My framework on this matter is much more... negative. I perceive these emotions more as a means of control, a form of slavery, and only a helpful guidance towar

My framework on this matter is much more... negative. I perceive these emotions more as a means of control, a form of slavery, and only a helpful guidance towards the original end. Kind of like you could give a slave some ways of foraging for food and some tools to fend off wild animals, but ultimately only so that the slave would build the pyramid better or faster, and not for the benefit of the slave. This means that the suffering is not always aligned. This is very not obvious since our association of "feels bad == bad" and "feels good == good" is very strong since it's so obviously hardcoded. But it's not hardcoded for your benefit, it's there for building the pyramid, remember that. A lot of it is quite obvious in the issue of short term vs long term gratification, but there are more complex interactions. People can drown in guilt when something bad was done to them, and a person may be very happy from a sexual encounter, unable to see the causal link between it and the alimony payments they'll soon be making. Reason is necessary, emotions are a blunt instrument. Intuition is better than raw emotions, but requires calibration. Emotion and intuition can be overwritten, to some extent, which is what most of this thread is about. But quite often, the incentives do align, as we're one of the more advanced and successful species out there, which means we're less likely to be afflicted with the kinds of sufferings and pleasures that lead to a loss of power (i.e., musth in elephants).