Isn't it interesting?

[_Scottie]

What is your 'heart'? What does that really mean?

Who says these 'emotional' feelings, aren't really just logic in disguise - logic we can't understand?

Stuess....pass around the peyote. We're getting into some deep philosophical crap here...

[_wenglund]

Yeah, Wade, that does clear it up a bit. Thanks.

In answer to your post, no, I don't think that emotion and logic can ever be completely separated.

Anybody that has been given marriage advice has heard the age old "Marriage isn't a 50/50 partnership, it's 100/100". This is great in logic, but in reality if you tried to practice it, one of you would end up getting walked all over. There is no practical way to reach a 100/100 agreement, even though we know the goal is to have a happy marriage.

For example, lets say your wife wanted to go out for the evening, but you wanted to stay in. Who should give in? In a 100/100 relationship, neither of you would be selfish. You would both want to give the other what they wanted, and neither of you would accept letting the other give in to you. So, at one point, one of you HAS to be selfish and allow the other person to give in. At this point, it is no longer a 100/100 relationship. One of you has been, by necessity, selfish. The emotions might say that you both want to give 100%, but the logic is that one of you has to give. In this case, the logic will bring you closer to your goal.

I used to see it that way also. However, I later learned that, paradoxically, there is giving in receiving and selflessness in thinking of oneself.

My nature has long been inclined towards giving and giving in, and up until the relationship previuosly mentioned, I had a terrible time receiving or taking from others. In time, though, I figured out that since I felt greatly blessed when giving, I may be denying that blessing to others by not receiving. So, by receiving, I enabled the giver to be blessed. I could give the gift of blessing by receiving.

At least that is how I was able to see that both parties in the relationship could give 100% even when one or the other party needed to "give in".

Besides, as is the point of this thread, too often our focus unwittingly shifts from the ultimate objective to the relatively meaningless details. In other words, our minds get wrapped up in where to go out for the evening, rather than on the ultimate purpose for going out. Were both parties to have in mind achieving happiness through spending quality time together with the other party, then deciding where to go out to isn't all that important, and it wouldn't matter who may "give in", because the ultimate goal can be achieved either way. No one is "getting walked on", but both win.

Does that make sense?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Inconceivable]

Correct reasoning would infer that a course of action has been carefully thought out. Because none of us are Klingons, logic hardly stands alone. When we reason, we tend to come to our most desireable conclusions by enlisting all of our faculties.

When we become too emotionally attached to an issue, we tend to become less reasonable. I think this is why many that are disaffected by the Mormon church have a tendency to give it all up, go have a beer and decide a loving God can't exist.

The same illogical tendencies are true for apologists. Their emotion drives them to dig themselves so deep into assinine explanations that they have created an entirely different religeon than their heros intended.

Wade,

Perhaps I'm bagging on you a little too heavily. I admit I'm still well within the emotionally charged anger stage of my dissafection. Because of the decision I've made based on what I consider my personal integrity, I'm losing some of my family, hope I thought was sure, many good freinds and even treasure. I feel like Job, but without a Heavenly Father that will make it all better somehow. I still need a little time to count to ten before I can see clearly enough to sort the peices of iron from the clay.

[_Yoda]

I fail to see the difference between the two, honestly. They are pretty much one in the same. Doesn't emotion ultimately come from logic?

Have you been around many women in your life???

No. Emotion and logic are often at wits with each other.

I'm sort of in Wade's same boat. My heart is telling me that I love this girl, but my logic is saying in the long run we would kill each other. Unfortunately, my emotions are winning.

Follow your heart.

Sorry...ultimately, I'm a romantic.

;)

[_wenglund]

I fail to see the difference between the two, honestly. They are pretty much one in the same. Doesn't emotion ultimately come from logic?

Yes, logic can engender emotion, though not all logic will engender emotion. And, emotions can engender or influence logic (particularly by way of weighting and pursuasion), though emotions may not, nor should not, always influence logic. As such, while there may at times be a symbionic ralationship between the two, the relationship, itself, and the times when there is no symbiosis, logically suggest to me that they are not the same thing.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Who Knows]

I fail to see the difference between the two, honestly. They are pretty much one in the same. Doesn't emotion ultimately come from logic?

