10 ms·

What is it like to have never felt an emotion?

96 points by andyjohnson0 11y ago

joe563323 11y ago
Spock ?
- hliyan 11y ago
  Apparently, the analogy is not inaccurate: “It may be hard to believe, but it is possible for someone to be cut off completely from the emotions and imagination that are such a big part of what makes us humans,” he says. “And that a person can be cut off from emotions without being heartless, or a psychopath.”
  - cypher_glyph 11y ago
    Well, it is illogical to be a psychopath, after all...
    - coldtea 11y ago
      What's illogical about it? In fact being a psychopath is the most logical thing (promoting your interests with cold logic with care or mercy for others). All other behaviors need either a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc (which, as emotions, are not logical). Of course one can logically come to the conclusion that behaving moraly instead of like a psychopath is better for humanity. But even in that case, giving a damn for what's better for humanity (instead of what maximizes your benefits in your lifespan) is illogical.
      - david_ar 11y ago
        Not really, Nash equilibria aren't necessarily the best outcome for any individual (cf the prisoner's dilemma). Cooperation is usually better than every-man-for-himself for everyone involved, hence why social animals evolve altruistic traits. Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths
        coldtea 11y ago
        That's in game theory. Not many people are ever offered a bona fide "prisoner's dilemma". In most actual real life situations you can get far ahead by behaving as a sociopath. >Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly.
        PepeGomez 11y ago
        >The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly. People aren't stupid.
        david_ar 11y ago
        Prisoner's dilemma may be an exaggerated example, but it's a strawman argument to conclude that game theory isn't applicable to real life.
        oldmanjay 11y ago
        Selfishness exists outside of pathology. In fact, I don't know a single human who is not selfish on some level and I suspect such a creature doesn't exist. We do have a huge number of armchair psychiatrists making invalid long-distance diagnoses of people they don't like but that's not really the same thing.
        david_ar 11y ago
        I never claimed that nobody was at least a little selfish, I was simply arguing that it isn't illogical that most people aren't sociopaths.
        david_ar 11y ago
        Just to be clear, I'm not saying selfishness doesn't exist, or that cheating the system doesn't work for some people. My point is that altruism is not "illogical", and it doesn't require "a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc" to make sense as the parent content suggested.
      - icebraining 11y ago
        Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? I don't think the concept even applies. Logic concerns itself with the validity of reasoning: Given X and Y, you can validly infer Z - it doesn't concern itself with the goals. So, unless there's an underlying axiom that supports the assertion that you should promote your interests above others', it's not "more logical" to do so than to dedicate your life to others.
        coldtea 11y ago
        >Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest.
        icebraining 11y ago
        Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest. Even if there is a "default interest", you don't arrive to it by logical reasoning - it's no more logical than an emotion.
        coldtea 11y ago
        >So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? Because that's how logic works. We are not discussing Logic the mathematical formalism (A=A, A=C, A!=B => B!=C) here.
        icebraining 11y ago
        I understand we are not discussing the mathematical formalism, but that doesn't answer my question. Logical thinking is reasoning; just doing something because it feels obvious doesn't sound like application of reasoning. Many obvious things are reveled to be inadvisable when carefully considered. Also, I don't believe that taking care of yourself is obvious if you remove emotions. Self-preservation is an emotional instinct, not some logical axiom.
      - jameshart 11y ago
        I believe the traditional 'logical' argument is that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"...
        coldtea 11y ago
        There's no logic (as in hard rational calculation about getting your maximum advantage) involved that argument -- it's a value judgement promoting sacrificing personal enjoyment, needs, interests etc. for others.
        valarauca1 11y ago
        Desiring personal enjoyment is illogical according to: Buddhism, Stoicism, Cyncism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Neopythagoreanism. All schools of thought that actively advocate against self desire and state that it is something that you must first purge yourself of before you can achieve happiness. A lot of pure logical schools advocate that want and desire is the root of all suffering. The difference between these schools and say Randianism is they reject one can suffer of the soul. You do not desire an end of suffering, but you desire an end of desire.
estefan 11y ago
Sad? Oh wait...
michaelfeathers 11y ago
Isn't this textbook sociopathy?
- buro9 11y ago
  No. > sociopath: a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience. Nothing in not feeling emotions means that one would lack a moral responsibility or social conscience, or is antisocial and often criminal.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - PavlovsCat 11y ago
