"People suffer emotionally of their own accord"?

[fushigi]

Quote by: Autolykos People suffer emotionally of their own accord. No one makes anyone else feel any certain way.

I disagree. People can be made to suffer and have no control of it. For example, while only 9.5% of Americans suffer from depression, 63% of people suffering from depression are the victims of abuse. It's not their choice to be depressed - that, IMO, is just Nietzschean uberman nonsense.

Part of being human is having emotions that we cannot fully control. These emotions present themselves as a result of events external to ourselves, which we cannot control.

Stating otherwise is merely another form of blaming the victim.

fushigi

[phoenix_fire]

Well, to a certain degree, people can affect how much they suffer emotionally. You can sometimes choose one type over another, for example. You can choose to always suspect the motives of others and shield yourself from their treachery by being entirely remote, but then you are choosing loneliness. I've tried that route. Then you can also choose to have close friends, but you have to make yourself vulnerable in order to do so. And let's face it: people are clumsy in how they treat others. One way or another without fail, you will be hurt. I've tried this too. You can choose to care about the plight of others and take on their cares or you can be a crass, cynical, selfish person and worry about yourself. Either choice will cause you some degree of misery. Investing your life in other people means that they will invariably let you down. And remaining closed off and protected means you will miss out on being loved and loving. And me...I'm...somewhere in the middle trying to figure it all out. Some of the people that I trusted the most turned out to not care nearly as much about me as I did for them. But I don't want to turn antisocial again either. *sigh* Damned if I don't...damned if I do.

[Osborn F Enready]

Emotion is controllable to a very large degree.

I would tend to agree with the overall point by Rob, but his explanation will determine if I fully agree.

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

Quote by: fushigi I disagree. People can be made to suffer and have no control of it. For example, while only 9.5% of Americans suffer from depression, 63% of people suffering from depression are the victims of abuse. It's not their choice to be depressed - that, IMO, is just Nietzschean uberman nonsense. Part of being human is having emotions that we cannot fully control. These emotions present themselves as a result of events external to ourselves, which we cannot control. Stating otherwise is merely another form of blaming the victim. fushigi

Of course they do, they choose to take on the suffering through their needs to envelope their worst emotions

[fushigi]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Emotion is controllable to a very large degree.

Didn't you say in another thread you had to take anger management classes? It doesn't seem logical to permit your emotion-based actions to restrict your freedom in this way.

[Jack]

Part of being human is having emotions that we cannot fully control. These emotions present themselves as a result of events external to ourselves, which we cannot control.

This reminds me of a sermon I gave when I was a youth pastor. It was entitled, "Be an actor, not a reactor".

The point I was trying then to make, and still believe to be true in my life, is that while life throws obstacles and frustrations at you all day long, you can choose how to respond to those events. At that time I used the example of the O.T.'s "eye for an eye" and the N.T.'s "turn the other cheek". We are responsible for our response to external stimuli. Some people who hit their thumb with a hammer laugh about it while others cry. There isn't a predetermined "right" way to respond to any situation. Whether you react intellectually or emotionally, you are ultimately in charge of your response.

Are there those who lack such control? Of course. But that's no reason for them to go through life a constant victim of their emotions. They need to be encouraged to take control of their emotions, to accept responsibility for their reactions. Once empowered, they can then begin to exercise their control and become actors in life instead of being reactors.

[fushigi]

Quote by: Isherwood We are responsible for our response to external stimuli. Some people who hit their thumb with a hammer laugh about it while others cry. There isn't a predetermined "right" way to respond to any situation. Whether you react intellectually or emotionally, you are ultimately in charge of your response.

But you're talking about physical response to stimuli. The emotional sensation of hitting your thumb with a hammer isn't in any way comparable to the sensation of, say, accidentally running over a family with your SUV, being raped, or having your family killed in a missile strike by a foreign aggressor.

