J. M. Casey wrote:
>But when we try to stanch the emotion we create an internal conflict that
>blocks our mentation. I'd suggest that what you're after is full,
congruent >emotion -- flow, it's been called, among other things -- so that
your >meta-emotions function in line with your primary emotions. It's a
simple >matter, though not always an easy one, to program in this adjustment.
That is an interesting point. The concern with any sort of psychological adjustment, however, is the possibility of emotional repression. It is always possible to consciously ignore an emotion and act around it, whether or not it is a primary or secondary emotion. Unfortunately, this repression has a tendency to weigh heavily on our subconscious and ultimately affects our physical and mental well-being. The question is whether or not we can psychologically tune ourselves to feel unnecessary\undesirable emotions to a lesser extent without causing this emotional repression. As I mentioned in the original post, drugs don't seem to work (though I have never used any) in reducing the magnamity of undesirable emotions. What can? Or as Greg suggested, perhaps the whole spectrum of emotions which humans feel is truly necessary to our well-being both now and in the future.
>To date, what we haven't as a species been able to do is to learn to do
>things like this without a change in lifestyle, and I think that's the
allure >of technology. We can stay the same old slobs and also live to be a
hundred. >But I wouldn't have thought this had much to do with extropianism.
Point taken: far better to be proactive than reactive. As Gandhi reputedly said: "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
=================================================================> Kineticize your potential. http://www.extropy.com --------------------------------------------------------------------