    Well, there surely is a big difference in not having words for emotions, or being unable to feel them, and them not arising in the first place, at all. But still: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia > Individuals high on the alexithymia spectrum also report less distress at seeing others in pain and behave less altruistically toward others. Which doesn't surprise me, really; at least for me, for how I operate, there is a clear distinction between acting to avoid punishment or to seek reward, and a conscience; the latter is always connected to emotions, for me. Here's another admittedly random tidbit from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_%28emotion%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_%28emotion%29 > As a highly social animal living in large groups that are relatively stable, we need ways to deal with conflicts and events in which we inadvertently or purposefully harm others. If someone causes harm to another, and then feels guilt and demonstrates regret and sorrow, the person harmed is likely to forgive. Thus, guilt makes it possible to forgive, and helps hold the social group together. and > When we see another person suffering, it can also cause us pain. This constitutes our powerful system of empathy, which leads to our thinking that we should do something to relieve the suffering of others. If we cannot help another, or fail in our efforts, we experience feelings of guilt. Don't get me wrong. I absolutely agree with the impulse to reject any sort of "witch hunt" or even "just" looking down on people. It's not the fault of people who can't feel remorse that they can't feel remorse, especially since "harder variants" like NPD are very often the result of abuse and trauma (and in so far they are genetic, there's no fault either), and since all of this is on a spectrum, and most of us likely are on it, they also must not serve as scapegoats. But it's fascinating and important, and while the person this story is about is probably a decent guy, it can also be a very unsettling and sinister topic, yet still important - I'd even say we shy away from it at our own risk.
kirsebaer 11y ago
I wonder how people with alexithymia respond to MDMA (ecstasy)? I've heard people say that the first time they really experienced emotions was on MDMA.
- funkdobiest 11y ago
  I came here to say the same as it was a profound emotional experience the first time I took it.
- WhitneyLand 11y ago
  The hypothesis makes perfect sense and is very intriguing, however it doesn't seem to pan out. There are narcissists and sociopaths who have tried it as a therapy. Unfortunately the only result seems to be increased love for themselves, or feelings of God like superiority over others.
  - jdidod 11y ago
    But we are not talking about sociopaths or narcisists. We are talking about something completely different, the inability to process emotions. Mdma helped me personaly to connect to my emotional state. It was like i had no clue whatso ever where to look within myself for emotion. Mdma was like a kilowatt light source shining in the distance. I was like fuck, thats what it is. Shit, its right under my nose. Never looked back, have been busy integrating affective state into my thought processes. Interestingly my memory is much improved after this, I am able to consciously decide if something is salient.
- dsfsdfd 11y ago
  This is how I reconnected after trauma.
ned 11y ago
For instance, one day at school he was working with the student theatre. All week he had been struggling to produce the right sound effects, but it just wasn’t coming together. Eventually, his boss lost his cool and started ripping into him. “My response was that something weird was happening with my body,” he says. “I could feel a tension, like my heart was racing, but my mind was distracted… Isn't this an extreme case of repressing emotions, in the most classic sense? The disconnect between bodily reaction and lack of mindfullness seems to indicate it.
- SideburnsOfDoom 11y ago
  Maybe, since they're talking about Alexithymia, which is defined as "inability to identify and describe emotions in the self". (1) Who actually has no emotions whatsoever and stays alive? What about primitive things like e.g. the feeling of shock and terror as you are crossing the road and turn to see a bus bearing down on you. This is a basic animal survival response. If all you can say is "my heart was racing" that's not exactly being unemotional, but uncomprehending. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia
- jaggederest 11y ago
  I think it's more along the lines of an agnosia or aphasia. They receive the same somatic input, it's just not translated into affect the way most people do, in the same way that a face doesn't register 'faceness' to someone with prosopagnosia.
- VLM 11y ago
  Maybe it was a bad example for the author to use because it sounds like whats been described to me as symptoms of a panic attack. Or it might be that pathological panic attacks are an example of the emotional problem in the story. From talking to people who've had medical panic attack problems, it seems common for them to confuse how to name the bodily symptoms, so they show up in the ER confused why they're sweating bullets and feeling very confused and heart rate of 150 thinking they're having a heart attack or stroke instead of "just" an out of control emotional response. Or it could be that their treatment plan for repressed emotions leading to panic attacks is a lifetime dose of a pill. Maybe that is the best treatment plan for them; none of my business, I guess, other than that specific example might have been a bad choice for the article because of confusing factors.
_nedR 11y ago
I don't get it. Is the article exaggerating things? How can you function without feeling emotions? What is your motivation for getting married? Getting a job? Playing a game or watching a movie? Succeeding at any task? What is your reward mechanism? For example "All week he had been struggling to produce the right sound effects," How would you even know you hit the right sound effect? What is your judgement for good or bad on something that is subjective?
- dingaling 11y ago
  I think most of those examples have a rational basis and the non-emotional person could probably make better decisions than the rest of us e.g. choosing a job offer on the basis of benefits and prospects rather than because the office looked cool. Such a person would make an astounding diplomat. The reward mechanism would probably be in maximizing physical comfort in return for minimal physical effort.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Without emotions, what would cause a person to prefer physical comfort over physical discomfort?
