Evolution of emotion
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Evolution of emotion
I was looking at the Wikipedia article "Evolution of Emotion". There was a table titled, "Expressed emotions and adaptive functions" comparing initial physiological functions with evolved communicative functions. It was claimed that for happiness, sadness and anger "more research needed".
I found this surprising, as the answers would not seem so difficult, even for me as a non scientist. I'd just like to run these past you ...
- Happiness would seem by nature to have initially been a general opening up of a healthy organism (an invitation to engage with its environment)
- Sadness, conversely, would be equivalent to closing up and withdrawal (to recoup energies)
- Anger involves an organism puffing itself up, trying to look bigger, or expending energy (to appear intimidating and ward off threats).
Does anyone have thoughts or expansion on this, yea or nay?
-
- Posts: 886
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
- Location: The Evening Star
Re: Evolution of emotion
The whole subject of scientific explanations of emotions is discussed a lot on these forums, with many people seemingly having strong objections to any attempt to analyze them in this way.
The most commonly cited example of an emotion which, arguably, defies analysis seems to be the nebulous concept of "love". Of course, it's easy to see how many aspects of this thing we call love would confer evolutionary advantages. But do you think it's likely that it is entirely explicable using the concept of evolutionary pressure? Many people, particularly those of a spiritual or religious nature, not only think the answer is "no" but seem to object even to the act of trying to do so. There seems to be a view that some concepts are cheapened even by attempted analysis. What do you think?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Evolution of emotion
Yes, some religious people object to anything to do with evolution, especially in relation to humans. I object to some people's views too. None of us can please everyone.
I don't come from a pure rationalist standpoint; I've had a couple of peak experiences in the past. However, there is clearly a pivotal and fascinating role for chemicals in life. A TED Talk: "The line between life and not-life" opened up a chemical path for life to me I'd not understood before. Fascinating stuff.
If we define love broadly as emotions that bring us together (be it romantic, platonic, spiritual, parental etc) then love, at its core is about connection. It's possible then that love is, at its root, a chemical reaction - "chemistry", as we tend to say. If that's the case, I wouldn't see it as undermining the value of love as we know it - no more that a tree is undermined by starting out as a seed.
We see love in other animals - dogs for instance. Even cats . When I was young my older sister's pet cockatoo became very attached to me in a edgy bird way that I believe was close enough to what we humans call love.
Emotion is a much more effective "mechanism of connection" than simple chemical or energetic attraction. Some animals will abandon their young due to disturbance of a nest or burrow, especially those who have many young at a time (less irreplaceable). However, almost no amount of disturbance will deter a higher order mammal with a long gestation period that loves her young.
It agree it's unbelievable the level of complexity that has been achieved over the last billion years (give or take), starting from single celled organisms. An entire sub-plot of the story of evolution can be told in the transition from non life chemicals to the first replicating life forms, which is a arguably a bigger step than the advent of multi-cellular animals. From there, higher and higher functions have emerged.
That makes us humans and other higher level creatures incredibly precious - we are born of billions of years of struggle in the lives and deaths of countless living things to reach this point of conscious awareness (so far). Arguably far more precious, rare an irreplaceable than if we were magicked out of the dust in an instant by an omnipotent supernatural agent.
Sorry for the late reply. I was right on the verge of posting when we had a blackout. So Merry Christmas
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: Evolution of emotion
Greta wrote: ↑December 16th, 2013, 9:25 pm Firstly, hi, I'm new here. Now that all the fuss and hullabaloo is out of the way ...
I was looking at the Wikipedia article "Evolution of Emotion". There was a table titled, "Expressed emotions and adaptive functions" comparing initial physiological functions with evolved communicative functions. It was claimed that for happiness, sadness and anger "more research needed".
I found this surprising, as the answers would not seem so difficult, even for me as a non scientist. I'd just like to run these past you ...
- Happiness would seem by nature to have initially been a general opening up of a healthy organism (an invitation to engage with its environment)
Why would you think that? Sometimes, I am quite happy when I am alone, and become less happy as soon as I encounter someone else. Walking alone in the woods, lost in thought, encountering someone else is often the last thing I want. As for my thoughts before the unwelcome encounter, they may or may not have much to do with my surroundings.
One could just as easily say that one wishes to be comforted by others. When I am sad, my dog seems to try to comfort me. And, when she does try that, she does comfort me. It is a very good feeling to be loved, when one sees that one is loved.
