3 ms·

Tangent, but: Emotions can't be shitty. You can miscalibrate your emotional responses to situations, much as you can sear your conscience. But the emotions t

Tangent, but: Emotions can't be shitty. You can miscalibrate your emotional responses to situations, much as you can sear your conscience. But the emotions themselves - the full range are valid human feelings, from fury to transcendent joy.

robertlagrant 5y ago
"valid" seems sort of weasel-wordy here.
- NateEag 5y ago
  Okay, I'll phrase it more strongly: Emotions as such are good, from sorrow to rage to joy. Each one is a good response to some situations, as far as I can tell. Your emotional response can be misplaced, so that you experience an inappropriate emotional in some situations. As noted elsewhere in the thread, you can also be inspired by your emotions to inappropriate (and just terrible) behavior. The emotions themselves, though, are not shitty. Recognizing them and understanding where they're coming from can be tremendously helpful in aligning your actions with reality and your own values, and even in discovering what your own values are. I share this perspective not out of a sense of superiority but in the hope that it helps someone else avoid my mistakes.
  - robertlagrant 5y ago
    I don't see the point in saying emotions are automatically good, but also inappropriate. This just seems like a segregation of two concepts that don't need separating. E.g. saying "I think people of type X are bad so I feel hatred towards them" is a good emotion but misplaced, vs is a bad emotion? I don't see the useful distinction.
    - NateEag 5y ago
      People often try to eliminate emotions from their lives, whether some specific ones or all of them. It's called "repression" and it can really mess you up. I don't mean that emotional responses are automatically good - I mean that emotions, as abstract entities, are inherently good. I'm not so sure I'd call "hate" an emotion, so I'll try a different example. If I'm angry at someone because they told me I wrote a buffer overflow (and I actually did), that's an unreasonable and unhealthy response. The fact that I feel anger over it should impel me to introspection and working out why I'm angry over useful technical feedback. From there, I can move on to personal change so that I'm no longer inclined to be angry about good, helpful input. If I'm angry at someone because they sexually assaulted my wife, that's a healthy anger response. They've mistreated her horribly and my anger on her behalf should push me to protect her and seek justice. How exactly I act on that anger matters, though - physically intervening so they cannot continue to hurt my wife then calling the police would be good. Pulling out a pistol and shooting them would not. Does that clarify my thoughts at all?
      - robertlagrant 5y ago
        I appreciate the explanation, but it doesn't really seem to justify making the distinction. Calling all emotions axiomatically good, but also saying that they are "unhealthy" if they're "inappropriate responses" still seems unnecessary.
jfengel 5y ago
The effect that emotions have on their behaviors can be shitty. Worse, they can be self-reinforcing, such that their emotions cause them to seek out ways to deepen that emotional state, resulting in an increase in shitty behavior. Those feelings are valid, but the effect they have on other people is not. Dealing with valid emotions in a way that doesn't harm other people can be incredibly difficult, especially when those emotions put harm front and center. Our emotions are valid, but our behaviors are not. It behooves us to mind our emotional states when they cause problems for other people. Often, that will coincidentally bring about an emotional state we prefer as well, but often with unpleasant transitions.
- NateEag 5y ago
  Yup, I agree with all of that. I didn't say anything about behaviors, because it was emotions that were labeled as shitty. I didn't bother to go into the distinction between emotions and the bad behavior they often give rise to, so thanks for explaining that.

robertlagrant 5y ago

"valid" seems sort of weasel-wordy here.

NateEag 5y ago
Okay, I'll phrase it more strongly: Emotions as such are good, from sorrow to rage to joy. Each one is a good response to some situations, as far as I can tell. Your emotional response can be misplaced, so that you experience an inappropriate emotional in some situations. As noted elsewhere in the thread, you can also be inspired by your emotions to inappropriate (and just terrible) behavior. The emotions themselves, though, are not shitty. Recognizing them and understanding where they're coming from can be tremendously helpful in aligning your actions with reality and your own values, and even in discovering what your own values are. I share this perspective not out of a sense of superiority but in the hope that it helps someone else avoid my mistakes.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  I don't see the point in saying emotions are automatically good, but also inappropriate. This just seems like a segregation of two concepts that don't need separating. E.g. saying "I think people of type X are bad so I feel hatred towards them" is a good emotion but misplaced, vs is a bad emotion? I don't see the useful distinction.
  - NateEag 5y ago
    People often try to eliminate emotions from their lives, whether some specific ones or all of them. It's called "repression" and it can really mess you up. I don't mean that emotional responses are automatically good - I mean that emotions, as abstract entities, are inherently good. I'm not so sure I'd call "hate" an emotion, so I'll try a different example. If I'm angry at someone because they told me I wrote a buffer overflow (and I actually did), that's an unreasonable and unhealthy response. The fact that I feel anger over it should impel me to introspection and working out why I'm angry over useful technical feedback. From there, I can move on to personal change so that I'm no longer inclined to be angry about good, helpful input. If I'm angry at someone because they sexually assaulted my wife, that's a healthy anger response. They've mistreated her horribly and my anger on her behalf should push me to protect her and seek justice. How exactly I act on that anger matters, though - physically intervening so they cannot continue to hurt my wife then calling the police would be good. Pulling out a pistol and shooting them would not. Does that clarify my thoughts at all?
    - robertlagrant 5y ago
      I appreciate the explanation, but it doesn't really seem to justify making the distinction. Calling all emotions axiomatically good, but also saying that they are "unhealthy" if they're "inappropriate responses" still seems unnecessary.

jfengel 5y ago

The effect that emotions have on their behaviors can be shitty. Worse, they can be self-reinforcing, such that their emotions cause them to seek out ways to deepen that emotional state, resulting in an increase in shitty behavior. Those feelings are valid, but the effect they have on other people is not. Dealing with valid emotions in a way that doesn't harm other people can be incredibly difficult, especially when those emotions put harm front and center. Our emotions are valid, but our behaviors are not. It behooves us to mind our emotional states when they cause problems for other people. Often, that will coincidentally bring about an emotional state we prefer as well, but often with unpleasant transitions.

NateEag 5y ago
Yup, I agree with all of that. I didn't say anything about behaviors, because it was emotions that were labeled as shitty. I didn't bother to go into the distinction between emotions and the bad behavior they often give rise to, so thanks for explaining that.