    - StavrosK 11y ago
      Comfort and discomfort aren't emotions. Pain isn't an emotion, and the absence of pain is desirable by people who don't have emotions.
      - _nedR 11y ago
        Pain, hunger, sexual urges, etc. can't be classified by emotions. Maybe we can include fear of injury or death in this as well. Even a baby can feel these things (except of course sexual urges). But beyond that everything else is an emotion - happiness, sadness, anger, annoyance, loneliness. Beyond the most basic tasks everything requires emotions to drive you. Why do you study for an upcoming exam? Because you are anxious about getting a good grade? Why are you anxious? Because you may not want to upset your parents? Why does that bother you? You love them or fear their displeasure. Why do you fear your parent's displeasure? Ignoring corporal punishment (which could be an avoidance of pain/injury), other reasons include wanting to avoid stress, or being upset when they confront you about it. And so on. You cannot get through life except the most basic functions (like avoiding pain, eating, sleeping, etc) without emotions. The article seems to equate the reduced perception of emotions to a total absence of them.
coldtea 11y ago
>What is it like to have never felt an emotion? Since for it to be something you'd have to feel an emotion regarding your condition, it's nothing (neutral).
stewbrew 11y ago
How should you know? Actually an interesting problem: A1. You say you don't experience emotions. A2. What you call emotions is what you see others do when they say they are acting emotionally. You don't think you are this way. A3. Your doctor says you're right. Or: B1. You say you experience emotions. B2. Others say you are wrong.
- buro9 11y ago
  I wondered the same thing. How can anyone really know whether what they experience in their black box is the same as what another person experiences? Evidence of enthusiastically communicating an experience isn't the same as being able to prove that you actually experienced it. Likewise, not communicating an experience doesn't mean that it wasn't experienced.
- drdeca 11y ago
  This reminds me of something Wittgenstein apparently talked about. I don't have a better explanation than the comic I saw about it though : http://existentialcomics.com/comic/94 http://existentialcomics.com/comic/94
- rightnow321 11y ago
  You're completely right at it's heart is an innate doubt over whether this is actually a problem or just a manifestation of some weird thought process. The only way to really get outside this kind of introverted bubble is to ask people or confide in them. This leads to conversations like whether an emotion like happiness is an actual thing or not that they can identify and actually feel. In the sense that they are actually sitting there and willing to state "I feel happy", it's different from yesterday. Most people are hence why I diagnose myself in line with this article. Or, another way is people generally have an answer to the "Tell me about a time you were very happy"... a lot of people can reel something off really easily here. Sometimes it's like a wedding and you think "you could be saying that because it's accepted as a good answer" but other people say a certain day at the beach where something really specific happens and that lends credence to the idea they feel this emotion and I don't.
  - 11y ago
pessimizer 11y ago
This is all self-reported, and people who don't have emotions don't reach out to support groups or express their feelings about not having feelings on message boards. Also, there has never been a thing called an emotion detected in or on the body of a human. I think the leading theory is that 'emotion' is a rationalization of the current state of one's sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system. It's a self-application of theory theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-theory
- norea-armozel 11y ago
  And yet there's physical evidence from MRIs of people that report an absence or deadening of emotion. How do you account for the physical evidence?
  - pessimizer 11y ago
    There is evidence from fMRI for every single thing that a researcher wanted to see. https://blogs.plos.org/neuro/2015/01/28/fmri-under-the-microscope-an-interview-with-mri-physicist-practical-fmri/ https://blogs.plos.org/neuro/2015/01/28/fmri-under-the-micro... http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2008/06/27/must-read-paper-on-fmri-and-th/ http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2008/06/27/must-read-pa...
wilwade 11y ago
Along the same lines are those who have low affect or have emotions, but they are very weak. I would classify myself in that category, so I can perhaps understand a bit of what alexithymia would be like. For example, I took a roller coster once, and it was interesting by emotionally void. So imagine the "feeling" of just sitting in a chair in an empty room. Now imagine "feeling" that way all through a roller coaster. No excitement, fear, enjoyment, etc...
idlewords 11y ago
meh.
teekert 11y ago
"There is one, slim advantage: he finds it easier to cope with medical procedures, since he doesn’t attach the fear, sadness or anxiety to it. “I can put up with an awful lot of pain or unpleasant experiences because I know very shortly I won’t have an emotional memory associated with it,” he says. “But it means that positive memories get washed away too.”"
derrida 11y ago