The idea that people in such situations can resist being emotionally affected is just inane. Certainly, they can take steps to avoid allowing the emotional response to go out of control, but as far as completely resisting it--that's impossible.

[Jack]

Even so, there's no universal response to those situations. Emotional responses can be tempered and controlled. To abdicate control is to suggest that we are helpless and not responsible for our reactions. Since I believe in personal responsibility, I'm obviously not going to agree that we aren't able to control and modify our responses to external stimuli. Perhaps you don't wish to modify your reaction. That's fine. You should at least be able to own up to the fact that you made that decision and wish to react in that way.

[fushigi]

Quote by: Isherwood Even so, there's no universal response to those situations. Emotional responses can be tempered and controlled.

The very fact that they need to be controlled proves that the emotional response is involuntary.

Quote by: Ish To abdicate control is to suggest that we are helpless and not responsible for our reactions.

I'm not saying "abdicate control"--I'm saying understand that emotions are part of our subconscious mind (in the amygdala) and we can only control such processes to a certain extent.

[Osborn F Enready]

Fushigi said: Didn't you say in another thread you had to take anger management classes?

Yes, but the reasons surrounding the need to do so I consider private and don't share.

Fushigi said: It doesn't seem logical to permit your emotion-based actions to restrict your freedom in this way.

It's not, and it was a learning experience I won't require, or tolerate again.
It proved my logic to me, by experience, as opposed to theory.

[fushigi]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Yes, but the reasons surrounding the need to do so I consider private and don't share. It's not, and it was a learning experience I won't require, or tolerate again. It proved my logic to me, by experience, as opposed to theory.

And now, can you control your emotions entirely--no anger, no rage?

I'm not saying you should be able to. There's nothing abnormal about wanting to punch a guy in the face when he insults my girlfriend. There's nothing strange about entering a wave of depression that lasts for weeks or months when your child dies.

Emotions are part of our humanity; how can you men just shrug them off like they were vestigial organs or something?

[Osborn F Enready]

Fushigi said: And now, can you control your emotions entirely--no anger, no rage?

I didn't say that, but yes. I could then also. The class did nothing but agitate or cause on its own, anger, but the experience of being FORCED to endure the class was something that taught me more about my logical position, and the origin of my rage.

In my opinion, anger management can be beneficial if one truly WELCOMES that service. It only goes to provoke, or promote anger if it is forced upon people.

Fushigi said: I'm not saying you should be able to. There's nothing abnormal about wanting to punch a guy in the face when he insults my girlfriend. There's nothing strange about entering a wave of depression that lasts for weeks or months when your child dies.

Agreed, and I am not saying it isn't natural or it's something I wouldn't still do, or would do.

The management aspect comes in when and how you choose to act on that emotion, not by negating or denying it.

I was forced to go to the class, for something that had NOTHING to do with anger, but instead, due to a choice I made based solely in reason, logic and normal by all means.

The details beyond that aren't relevant.

[fushigi]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready The class did nothing but agitate or cause on its own, anger, but the experience of being FORCED to endure the class was something that taught me more about my logical position, and the origin of my rage.

There you go. The class pissed you off. Proof that external conditions can make us feel one way or another.

I think the thing that shocked me about Rob's statement in the OP was him implying that emotions ARE or even OUGHT TO BE elective, voluntary forces and if they bother you, that's YOUR problem.

In fact, emotions can be elicited by other people--case in point, Alec Baldwin's angry phone message. Should he have controlled himself? Of course. But even I can understand how a woman you love can drive you to your wit's ends, make you into a person you don't even know.

If such a thing wasn't possible, there wouldn't be any such thing as love IMO.

[Jack]

The very fact that they need to be controlled proves that the emotional response is involuntary.

I don't dispute that emotions arise involuntarily. But as Osborn said,

The management aspect comes in when and how you choose to act on that emotion, not by negating or denying it.

My point precisely.

