what counts as "primary"
(which I take as meaning "inborn"/"instinctual"/not based on life experience),
vs.
what counts as "secondary"/"tertiary"
(which does require additional experience).

Do you follow my question? Can you help me understand the terminology? I'm confused.

mildadhd
06-13-15, 07:55 PM
Do you follow my question? Can you help me understand the terminology?

Yes.

Are you familiar with the PAG?

The PAG receives input from all of the major emotional systems of the brain.

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jaak_Panksepp/publication/233563843_The_periconscious_substrates_of_consciou sness_affective_states_and_the_evolutionary_origin s_of_the_self/links/553970b90cf2239f4e7d929e.pdf



PeriAqueductal Gray (PAG)

..we found that as the virtual predator grew closer, brain activity shifted from the ventromedial prefrontal cortex to the periaqueductal gray.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/317/5841/1079.full




P

mildadhd
06-13-15, 08:33 PM
The PAG is located below the amygdala, deeply subcortical in the primary processes midbrain area (brain stem area).


..This is an interesting area that is involved the regulation of pain.

It has been demonstrated that stimulation of this area in rats eliminates their perception of pain.

This is called stimulation produced analgesia or SPA (or stimulation induced analgesia; SIA).

http://www.neuroanatomy.wisc.edu/virtualbrain/BrainStem/24PAG.html

namazu
06-13-15, 09:01 PM
No, I wasn't familiar with the PAG.

It sounds like a kind of neural emergency response dispatcher.

But I don't think that answers my question, unless I'm just not seeing it (which is totally possible).

mildadhd
06-14-15, 12:02 AM
..are these primary emotions naturally within us to begin with,
and automatically show up when the situation is right,
(I think, based on their presence in all mammals and them being "instinctual", the answer would probably be "yes"?),
or do they also "develop" with repeated use?..




Yes.

The 7 primary emotional response systems are very biologically real, they are strengthened or weakened depending on secondary and tertiary experiences.

Each of these basic 7 emotional response systems have basically the same anatomy, chemistries, and the associated basic responses for each of the 7 systems, can be predictably stimulated in all mammals practically every time, by trained professionals.

Example involving the primary FEAR system below.

Fear is agonizing in all its forms.

It is horrible to be stricken by sudden terror.

It is also terrible to be continually consumed by persistent feelings of anxiety that gnaw away at you, destroying your sense of security in the world.

Such feelings are generated by a coherently operating primal brain system, running from the periaqueductal gray (PAG) to the amygdala and back again.

This system produces terror when it is precipitously aroused, and it promotes chronic anxiety in response to milder, more sustained arousal.

When fear stimuli are far away, the higher cognitive parts of the brain, such as the medial frontal cortex and amygdala, are also aroused; you may hide and be still.

But when a fearful predator is at your heels, the the lower regions of the FEAR circuitry, especially down in the midbrain PAG, take over (Mobbs et al., 2007).

Those unconditional fear circuits absolutely compel you to take flight.


Panksepp/Biven, "The Archaeology of Mind", Chapter: Ancestral Roots of FEAR, p. 178.



P

mildadhd
06-14-15, 12:06 AM
..the PAG may be the most important location in the brain, because it is richly connected to both higher and lower brain functions.

It is a Grand Central Station for our affective life, and is essential for the primal integration of diverse emotional experiences.

It sends its tentacles far into the lower and higher regions of the brain.

Much of this kind of "dark energy" in the brain is not easily visualized with modern brain-imaging technologies (Zhang & Raichle, 2010), but with the right tasks, remarkable images can be generated (Mobbs et al., 2009).


The PAG and its related brain-stem networks are essential for the construction of the higher mind..

-Panksepp/Biven, "The Archaeology of Mind", p 498.





P

mildadhd
06-14-15, 05:15 AM
So - I think that all of the various selfish acts we're compelled towards eg pair-bond formation, pursuit of money, pursuit of power, winning in competition

- can access all of the 7, some greater than 1 of the 7 simultaneously
- but not often all 7 at the same time.