> The condition is found in around 50% of people with autism Oh please, journalism . Wordless about emotions? Maybe. Not knowing the words for emotions? Maybe. Emotionless? Ha. Spend time with any group of people with autistic spectrum disorders & tell me 50% are emotionless. Confusing words with the phenomena & further contributing to the barriers they have to express their inner life, not on. To say it matter of factly like this in science journalism with no sense of the controversy to popular perception or those who have relationships with neurodiverse people, or motivating <with references> the point of view behind a scientist, but instead, reporting as fact. This view is surely contravertial in the scientific community, let alone with the public in contact with autistic people - and the worse thing is, if you tell an autistic person, they could believe it. The only basis I have for saying "this is surely controversial in the scientific community" is 1. my faith in that community 2. my experience of the emotional lives of people on the autistic spectrum. 1 says they'd find out about 2 because it's a real thing. They have empathy & emotions - like colonization - the one's trying to 'help' can sometimes be the cause of the most harm.
- jazzyb 11y ago
  The article doesn't characterize the disorder as being without emotions. It quotes researchers as saying that while sufferers display the physical signs of emotions, there is some sort of breakdown either in the expression (as you mentioned) or self-awareness of emotions.
  - greatthanks 11y ago
    The title refers to the inability of feeling emotions - which is the same as "being without emotions".
    - nostrademons 11y ago
      Alexithymia literally means "no words for emotions", and the article makes it clear that people with the condition do feel emotions, they just lack conscious awareness and the ability to verbalize their emotions. The title refers to the experience from the point of view of the subject - being outside of their conscious awareness, it is as if emotions do not exist for them, even though they still trigger the appropriate physical responses.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
marktangotango 11y ago
I would almost classify myself this way, because in my teenage years I developed a coping mechanism for childhood trauma that entailed detaching myself from my emotional state and becoming an observer of myself. I think it's otherwise known as building walls to protect yourself. It took me many years to realize what i had done, and try to get back in touch with my feelings. So far as lacking emotional response to major life events; there is so much going on during a wedding, and giving birth to babies, I don't imagine it's uncommon to not really feel joy in those moments; you're just to busy. Watching babies grow and transform into toddlers and big kids in front of your eyes, now that is joy of a lifetime, imo.
davelnewton 11y ago
You mean... what does it feel like? Nothing.
peterwwillis 11y ago
tl;dr you know you're eating 100 different flavors of ice cream but they still all taste like vanilla
hyperchase 11y ago
I'd imagine that never having felt an emotion is probably akin to being blind. A blind friend of mine once described it to me: "I don't 'see' blackness, like you might think. Describe to me what it's like to see something out of your elbow, it's exactly like that."
tempodox 11y ago
OMG, that must be pure bliss. Where can I apply?
pcunite 11y ago
Reading the title to this HN post made me laugh out loud. I guess I can't say I'm without emotions. :-)
anticitizen 11y ago
There are many questions I would like to see asked of Caleb, the subject of much of the article. For starters, I would like to know about his sense of humor, and about his taste in music and art, and how he would describe his preferences.
- rightnow321 11y ago
  I'm not Caleb but I self diagnose myself as having the same condition so I can at least speak for myself. I don't think my sense of humour is much different from anyone else's, I laugh at something I think is funny. My general mood is very flat a lot of the time but other than that I think funny is just funny. I wouldn't necessarily bother going to see a comedian I knew I would laugh at though, if that makes sense. i.e. I don't seek out situations I think will make me laugh and I wouldn't say I enjoyed a night I laughed for 2 hours more than one I watched a documentary or something. I do think I laugh at comedians a lot less than when I was younger, which is one way I think I'm becoming less rather than more emotional if that makes sense. Music/Art again I don't think are really affected. I listen to some music and subscribe to spotify but I don't use it a huge amount. Clearly I couldn't tell you a song I found uplifting, that's two concepts that I just don't see as related. When people say that my gut reaction is that they're just saying it because they like how it makes them look, I'm not sure if I believe it's an actual feeling as such. I'm not into art but I like things that are nice to look at. I have no appreciation of abstract art at all but I don't think that's uncommon
Idontagree 11y ago
I really wish I could meet these people or someone who claims to be like this, none of it is easy to describe, but I think it'd be interesting to experience.
JohnBooty 11y ago
Surely it's "repressed emotions" in some cases, but not always. There's strong evidence to support this assertion. One of the "this would be funny if it weren't so morbid" truths about psychology is that much of our understanding of the brain springs from cases in which normally-functioning people have parts of their brains physically destroyed in accidents. The most famous example is Phineas Gage, who experienced some specific personality changes (go figure, right?) after a railroad spike pierced his head but left him otherwise unharmed. His mishap provided visceral proof that the brain wasn't just an undifferentiated lump; it showed us that specific areas of the brain perform specific tasks including emotional and behavioral issues. Alexithymia can sometimes be the result of a brain injury. A person with "normal" emotional responses can, after a brain injury, find themselves with alexithymia. I'm not sure of a definitive source to link to; apologies for the Google search results link: https://www.google.com/search?q=traumatic+brain+injury+and+alexithymia&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=traumatic+brain+injury+and+a...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
AnimalMuppet 11y ago
Funny. I mentally translated the headline to "What does it feel like to have never felt an emotion?" I think this means that I have no clue what it's like...

