I don't believe you, Daniel. I agree that emotion does not necessarily cloud
reason. The old Star Trek style opposition of reason and emotion is a poor
picture of reality. However, emotional responses *can* make it extremely
difficult to think rationally, while under their influence. When "wallowing"
in an emotion, I think for humans it's hard not to let it interfere with
reason. In some situations, the best thing is to realize that your ability
to think clearly and from various perspectives is currently impaired, and to
put off making decisions and judgments if possible. I think this is more
rational than convincing yourself that you can completely set aside
currently raging feelings to think perfectly rationally.
>> Emotions are valuable guides in decision making, and if carefuly examined can
>> help us to make subconscious evalutaions and correctly place our values.
>
>This I reject completely. Reason is man's only reliable guide to action.
>Having emotions is a good thing, just like having teeth, but they are not
>a means for discovering truth or making choices.
While I agree with some of the other points you make, and sympathize with
your general approach, I think you've missed QueenMUSE's point. She did not
say that emotions are *reliable* guides to action, only that there are
valuable guides. She's right. Emotions involve subsconsious judgments.
*Sometimes* these can tell us things that we have not consciously realized.
Denying this in favor of a view that only fully conscious reasoning provides
useful information flies in the face of evolution and psychology.
Nathaniel Branden explores these ideas in detail in his books. He started
with the simpler Randian model that you seem to advocate, but developed a
view that grants emotions more of a role, while still strongly advocating
conscious reason as the final arbiter.
Max
Max More, Ph.D.
more@extropy.org
http://www.primenet.com/~maxmore
President, Extropy Institute, Editor, Extropy
info-exi@extropy.org, http://www.extropy.org
(310) 398-0375