And that emotional overload isn't really a worry - what we're trying to do is to escape irrational emotional responses - by pursuit of anything other than the moral mind eg multiple relationships, pursuit of money, pursuit of power, desire to win
- through pursuit of all of these 'addictive' pursuits - we grow ever moer addicted - show ever increased emotional reactions when we fail to have our selfish way ... ... that the overly irrational emotional reaction is self-defeating - will destroy us ... ... and that the goal is to overcome the problem through acquisition of wisdom.

I'm more suggesting that leading a life which increases emotional reactivity is bad for the individual and not that having an exaggerated emotional response through living that form of life will force a ?? shut-down ?? - perhaps a capacity to completely evade rational/moral/wise input eg the crime of passion which results in the predisposed individual exerting an emotional reaction which results in violently irrational behaviour.

SB_UK

SEEKING/pursue morality.

SEEKING/pursue immorality.

The SEEKING/expectancy system is involved either way.

Does morality and immorality involve higher tertiary (neocortical) processes?

Feelings and thoughts appreciated.






P

someothertime
06-14-15, 07:40 AM
Could it be that these asexual beings have damaged/void Oxytocin receptors and alike....?

or conversely...... they self generate these hormones?

Of interest to the topic..... A 'learnered" person stated the big two..... ANGER / SEX ( Effection/Love/Lust/Nurture) a-la FREUD,,,, in a conversation I was having with them........

Will not go into the self questioning re: the topic..... needless to say.... focussing on these two certainly allowed one to dissect whatever behavioral entomology was under speculation.

mildadhd
06-14-15, 02:26 PM
Could it be that these asexual beings have damaged/void Oxytocin receptors and alike....?

or conversely...... they self generate these hormones?

Of interest to the topic..... A 'learnered" person stated the big two..... ANGER / SEX ( Effection/Love/Lust/Nurture) a-la FREUD,,,, in a conversation I was having with them........

Will not go into the self questioning re: the topic..... needless to say.... focussing on these two certainly allowed one to dissect whatever behavioral entomology was under speculation.

Something alike, I have not studied much at all yet about those subjects yet, although I think what the individual feels, is what the individual knows, and can be explained biologically with a understanding beginning with the foundation of the mind.

Personally, I could not get much into psychology before learning about psychological development from a bottom-up Affective Neuroscientific perspective, then top-down perspective.

I prefer Panksepp's, Grandin's, Mate's... deeper understanding of the foundation of the mind, in mind, because the basic explanations include the working biological mechanisms

At a glance, I think it is amazing how close some psychologist theories where, without knowing nearly as much about how the brain works psychologically biologically.

Primary affects are preverbal. (Meaning the basic 7 emotional response systems evolved before the higher brain's ability for complex human language, society, etc.)

All terminology is secondary/tertiary.

Prof Panksepp writes the primary emotional, sensory and homeostatic affectives systems, with capitalized letters to distinguish between the preverbal biology of basic feelings (from lower in the brain) and verbal complex highly subjective thoughts about feelings (from higher in the brain).

RAGE/anger and LUST/sexuality are definitely involved, although I try to consider them all 7 emotional affective systems in there raw working forms, to get my psychobiological bearings.

I will need to spend some time understanding each of basic emotional response systems, before discussing individual topics like LUST/sexuality, and get back to that part of the discussion when I understand how the psychobiological mechanisms work and develop better.

(Anything not quoted is my own interpretation)


P

mildadhd
06-14-15, 04:50 PM
If we could simply develop morality and then make the world more beautiful for one and all without some force driving pair-bond formation / children - then we will die out as a species ?

Question - not statement.

Conditions that promote the development of self-regulation, are the same conditions that promote the development of morality?



P

mildadhd
06-14-15, 05:24 PM
That depends...
1000 of these:
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTA2OFgxNjAw/z/DxsAAOSwv0tU6mOq/$_35.JPG

or

1000 of these:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5384833590_1dd85db012_m.jpg

?



Assuming you mean the large, irritated kind, I'd have to go with
FEAR (of being trampled/gored)
SEEKING (a place to escape to)
and CARE (I'm worried about you being trampled/gored, too).



Thanks.

After having some time to think about it.

Since we never really experienced either, I am guessing both examples would have something to do the social PLAY system our imaginations, along with SEEKING, FEAR, CARE, and other primary emotional systems.

I also forgot to consider, both, 1000 irritated Buffalo and 1000 funny Buffalo examples charging us all at the same time...


P