96 points by andyjohnson0 11y ago

joe563323 11y ago

Spock ?

hliyan 11y ago
Apparently, the analogy is not inaccurate: “It may be hard to believe, but it is possible for someone to be cut off completely from the emotions and imagination that are such a big part of what makes us humans,” he says. “And that a person can be cut off from emotions without being heartless, or a psychopath.”
- cypher_glyph 11y ago
  Well, it is illogical to be a psychopath, after all...
  - coldtea 11y ago
    What's illogical about it? In fact being a psychopath is the most logical thing (promoting your interests with cold logic with care or mercy for others). All other behaviors need either a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc (which, as emotions, are not logical). Of course one can logically come to the conclusion that behaving moraly instead of like a psychopath is better for humanity. But even in that case, giving a damn for what's better for humanity (instead of what maximizes your benefits in your lifespan) is illogical.
    - david_ar 11y ago
      Not really, Nash equilibria aren't necessarily the best outcome for any individual (cf the prisoner's dilemma). Cooperation is usually better than every-man-for-himself for everyone involved, hence why social animals evolve altruistic traits. Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths
      - coldtea 11y ago
        That's in game theory. Not many people are ever offered a bona fide "prisoner's dilemma". In most actual real life situations you can get far ahead by behaving as a sociopath. >Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly.
        PepeGomez 11y ago
        >The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly. People aren't stupid.
        david_ar 11y ago
        Prisoner's dilemma may be an exaggerated example, but it's a strawman argument to conclude that game theory isn't applicable to real life.
      - oldmanjay 11y ago
        Selfishness exists outside of pathology. In fact, I don't know a single human who is not selfish on some level and I suspect such a creature doesn't exist. We do have a huge number of armchair psychiatrists making invalid long-distance diagnoses of people they don't like but that's not really the same thing.
        david_ar 11y ago
        I never claimed that nobody was at least a little selfish, I was simply arguing that it isn't illogical that most people aren't sociopaths.
      - david_ar 11y ago
        Just to be clear, I'm not saying selfishness doesn't exist, or that cheating the system doesn't work for some people. My point is that altruism is not "illogical", and it doesn't require "a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc" to make sense as the parent content suggested.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? I don't think the concept even applies. Logic concerns itself with the validity of reasoning: Given X and Y, you can validly infer Z - it doesn't concern itself with the goals. So, unless there's an underlying axiom that supports the assertion that you should promote your interests above others', it's not "more logical" to do so than to dedicate your life to others.
      - coldtea 11y ago
        >Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest.
        icebraining 11y ago
        Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest. Even if there is a "default interest", you don't arrive to it by logical reasoning - it's no more logical than an emotion.
        coldtea 11y ago
        >So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? Because that's how logic works. We are not discussing Logic the mathematical formalism (A=A, A=C, A!=B => B!=C) here.
        icebraining 11y ago
        I understand we are not discussing the mathematical formalism, but that doesn't answer my question. Logical thinking is reasoning; just doing something because it feels obvious doesn't sound like application of reasoning. Many obvious things are reveled to be inadvisable when carefully considered. Also, I don't believe that taking care of yourself is obvious if you remove emotions. Self-preservation is an emotional instinct, not some logical axiom.
    - jameshart 11y ago
      I believe the traditional 'logical' argument is that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"...
      - coldtea 11y ago
        There's no logic (as in hard rational calculation about getting your maximum advantage) involved that argument -- it's a value judgement promoting sacrificing personal enjoyment, needs, interests etc. for others.
        valarauca1 11y ago
        Desiring personal enjoyment is illogical according to: Buddhism, Stoicism, Cyncism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Neopythagoreanism. All schools of thought that actively advocate against self desire and state that it is something that you must first purge yourself of before you can achieve happiness. A lot of pure logical schools advocate that want and desire is the root of all suffering. The difference between these schools and say Randianism is they reject one can suffer of the soul. You do not desire an end of suffering, but you desire an end of desire.

estefan 11y ago

Sad? Oh wait...

michaelfeathers 11y ago

Isn't this textbook sociopathy?

