Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="porco-dddio" data-source="post: 80254" data-attributes="member: 656">I would frame it more like inventing emotion.What we know is theres some &quot;rudimentary emotions&quot; like lust, fear, play, rage, so on. I dont know them all. But in our human life we play and invent senses, like schadenfreude became known because someone invented it. Terribility became known because some gothic artist pained it. Its how it works. Awe dread and sublime were invented. Verticality, sense of speed, the joy of progress. And more.Can you deconstruct Schadenfreude retroduce it? I dont think so. I mean you could say is based on envy and rivalry and superiority. Rivalry would be another constructed emotion as well. I believe you cannot go back to what was the inherent reality of a human who produces the sense.Unless you have a superbrain to do it, and you can construct every causal chain and you know the latest cognitive science and the history of the subject so maybe you could predict where the output came from. So I think when you speak of emotions you can retroduce them as probabilities. But there is no single rule to decompose an emotion if its very complex it becomes even harder.Also, an artist does not creates ex nihilo but he invents new configurations, resolutions (think of catharsis), trajectories (unresolved impulses), and symbolic organizations of fundamental emotional potentials already latent in human nature.I dont know the current science of emotion, but I believe is understood as brain signals that are inherent in an human organism. I can make it quick, and accept this is true bcause I didnt delve much on cognitive science, but im sure it aligns with what aristotle already knew.We can reorganize emotional potentials into higher order emotional forms. High level magicians can do massive spells on humanity. So the artist wont be just expressing &quot;an emotion&quot; he will have it invented. Often these spells rearrange reality. Magic is power, knowledge is power.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="porco-dddio, post: 80254, member: 656"] I would frame it more like inventing emotion. What we know is theres some "rudimentary emotions" like lust, fear, play, rage, so on. I dont know them all. But in our human life we play and invent senses, like schadenfreude became known because someone invented it. Terribility became known because some gothic artist pained it. Its how it works. Awe dread and sublime were invented. Verticality, sense of speed, the joy of progress. And more. Can you deconstruct Schadenfreude retroduce it? I dont think so. I mean you could say is based on envy and rivalry and superiority. Rivalry would be another constructed emotion as well. I believe you cannot go back to what was the inherent reality of a human who produces the sense. Unless you have a superbrain to do it, and you can construct every causal chain and you know the latest cognitive science and the history of the subject so maybe you could predict where the output came from. So I think when you speak of emotions you can retroduce them as probabilities. But there is no single rule to decompose an emotion if its very complex it becomes even harder. Also, an artist does not creates ex nihilo but he invents new configurations, resolutions (think of catharsis), trajectories (unresolved impulses), and symbolic organizations of fundamental emotional potentials already latent in human nature. I dont know the current science of emotion, but I believe is understood as brain signals that are inherent in an human organism. I can make it quick, and accept this is true bcause I didnt delve much on cognitive science, but im sure it aligns with what aristotle already knew. We can reorganize emotional potentials into higher order emotional forms. High level magicians can do massive spells on humanity. So the artist wont be just expressing "an emotion" he will have it invented. Often these spells rearrange reality. Magic is power, knowledge is power. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Layout Options

Color Schemes

Reply to thread