From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Exactly what I mean by "unattached"...
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 04:34:51 GMT

 
in <kiran.714650733@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
    kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
 
] tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
]
] >Nope, not even close--can't you make yourself mad by focusing on
] >someone's annoying quirk that particularly bothers you?  Stir up sad
] >feelings with a depressing movie?
]
] Certainly, but I see that as "accentuating the positive."
] Not controlling, but rather, feeding or starving the feelings.
 
All right--but if starting with only the trace or potential for a given
feeling you can "feed" it until it becomes strong and you can "starve" a
strong feeling until it becomes unnoticeable, isn't that effectively the
same as being able to control them?
 
] >Have you ever found that your attraction to a particular characteristic
] >was increased or decreased by dating someone with that characteristic?
]
] If I don't like a trait, I don't not like it less cause someone has
] it.  A trait i am neutral about might seem endearing attached to the
] right person.
 
Well, maybe that one doesn't apply to you--I recall that recently a
number of posters mentioned experiences of dating a really nifty
person with a characteristic they used to be neutral about but
afterwards found quite appealing.
 
] >influences, it seems apparent emotions *are* controlled and the question
] >is merely one of whether you would prefer your feelings to be controlled
] >solely by the vagaries of circumstances around you or whether you would
] >like to take an active role in their occurance and nature.
]
] The word "control" seems to me to have connotations of "conscious"
] about it.  Emotions are controlled--but so are the course of rivers
] and the movements of the continents.  But I don't think they are under
] anyone's conscious control.  They just are.
 
Actually, you can move rivers and even continents if you know what
you're doing and try hard enough.  (The latter, however, tends to
require the use of nuclear weapons and the like and, as such, can have
undesirable side-effects.)  People (and beavers, for that matter) have
been changing the courses of rivers for eons to make them more useful or
to prevent them from causing harm to their lives or property.
 
Emotions are influenced by external stimuli, internalized values and
beliefs, internal evaluation of perception, and internal thinking and
focus.  All but the first are internal processes that are, with a
greater or lesser level of difficulty, under conscious control; indeed,
one can even choose to a significant degree what external stimuli to be
exposed to.  With all the factors that contribute to emotion being to a
significant degree consciously controllable, the emotions themselves
must also be subject to conscious control.  My own experience is that
this is very much the case.
 
I get the feeling that many people find it very important that their
feelings be uncontrollable and fundamentally incomprehensible and
illogical; why, I'm not quite sure, though I suspect that it may be
because they feel the need for life to be mysterious and beyond their
comprehension and control or that they feel threatened by science and
logic.
 
] Perhaps an extreme example would help clarify my point.  You can
] control your emotions, right?  Then--turn the love you feel for your
] closest friend into hate, or, better yet, ennui.
 
If I decided that the advantages of doing so greatly outweighed the
disadvantages, that would not be especially hard; however, the feelings
I have for my friends I value a great deal and I don't go around editing
them lightly.  (After all, my friendships are among the very most
important things to me--I'm not going to damage the most important one
of those on a dare.)
 
Trygve