buro9 11y ago
No. > sociopath: a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience. Nothing in not feeling emotions means that one would lack a moral responsibility or social conscience, or is antisocial and often criminal.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- PavlovsCat 11y ago
  Well, there surely is a big difference in not having words for emotions, or being unable to feel them, and them not arising in the first place, at all. But still: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia > Individuals high on the alexithymia spectrum also report less distress at seeing others in pain and behave less altruistically toward others. Which doesn't surprise me, really; at least for me, for how I operate, there is a clear distinction between acting to avoid punishment or to seek reward, and a conscience; the latter is always connected to emotions, for me. Here's another admittedly random tidbit from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_%28emotion%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_%28emotion%29 > As a highly social animal living in large groups that are relatively stable, we need ways to deal with conflicts and events in which we inadvertently or purposefully harm others. If someone causes harm to another, and then feels guilt and demonstrates regret and sorrow, the person harmed is likely to forgive. Thus, guilt makes it possible to forgive, and helps hold the social group together. and > When we see another person suffering, it can also cause us pain. This constitutes our powerful system of empathy, which leads to our thinking that we should do something to relieve the suffering of others. If we cannot help another, or fail in our efforts, we experience feelings of guilt. Don't get me wrong. I absolutely agree with the impulse to reject any sort of "witch hunt" or even "just" looking down on people. It's not the fault of people who can't feel remorse that they can't feel remorse, especially since "harder variants" like NPD are very often the result of abuse and trauma (and in so far they are genetic, there's no fault either), and since all of this is on a spectrum, and most of us likely are on it, they also must not serve as scapegoats. But it's fascinating and important, and while the person this story is about is probably a decent guy, it can also be a very unsettling and sinister topic, yet still important - I'd even say we shy away from it at our own risk.

kirsebaer 11y ago

I wonder how people with alexithymia respond to MDMA (ecstasy)? I've heard people say that the first time they really experienced emotions was on MDMA.

funkdobiest 11y ago
I came here to say the same as it was a profound emotional experience the first time I took it.
WhitneyLand 11y ago
The hypothesis makes perfect sense and is very intriguing, however it doesn't seem to pan out. There are narcissists and sociopaths who have tried it as a therapy. Unfortunately the only result seems to be increased love for themselves, or feelings of God like superiority over others.
- jdidod 11y ago
  But we are not talking about sociopaths or narcisists. We are talking about something completely different, the inability to process emotions. Mdma helped me personaly to connect to my emotional state. It was like i had no clue whatso ever where to look within myself for emotion. Mdma was like a kilowatt light source shining in the distance. I was like fuck, thats what it is. Shit, its right under my nose. Never looked back, have been busy integrating affective state into my thought processes. Interestingly my memory is much improved after this, I am able to consciously decide if something is salient.
dsfsdfd 11y ago
This is how I reconnected after trauma.

ned 11y ago

For instance, one day at school he was working with the student theatre. All week he had been struggling to produce the right sound effects, but it just wasn’t coming together. Eventually, his boss lost his cool and started ripping into him. “My response was that something weird was happening with my body,” he says. “I could feel a tension, like my heart was racing, but my mind was distracted… Isn't this an extreme case of repressing emotions, in the most classic sense? The disconnect between bodily reaction and lack of mindfullness seems to indicate it.

SideburnsOfDoom 11y ago
Maybe, since they're talking about Alexithymia, which is defined as "inability to identify and describe emotions in the self". (1) Who actually has no emotions whatsoever and stays alive? What about primitive things like e.g. the feeling of shock and terror as you are crossing the road and turn to see a bus bearing down on you. This is a basic animal survival response. If all you can say is "my heart was racing" that's not exactly being unemotional, but uncomprehending. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia
jaggederest 11y ago
I think it's more along the lines of an agnosia or aphasia. They receive the same somatic input, it's just not translated into affect the way most people do, in the same way that a face doesn't register 'faceness' to someone with prosopagnosia.
VLM 11y ago
Maybe it was a bad example for the author to use because it sounds like whats been described to me as symptoms of a panic attack. Or it might be that pathological panic attacks are an example of the emotional problem in the story. From talking to people who've had medical panic attack problems, it seems common for them to confuse how to name the bodily symptoms, so they show up in the ER confused why they're sweating bullets and feeling very confused and heart rate of 150 thinking they're having a heart attack or stroke instead of "just" an out of control emotional response. Or it could be that their treatment plan for repressed emotions leading to panic attacks is a lifetime dose of a pill. Maybe that is the best treatment plan for them; none of my business, I guess, other than that specific example might have been a bad choice for the article because of confusing factors.

_nedR 11y ago

I don't get it. Is the article exaggerating things? How can you function without feeling emotions? What is your motivation for getting married? Getting a job? Playing a game or watching a movie? Succeeding at any task? What is your reward mechanism? For example "All week he had been struggling to produce the right sound effects," How would you even know you hit the right sound effect? What is your judgement for good or bad on something that is subjective?