[iclaudius]

Quote by: fushigi There you go. The class pissed you off. Proof that external conditions can make us feel one way or another. I think the thing that shocked me about Rob's statement in the OP was him implying that emotions ARE or even OUGHT TO BE elective, voluntary forces and if they bother you, that's YOUR problem. In fact, emotions can be elicited by other people--case in point, Alec Baldwin's angry phone message. Should he have controlled himself? Of course. But even I can understand how a woman you love can drive you to your wit's ends, make you into a person you don't even know. If such a thing wasn't possible, there wouldn't be any such thing as love IMO.

True, fushy, you may not be able to choose whether or not to react, but you do choose to react in that way, and to get angry. Don't believe me? In September or October of 2006, a man who drove a milk truck in Pennsylvania (called "The Quiet Milkman" in the communities he frequented) suddenly and without warning barricaded himself in a small Amish school and shot 10 young girls, killing 5. The Amish community's response to this was complete, unconditional, immediate forgiveness. They chose not to get angry. They mourned and lamented their loss, but never, ever was there even a hint of resentment within the community. Where most people would have reacted with venomous hatred and almost reflexive anger, the Amish chose to simply let things be. In public statement after public statement, they made it clear that they harbored no ill will, and in fact, had only pity for the man who killed their children. They wished him will, and expressed a hope that God would be merciful on his soul. They invited his family to the funeral service, because they were victims of his suicide. Were they victims of simply being merciful? Was it by accident that they reacted the way they did? No. It was a tempered habit of forgiveness and and sincere dedication to truly loving everyone, no matter what they did.

In the end, your reactions are just a thing of habit. With enough repetition, you can control any of your emotions, which includes changing feeling angry about things. True, in this culture, it is "natural" to feel angry when someone insults your girlfriend, but that anger is the result of your having chosen to get angry. It is very easy to become angry if you have chosen to be angry before, because choosing anger and duking it out is the easier alternative to changing. Some emotions are harder to change than others, but just remember that your personality is mostly a series of learned behaviors. You can change them as soon as you want to, all it takes is a little time.

[Heather]

While I certainly agree that outside elements can, and will affect ones emotions, I too think that in end, what one walks away with from the experience can be an entirely different aspect.

Yes, our environment will make us feel a certain way, but how a person feels about those experiences, how a person feels about what they have “potentially” learned, is another matter in entirely.

You walk away with what you care to know.

[fushigi]

Well, it's a bit of a relief to hear you all admit that emotions CAN be affected by other people.

Yes, of course we mitigate our emotional response to every event. We learn how to do this as a survival technique. But the only way to truly learn to deal with everything in life without emotion is to avoid any new experiences--to shut yourself off from any novelty. Think about babies--why do they cry and throw up so much? Because every experience is new. Every minute there is a somewhat new sensation, be it an external stimulus or the physical response to a new tactile sensation/flavor/smell/song/whatever.

It's when we are presented with something out of the ordinary or unexpected that we have the greatest emotional response. The reason other people have the ability to affect our emotions so much is because humans are--by nature--unpredictable.

To desire a world without involuntary emotion is to desire a world without humanity, without novelty. That, in my view, is the definition of hell: the lack of humanity and novelty in the world.

[Jack]

But the only way to truly learn to deal with everything in life without emotion is to avoid any new experiences--to shut yourself off from any novelty.

I didn't mean to suggest we learn to react without emotion, just that we learn to moderate our reactions, take responsibility for them and keep them in check. When someone insults me, my immediate and internal response is to get pissed off. But I don't have to express that. I can react in any number of ways, from constructive to destructive. It's my choice, and I'm fully responsible for the reaction I choose to exhibit. It would be dishonest of me to react negatively then blame the other person for evoking that response.

[Osborn F Enready]

I agree Ish, and that is the underpinning of my, and I think, Robs statement.

Nothing pisses off a person more who is trying to elicit a "planned response" from you, than giving them an unplanned reaction.

[brien]

"All emotion is involuntary when genuine..."

Mark Twain 1894