The Notion of Emotion

How does emotion function?

Emotion is such a common element of humanity, that its functionality is often taken for granted. But perhaps it should be more distinctly analysed and understood. Assuming emotion was developed through evolution, it should have a cause and effect, developed with a benefit for survival and reproduction. Happiness would be basically a positive reinforcement method, and sadness, fear and pain would basically be a negative reinforcement method.

Happiness would have developed to reward circumstances beneficial for survival and reproduction. Food that tastes good, causes enjoyment as reinforcement to continue eating more food which proved to be helpful to the species in those circumstances. Exercise causes a sensation of reward, as it makes the body healthier. Sex is bliss, as it enables reproduction and survival of the species. In some species, there’s a natural inclination of accomplishment, causing ambition and task motivation, since exploring or solving problems often results in finding easier methods to survive.

Sadness is naturally the effect of lacking something which would help survive. Loneliness would be a lack of assistance from others of the same species, in animals which survive better in a group. Fear is triggered by conditions which endanger the individual, causing high risk. Physical pain simply reinforces the individual to avoid causing themselves physical harm.

These emotions are natural and instinctual. They are pre programmed by genetics to be triggered by a range of circumstances. The boundaries of the range of circumstances which trigger emotional feedback, have been proven over many generations to repeatedly be beneficial for survival of that species. The brain is programmed for each emotion, to react to the range of circumstances, when sensory input detects a near enough resemblance to a situation which should be avoided or pursued. For eg. a person receives sensory input, via sight, of the resemblance of a large animal in a dark forest, and instinctively feels fear as encouragement to run. Or a person receives the sense of taste, resembling fruit, and naturally receives positive reinforcement of enjoyment, to cause them to pursue eating that food, which was proven to be beneficial for health.

In my previous post; Memory Priority, I touched on how emotion also has a significant influence on memory. Through an individual's’ subjective memory of experience in their lifetime, the emotional feedback triggers allow a customized set of reactions to particular circumstances. After an individual experiences scenarios where the emotional feedback is triggered, they are reinforced to avoid or pursue more detailed and specific sensory input linked with those circumstances. This is basically subconscious (and potentially conscious) memory of their experiences, where emotions have triggered positive or negative feedback, based on more specific factors.

Emotions are the default, built-in reinforcement triggers, developed over long periods of generations, for those broad ranges of circumstances, which can be triggered by basic resemblances detected by sensory input. Along with those instinctive, basic scenarios which cause emotional feedback, emotions also allow more specific and accurate reinforcement, as a result of subconscious memory, throughout an individual's experience. Emotion seems to be included in very practical and functional processes. The notion of which, should be quite useful to be understood.

Memory Priority

What effect does prioritizing memory have?

If someone conservatively and awarefully prioritizes memories, rather than allowing just any memories to be ranked for priority, naturally, would this cause a beneficial outcome?

The definition and comparison of “natural” vs “aware”, can be ambiguous. I’m basically referring to “awarefully” prioritizing memory, as consciously analysing the specific and relevant causes and effects. Whereas I’m referring to “naturally”, as a subconscious “reaction” with a less analysed or less actively considered understanding of detailed causes and effects regarding circumstances at hand.

What I mean by prioritizing memories, is considering experiences or information to be significant enough to be remembered more distinctly and easily. There are basically 2 methods (that I’m aware of) for information or experiences to be remembered more distinctly. 1 would be repetition, the other would be profound feedback linked with the memory.  

In the scenario of someone letting memories be prioritized naturally, the 1st method of memory, would cause memories to be prioritized simply by reoccuring circumstances in their life. A huge determining factor of this method, would be the individual's upbringing. Whatever fluke circumstances of life that someone happens to be born into, would cause repetition throughout their childhood. This repetition would then hypothetically cause a relevant degree of memory to be prioritized by whatever they were taught, and whatever actions they took repeatedly, as a child.

The 2nd method of naturally prioritized memory would hypothetically also be caused by fluke circumstances during their upbringing, but significantly influenced by emotional feedback to their circumstances. If the chemical and electrical function of emotion (potentially another sub-topic) is understood to be a feedback trigger linked to the memory of any given circumstance, then genetic and instinctual emotional subjection would be a huge factor in this 2nd method of memories being prioritized. If someone is born with a genetic disposition to be more profoundly influenced by emotional feedback in some way or another, then this should have a relevant impact on which memories are prioritized throughout their circumstantial upbringing. But fluke circumstances could also play a significant role in this methods influence (even without repetition). For eg, if someone has a traumatic experience as a child, such as being severely abused, then the natural emotional feedback would likely be profound fear of resembling factors to that circumstance.

In the scenario of someone awarefully and conservatively prioritizing memories, the 1st method of memory priority (being repetition), could hypothetically be altered and diverted to disregard unuseful repeated memories, and replace them with an intentional alternate repetition. By consciously analyzing effects of any given repeated action, someone can determine the degree of benefit of said effects. If an alternate memory (of experience or information), caused by repetition, is determined to be more preferable, the individual can intentionally cause repetition of that more beneficial memory of information or experience.