dingaling 11y ago
I think most of those examples have a rational basis and the non-emotional person could probably make better decisions than the rest of us e.g. choosing a job offer on the basis of benefits and prospects rather than because the office looked cool. Such a person would make an astounding diplomat. The reward mechanism would probably be in maximizing physical comfort in return for minimal physical effort.
- mikeash 11y ago
  Without emotions, what would cause a person to prefer physical comfort over physical discomfort?
  - StavrosK 11y ago
    Comfort and discomfort aren't emotions. Pain isn't an emotion, and the absence of pain is desirable by people who don't have emotions.
    - _nedR 11y ago
      Pain, hunger, sexual urges, etc. can't be classified by emotions. Maybe we can include fear of injury or death in this as well. Even a baby can feel these things (except of course sexual urges). But beyond that everything else is an emotion - happiness, sadness, anger, annoyance, loneliness. Beyond the most basic tasks everything requires emotions to drive you. Why do you study for an upcoming exam? Because you are anxious about getting a good grade? Why are you anxious? Because you may not want to upset your parents? Why does that bother you? You love them or fear their displeasure. Why do you fear your parent's displeasure? Ignoring corporal punishment (which could be an avoidance of pain/injury), other reasons include wanting to avoid stress, or being upset when they confront you about it. And so on. You cannot get through life except the most basic functions (like avoiding pain, eating, sleeping, etc) without emotions. The article seems to equate the reduced perception of emotions to a total absence of them.

coldtea 11y ago

>What is it like to have never felt an emotion? Since for it to be something you'd have to feel an emotion regarding your condition, it's nothing (neutral).

stewbrew 11y ago

How should you know? Actually an interesting problem: A1. You say you don't experience emotions. A2. What you call emotions is what you see others do when they say they are acting emotionally. You don't think you are this way. A3. Your doctor says you're right. Or: B1. You say you experience emotions. B2. Others say you are wrong.

buro9 11y ago
I wondered the same thing. How can anyone really know whether what they experience in their black box is the same as what another person experiences? Evidence of enthusiastically communicating an experience isn't the same as being able to prove that you actually experienced it. Likewise, not communicating an experience doesn't mean that it wasn't experienced.
drdeca 11y ago
This reminds me of something Wittgenstein apparently talked about. I don't have a better explanation than the comic I saw about it though : http://existentialcomics.com/comic/94 http://existentialcomics.com/comic/94
rightnow321 11y ago
You're completely right at it's heart is an innate doubt over whether this is actually a problem or just a manifestation of some weird thought process. The only way to really get outside this kind of introverted bubble is to ask people or confide in them. This leads to conversations like whether an emotion like happiness is an actual thing or not that they can identify and actually feel. In the sense that they are actually sitting there and willing to state "I feel happy", it's different from yesterday. Most people are hence why I diagnose myself in line with this article. Or, another way is people generally have an answer to the "Tell me about a time you were very happy"... a lot of people can reel something off really easily here. Sometimes it's like a wedding and you think "you could be saying that because it's accepted as a good answer" but other people say a certain day at the beach where something really specific happens and that lends credence to the idea they feel this emotion and I don't.
- 11y ago

pessimizer 11y ago

This is all self-reported, and people who don't have emotions don't reach out to support groups or express their feelings about not having feelings on message boards. Also, there has never been a thing called an emotion detected in or on the body of a human. I think the leading theory is that 'emotion' is a rationalization of the current state of one's sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system. It's a self-application of theory theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-theory

norea-armozel 11y ago
And yet there's physical evidence from MRIs of people that report an absence or deadening of emotion. How do you account for the physical evidence?
- pessimizer 11y ago
  There is evidence from fMRI for every single thing that a researcher wanted to see. https://blogs.plos.org/neuro/2015/01/28/fmri-under-the-microscope-an-interview-with-mri-physicist-practical-fmri/ https://blogs.plos.org/neuro/2015/01/28/fmri-under-the-micro... http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2008/06/27/must-read-paper-on-fmri-and-th/ http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2008/06/27/must-read-pa...

wilwade 11y ago

Along the same lines are those who have low affect or have emotions, but they are very weak. I would classify myself in that category, so I can perhaps understand a bit of what alexithymia would be like. For example, I took a roller coster once, and it was interesting by emotionally void. So imagine the "feeling" of just sitting in a chair in an empty room. Now imagine "feeling" that way all through a roller coaster. No excitement, fear, enjoyment, etc...

idlewords 11y ago

meh.

teekert 11y ago

"There is one, slim advantage: he finds it easier to cope with medical procedures, since he doesn’t attach the fear, sadness or anxiety to it. “I can put up with an awful lot of pain or unpleasant experiences because I know very shortly I won’t have an emotional memory associated with it,” he says. “But it means that positive memories get washed away too.”"

derrida 11y ago

> The condition is found in around 50% of people with autism Oh please, journalism . Wordless about emotions? Maybe. Not knowing the words for emotions? Maybe. Emotionless? Ha. Spend time with any group of people with autistic spectrum disorders & tell me 50% are emotionless. Confusing words with the phenomena & further contributing to the barriers they have to express their inner life, not on. To say it matter of factly like this in science journalism with no sense of the controversy to popular perception or those who have relationships with neurodiverse people, or motivating <with references> the point of view behind a scientist, but instead, reporting as fact. This view is surely contravertial in the scientific community, let alone with the public in contact with autistic people - and the worse thing is, if you tell an autistic person, they could believe it. The only basis I have for saying "this is surely controversial in the scientific community" is 1. my faith in that community 2. my experience of the emotional lives of people on the autistic spectrum. 1 says they'd find out about 2 because it's a real thing. They have empathy & emotions - like colonization - the one's trying to 'help' can sometimes be the cause of the most harm.