With anger, when I feel it, I do not generally want to show it. It is more that I want various things to happen. I want the object of my anger to no longer anger me. Mostly, it means I want the person to stop being a *******************************************.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Evolution of emotion
Opening up does not necessarily mean opening up to humans. It means opening up to your environment.
-
- Posts: 219
- Joined: March 27th, 2011, 8:03 am
Re: Evolution of emotion
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Evolution of emotion
That's because the humans interfere with your enjoyment of quiet time with the environment - to which you had opened up. I am exactly the same, unless it's a dog walker with a friendly dog :)Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pmGreta wrote: ↑December 16th, 2013, 9:25 pm Firstly, hi, I'm new here. Now that all the fuss and hullabaloo is out of the way ... :)
I was looking at the Wikipedia article "Evolution of Emotion". There was a table titled, "Expressed emotions and adaptive functions" comparing initial physiological functions with evolved communicative functions. It was claimed that for happiness, sadness and anger "more research needed".
I found this surprising, as the answers would not seem so difficult, even for me as a non scientist. I'd just like to run these past you ...
- Happiness would seem by nature to have initially been a general opening up of a healthy organism (an invitation to engage with its environment)
Why would you think that? Sometimes, I am quite happy when I am alone, and become less happy as soon as I encounter someone else. Walking alone in the woods, lost in thought, encountering someone else is often the last thing I want. As for my thoughts before the unwelcome encounter, they may or may not have much to do with my surroundings.
And I notice a LOT more of the bushland when I am in a good mood, rather than closed off in a poor mood, where one tends towards the kind of rumination that involved cycling the same damn mental static that's been buzzing around one's head for a lifetime.
As Alan said below, I was thinking in terms of basic emotions rather than more complex ones - the kinds of emotions that we share with reptiles.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pmOne could just as easily say that one wishes to be comforted by others. When I am sad, my dog seems to try to comfort me. And, when she does try that, she does comfort me. It is a very good feeling to be loved, when one sees that one is loved.
Meanwhile, one does not tend to muster a whole lotta love, or spiritual or peak experiences, when nauseated to the point of vomiting or diarrhoea. And, when you body is in such a state, one will want to retreat until the discomfort has calmed.
It's well established that most species will try to make themselves look bigger and more threatening when annoyed. Of course, in this modern world, less physically aggressive types will instead make their prose seem more threatening words than are often replaced by asterisks in this patchily prudish world. Your post turned out to be a practical example. Everything about your post says "Don't F with me". A puffer fish conveys the same message by inflating and presenting potential attackers with spikes.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pmWith anger, when I feel it, I do not generally want to show it. It is more that I want various things to happen. I want the object of my anger to no longer anger me. Mostly, it means I want the person to stop being a *******************************************.
In general, it not a good strategy to appear vulnerable when under threat, unless it's a ruse or one is hoping to be seen as too harmless to attack.
Bottom line is that emotions started out as simple heath and wellbeing indicators. They are like subroutines. You have an emotion and a suite of standard body responses occur.
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: Evolution of emotion
Greta wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 7:49 pmThat's because the humans interfere with your enjoyment of quiet time with the environment - to which you had opened up.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pm
Why would you think that? Sometimes, I am quite happy when I am alone, and become less happy as soon as I encounter someone else. Walking alone in the woods, lost in thought, encountering someone else is often the last thing I want. As for my thoughts before the unwelcome encounter, they may or may not have much to do with my surroundings.
I don't think that is always the case when I am walking alone in the woods. Sometimes, I am focused on my surroundings (in which case your description of what I am doing seems apt), and other times, I am focussed on things unrelated to what is around me, lost in thoughts that have nothing to do with what is around me (in which case your description of what I am doing does not seem apt).
Greta wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 7:49 pm I am exactly the same, unless it's a dog walker with a friendly dog :)
And I notice a LOT more of the bushland when I am in a good mood, rather than closed off in a poor mood, where one tends towards the kind of rumination that involved cycling the same damn mental static that's been buzzing around one's head for a lifetime.
As Alan said below, I was thinking in terms of basic emotions rather than more complex ones - the kinds of emotions that we share with reptiles.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pm
One could just as easily say that one wishes to be comforted by others. When I am sad, my dog seems to try to comfort me. And, when she does try that, she does comfort me. It is a very good feeling to be loved, when one sees that one is loved.
Okay, my mistake. However, I am accustomed to thinking of happiness as something complex. Perhaps it is from having read too much Aristotle in my misspent youth.
Greta wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 7:49 pm Meanwhile, one does not tend to muster a whole lotta love, or spiritual or peak experiences, when nauseated to the point of vomiting or diarrhoea. And, when you body is in such a state, one will want to retreat until the discomfort has calmed.
