Evolutionary Benefit to all emotions.

You are correct. I did in fact state that you're job was to present a single example of an "emotional response that doesn't benefit either individual or group survival." In my previous post, I pointed out that the stimuli which brought about the emotional response was the roller coaster, and the emotional response was the fight-or-flight reflex. By the rules of the debate, my job is to explain the evolutionary value of the emotional response (as pointed out in the comment in which you quoted me), not it's value in relation to the stimuli. Were that the case, this debate would be impossible for me to win. Every emotion has a situation where it doesn't benefit the animal evolutionarily. We're not arguing that. We're arguing that, as I said in my first post, there's a benefit to all emotional responses, not that emotional responses are always beneficial. And in this case, I have set precedent, which you have not yet dismantled, and have actively agreed with, showing that the emotional response you provided is the fight-or-flight reflex. Nonetheless, even if I were to follow your line of thought here, I'd still have ground to stand upon.. So, let's pull on that thread for a minute, just to be thorough. Why does Joy exist? Because a happy animal tries harder to survive. Animals can in fact become depressed and give up on living. This is exhibited when dogs stop eating after their owners give them away or die, and by countless humans who commit suicide when they aren't happy enough to continue living. So, since you yourself said the exhilaration causes pleasure, all I've to argue is that pleasure contributes to individual happiness, since happiness contributes to individual survival. So for that, here's a relevant article with experts in psychology making exactly that claim: http://www.pbs.org... . To cite from the article itself, "Martin Seligman, one of the leading researchers in positive psychology and author of Authentic Happiness, describes happiness as having three parts: pleasure, engagement, and meaning. Pleasure is the “feel good” part of happiness. Engagement refers to living a “good life” of work, family, friends, and hobbies. Meaning refers to using our strengths to contribute to a larger purpose. Seligman says that all three are important..." I can therefore, based upon the research of experts in this specific area, make the assertion that pleasure is an integral part of happiness. That being the case, riding a roller coaster, by your own logic, would benefit your survival by benefiting your happiness. And in case it's needed, here's citation for my assertion that happiness causes an animals health to decline, specifically in the ways I claimed it did. Dog example- http://www.petplace.com..."Some dogs with separation anxiety are so bonded to one person that if that person leaves the dog with other people in a crowded room he will display full-blown signs of separation anxiety. Such a dog will not take well at all to his owner going away on a trip or, indeed, to the permanent separation caused by death. The dog will panic at first and will eventually become depressed. While we can't ask a dog how he feels, we can (and do) sometimes see all the visible signs of depression in bereft dogs that we see in a recently bereaved or otherwise depressed person. Clinical Signs of Mourning in Dogs Lack of energy and interest Absence of play Listlessness/moping Loss of appetite/anorexia Reduced social interactions Increased daytime sleeping Nighttime restlessness/insomnia Weight loss " Suicide Example- http://www.save.org... "Research has consistently shown a strong link between suicide and depression"Other examples exist. In fact, ample examples exist. I just think the points been proved. If you think otherwise, say so and I'll provide more. But at this point, I think I've explained and provided enough backing for my position.