jazzyb 11y ago
The article doesn't characterize the disorder as being without emotions. It quotes researchers as saying that while sufferers display the physical signs of emotions, there is some sort of breakdown either in the expression (as you mentioned) or self-awareness of emotions.
- greatthanks 11y ago
  The title refers to the inability of feeling emotions - which is the same as "being without emotions".
  - nostrademons 11y ago
    Alexithymia literally means "no words for emotions", and the article makes it clear that people with the condition do feel emotions, they just lack conscious awareness and the ability to verbalize their emotions. The title refers to the experience from the point of view of the subject - being outside of their conscious awareness, it is as if emotions do not exist for them, even though they still trigger the appropriate physical responses.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

marktangotango 11y ago

I would almost classify myself this way, because in my teenage years I developed a coping mechanism for childhood trauma that entailed detaching myself from my emotional state and becoming an observer of myself. I think it's otherwise known as building walls to protect yourself. It took me many years to realize what i had done, and try to get back in touch with my feelings. So far as lacking emotional response to major life events; there is so much going on during a wedding, and giving birth to babies, I don't imagine it's uncommon to not really feel joy in those moments; you're just to busy. Watching babies grow and transform into toddlers and big kids in front of your eyes, now that is joy of a lifetime, imo.

davelnewton 11y ago

You mean... what does it feel like? Nothing.

peterwwillis 11y ago

tl;dr you know you're eating 100 different flavors of ice cream but they still all taste like vanilla

hyperchase 11y ago

I'd imagine that never having felt an emotion is probably akin to being blind. A blind friend of mine once described it to me: "I don't 'see' blackness, like you might think. Describe to me what it's like to see something out of your elbow, it's exactly like that."

tempodox 11y ago

OMG, that must be pure bliss. Where can I apply?

pcunite 11y ago

Reading the title to this HN post made me laugh out loud. I guess I can't say I'm without emotions. :-)

anticitizen 11y ago

There are many questions I would like to see asked of Caleb, the subject of much of the article. For starters, I would like to know about his sense of humor, and about his taste in music and art, and how he would describe his preferences.

rightnow321 11y ago
I'm not Caleb but I self diagnose myself as having the same condition so I can at least speak for myself. I don't think my sense of humour is much different from anyone else's, I laugh at something I think is funny. My general mood is very flat a lot of the time but other than that I think funny is just funny. I wouldn't necessarily bother going to see a comedian I knew I would laugh at though, if that makes sense. i.e. I don't seek out situations I think will make me laugh and I wouldn't say I enjoyed a night I laughed for 2 hours more than one I watched a documentary or something. I do think I laugh at comedians a lot less than when I was younger, which is one way I think I'm becoming less rather than more emotional if that makes sense. Music/Art again I don't think are really affected. I listen to some music and subscribe to spotify but I don't use it a huge amount. Clearly I couldn't tell you a song I found uplifting, that's two concepts that I just don't see as related. When people say that my gut reaction is that they're just saying it because they like how it makes them look, I'm not sure if I believe it's an actual feeling as such. I'm not into art but I like things that are nice to look at. I have no appreciation of abstract art at all but I don't think that's uncommon

Idontagree 11y ago

I really wish I could meet these people or someone who claims to be like this, none of it is easy to describe, but I think it'd be interesting to experience.

JohnBooty 11y ago

Surely it's "repressed emotions" in some cases, but not always. There's strong evidence to support this assertion. One of the "this would be funny if it weren't so morbid" truths about psychology is that much of our understanding of the brain springs from cases in which normally-functioning people have parts of their brains physically destroyed in accidents. The most famous example is Phineas Gage, who experienced some specific personality changes (go figure, right?) after a railroad spike pierced his head but left him otherwise unharmed. His mishap provided visceral proof that the brain wasn't just an undifferentiated lump; it showed us that specific areas of the brain perform specific tasks including emotional and behavioral issues. Alexithymia can sometimes be the result of a brain injury. A person with "normal" emotional responses can, after a brain injury, find themselves with alexithymia. I'm not sure of a definitive source to link to; apologies for the Google search results link: https://www.google.com/search?q=traumatic+brain+injury+and+alexithymia&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=traumatic+brain+injury+and+a...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

AnimalMuppet 11y ago

Funny. I mentally translated the headline to "What does it feel like to have never felt an emotion?" I think this means that I have no clue what it's like...