With the 2nd method being reinforcement triggers, someone could “awarefully” analyze specific details of any given circumstance, then determine more accurate effects, then cause more preferable feedback. Someone could consciously analyzes a situation, which would naturally seem insignificant, but comprehend detailed causes and effects which are actually important for a better resulting effect. After this comprehension, significant positive reinforcement can be linked with the circumstances (occuring by considering it relevant, and causing chemical positive reinforcement) which were understood in detail to be beneficial.

Or, in another case, of profound reinforcement being naturally triggered by a circumstance, conscious comprehension can determine the circumstances to not be so highly prioritized. With the eg. of trauma, awareful prioritization can allow a reduction of fear to factors resembling the scenario which caused the initial trauma. With distinguishment of differentials (as described here) within the traumatic situation, the individual can determine the specific details of that which caused the negative situation of trauma. Then, they can understand that factors which are resembling (but not precisely the same), would not cause the same negative traumatic situation to occur again. With this understanding comes a reduction of priority of those factors being negatively linked in memory, and therein reduction of fear of those resembling factors, which don’t actually cause the particular negative outcome.

As seems to be the tendency with most concepts, conscious “awareful” decisions seem to allow much more preferable and beneficial results, compared to “natural” or subconscious reactions. Consideration of prioritizing memories, is virtually understanding the details of preferable effects, and intentionally causing more of those preferable effects. For better results, consciously prioritize your memories!

Maximum Intellect

What is a theoretical maximum for intellect?

By intellect, I am referring to; ability to accurately predict the outcome to any given scenario. With a higher accuracy of prediction, the individual can predict which specific adjustments to the cause of the outcome, are required to cause the resulting effect to be the most preferred. This ability allows problem solving, by accurately predicting the outcome of a solution, and the necessary adjustments to cause that solution.

By that definition of intellect, the maximum would be relative to the information available. If considering a relative maximum intellect, then the intellect should be as accurate as possible at determining influencing factors (as I explain further, in; Differential Distinguishment), based on what information is accessible.

A low intellect level would make an inaccurate prediction of the outcome of any scenario, without considering the details of causes of factors within the scenario. By considering fewer and only basic factors at hand, the probability of making an accurate prediction, should be much less. Whereas the maximum intellect (without knowledge of all information), would distinguish all minor differentials within the scenario, for which it has knowledge of. It would calculate the effect of every specific factor, no matter how minor or how many factors. Taking into account how each specific detail influences the overall outcome, should allow the most accurate and therefore most probable prediction of the scenario.

Besides a relative maximum intellect, theoretically, there could also be an absolute maximum intellect. This intellect would need access to any and all information. It would need to know every specific detail about every aspect of any situation, down to individual molecules and particles. Besides knowing the state or condition of every particle, it would need to have the knowledge of the cause and effect of each particle, relative to every influence on that particle. This would be incredibly difficult and complicated, even within the context of a simple scenario, but for this intellect to be absolutely maximized, it would need to know every particle in the universe.

In order for an intellect to have access to that much information, it would seem the information would need to consist of almost as many particles as the universe itself. But if information about large groups of particles was condensed, then it should be theoretically possible for the information about the universe, to consist of a smaller mass, than the universe itself.

Information about details seem to be quite relevant, when it comes to maximum intellect. Whether its information about all particles within the universe, or just regarding the most relevant factors available, within context, the most specific details about cause and effect is prerequisite for a maximum intellect.

Differential Distinguishment

Distinguishing differences could be the key to intellect.

If intelligence evolved from animals to humans, by the brain being able to access more accurate details of memories, in order to make a more accurate prediction of a given situation, then distinguishing the differences in circumstances seems to be crucial.

I’m basing this on the assumption that animals use mainly subconscious mindsets to take action, as opposed to humans who sometimes use conscious analysis to make a decision. Animals use subconscious to simply take whichever action has the most significant feedback connected to it, within memory of the closest resembling circumstances to the present. Whereas humans can decide which action to take, by analysing memories of resembling circumstances, and of relevant factors within.

Under this assumption, the key to being more intelligent, seems to be the ability to determine more specific differences within any circumstances. The faster, yet more basic brain function of subconscious, takes a more general analysis of the circumstances, by comparing them to whichever simple memory matches best. But the more complex function of conscious thought, picks the more specific relevant factors within the circumstances, to result in a more accurate prediction. If analysis of more specific details stored in memory, causes a more accurate prediction, then distinguishing differentials seems to be 1 of the main causes of higher intelligence.

Within any circumstances, in order to make the most accurate prediction, and therein decision, any minor detailed differences should be determined. If the prediction of the circumstances is trying to make an estimate of the result, then any minor detail differences can be distinguished, then determined of their influence on the end result.

The overall concept seems quite clear and logical. The more specific the details of factors known within any circumstances, the more accurately the cause and effect of all the factors can be determined. By more accurately determining the effect of the details, the most accurate prediction of the overall result, can be made, using this prospect of Differential Distinguishment.