Yes, logic can engender emotion, though not all logic will engender emotion. And, emotions can engender or influence logic (particularly by way of weighting and pursuasion), though emotions may not, nor should not, always influence logic. As such, while there may at times be a symbionic ralationship between the two, the relationship, itself, and the times when there is no symbiosis, logically suggest to me that they are not the same thing.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Can you give me an example of pure emotion, no logic?

And did you read that blurb that i posted earlier?

[_wenglund]

Wade,

Perhaps I'm bagging on you a little too heavily. I admit I'm still well within the emotionally charged anger stage of my dissafection. Because of the decision I've made based on what I consider my personal integrity, I'm losing some of my family, hope I thought was sure, many good freinds and even treasure. I feel like Job, but without a Heavenly Father that will make it all better somehow. I still need a little time to count to ten before I can see clearly enough to sort the peices of iron from the clay.

I am really sorry that the cost of your loss of faith has been so high. Loosing family, friends, and treasures has got to be tough, not to mention the toll it may take on your emotions. If it helps to "bag" on me, then I am fine with that. I've gotten used to over the years, and over the past year or so I have found a way to not take it personally or be negatively affected by it.

And, if you think there is any way I might help de-escalate or dissappate your anger, or even minimize the personal costs, please don't hesitate to ask.

Have you considered mediation (where a neutral third-party helps the two disputing parties work out a mutually benefitial resolution--not to be confused with arbitration, where a neutral third-party assesses the disputes and renders a binding judgement)? This is a successful service that is often provided by communities, and may not always cost (some communities have volunteers that will mediate for free).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

I fail to see the difference between the two, honestly. They are pretty much one in the same. Doesn't emotion ultimately come from logic?

Yes, logic can engender emotion, though not all logic will engender emotion. And, emotions can engender or influence logic (particularly by way of weighting and pursuasion), though emotions may not, nor should not, always influence logic. As such, while there may at times be a symbionic ralationship between the two, the relationship, itself, and the times when there is no symbiosis, logically suggest to me that they are not the same thing.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Can you give me an example of pure emotion, no logic?

A newborn infant feels hunger pains and cries.

With the swing of a hammer, you miss the nail and hit your thumb, and are immediately enraged.

When I used to run, I would feel a "runner's high"--i.e a flood of endorphines that would make me happy.

The cloudy weather in Seattle tends to darkened some people's mood

Granted, some of these examples involve some level of cognition, though not necessarily "logic", and often the emotions that are logic-based, the "logic" is often somewhat subconscious (barely cognizant "hot thoughts"), fragmented, disjointed, and unsound and invalid (irrational).

If you wish for examples of this, just observe most any 2-year-old or a hormone-driven teen (particularly around prome time). ;-)

And did you read that blurb that I posted earlier?

If it was on this thread, then it is likely that I did, though I can't be sure. Feel free to paste it in response to this post.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Can you give me an example of pure emotion, no logic?

I just now came across a perfect example of logic-free emotions. It is the last post from Infymus on the thread HERE--at the bottom of the page (Warning: bad language).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Who Knows]

I see pure logic in every example you gave.

It seems logical to me that I scream when I hit my finger with a hammer. It hurts, therefore I'm in pain, therefore I'm mad, therefore I react with a scream, which makes me feel better.

Baby is hungry. Therefore its tummy hurts, therefore it cries (potentially for a number of different logical reasons - to get someones attention, because it's sad, etc.).

You're happy while getting a runner's high because you have 'happy' chemicals running through your blood - and that reaction makes you happy.

Cloudy weather darkens some peoples moods - perhaps for a number of different reasons - they don't like darkness, they don't like rain, etc. - they are happier when it's sunny.

Again, read the blurb i posted earlier. It's at the end of the first page of the thread.