It's well established that most species will try to make themselves look bigger and more threatening when annoyed. Of course, in this modern world, less physically aggressive types will instead make their prose seem more threatening words than are often replaced by asterisks in this patchily prudish world. Your post turned out to be a practical example. Everything about your post says "Don't F with me".Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pm
With anger, when I feel it, I do not generally want to show it. It is more that I want various things to happen. I want the object of my anger to no longer anger me. Mostly, it means I want the person to stop being a *******************************************.
Really? I would have thought that my post was not intimidating at all, that it was not threatening at all.
Greta wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 7:49 pm A puffer fish conveys the same message by inflating and presenting potential attackers with spikes.
In general, it not a good strategy to appear vulnerable when under threat, unless it's a ruse or one is hoping to be seen as too harmless to attack.
Bottom line is that emotions started out as simple heath and wellbeing indicators. They are like subroutines. You have an emotion and a suite of standard body responses occur.
Okay, now to try again with a response to your opening post. I think the key you are missing is this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_emotionA common view is that facial expressions initially served a non-communicative adaptive function.
That, I think, is the sort of thing they are looking for in the "Initial physiological function" column of the table. That also fits with the earlier statement:
So, they are looking for things that are non-communicative, like in the first example in the chart:The ideas found in his book on universality of emotions were intended to go against Sir Charles Bell's 1844 claim[3] that human facial muscles were created to give them the unique ability to express emotions.[2]
That is not a communicative function, but something else. But, to look at one of your examples, your response to the "anger" part is to tell us basically what is in the final column of the chart for anger, which is the later communicative function.Increased visual field and speed of eye movement from widened eyes
So, the question for the chart is, what non-communicative function is served by the expressions for happiness, sadness, and anger? They say more research is needed, and, certainly, if I were going to attempt to answer those questions, I would need to do more research than I have done.
-
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
- Location: canada
Re: Evolution of emotion
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Evolution of emotion
Yes, but "a quiet time with the environment" and a quiet time lost in one's own thoughts can each be interrupted by other hominids being around. Hence artists won't have others around as they create. Dogs and cats, though, don't seem to be an issue. When a human is around, one is subject to that person's judgement - whether that other wants to judge or not and whether you want to notice them or not. In base terms the potential for judgement translates to the potential for danger.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 9:46 pm I decided to read the article before replying, though it may well have changed since you read it years ago. I will reply to the particular things in your response to me, and then take another crack at responding to your original post. Of course, that reply may mean my remarks regarding your reply to me are irrelevant, but I will not let a little thing like that prevent me from doing as pleases me.
I don't think that is always the case when I am walking alone in the woods. Sometimes, I am focused on my surroundings (in which case your description of what I am doing seems apt), and other times, I am focussed on things unrelated to what is around me, lost in thoughts that have nothing to do with what is around me (in which case your description of what I am doing does not seem apt).Greta wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 7:49 pmThat's because the humans interfere with your enjoyment of quiet time with the environment - to which you had opened up.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pm
Why would you think that? Sometimes, I am quite happy when I am alone, and become less happy as soon as I encounter someone else. Walking alone in the woods, lost in thought, encountering someone else is often the last thing I want. As for my thoughts before the unwelcome encounter, they may or may not have much to do with my surroundings.
Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑October 11th, 2020, 11:04 pmDefinitely. I find that the light at the time of the walk can make a difference. There have been times when the gleam of sunshine through translucent leaves or off a spider's web brings me back to the here and now.Greta wrote: ↑November 17th, 2020, 7:49 pm I am exactly the same, unless it's a dog walker with a friendly dog :)
And I notice a LOT more of the bushland when I am in a good mood, rather than closed off in a poor mood, where one tends towards the kind of rumination that involved cycling the same damn mental static that's been buzzing around one's head for a lifetime.
- The Beast
- Posts: 1403
- Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm
Re: Evolution of emotion
-
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
- Location: canada
Re: Evolution of emotion
-
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: October 22nd, 2020, 2:22 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Alfred North Whitehead
- Location: canada
Re: Evolution of emotion
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Evolution of emotion
Humans are rather mind blowing when you think of it.popeye1945 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2021, 1:41 am Here is something that might require a little anaylisis, what happens when one loses the sense of self to the environment generally momentarily. I was working in the far north, a city boy, daylight twenty four hours a day, mind blowing vestas you can see forever, then it happens you are the vista in awe of yourself. Any thoughts?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023