Where I'm at...

[_Runtu]

Since empirical evidence is, in and of itself, meaning/value neutral, we see the need for "feelings of conviction" so as to settle things in a meaningful and valued way.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Feelings of conviction are also meaning/value free unless someone assigns meaning and value to them. Come to think of it, the same is true of empirical evidence.

[_wenglund]

Since empirical evidence is, in and of itself, meaning/value neutral, we see the need for "feelings of conviction" so as to settle things in a meaningful and valued way.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Feelings of conviction are also meaning/value free unless someone assigns meaning and value to them. Come to think of it, the same is true of empirical evidence.

I would think that "feelings of convictions" would be a function of meaning/value, rather than the other way around (where value and meaning are assigned to the conviction). But, as with Schmo, I am open to learning how it may be otherwise. Can you please provide me with a reasonable example of a meaning/value-free "feeling of conviction".

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

WADE!!! Where ya been??

I decided to better put into practice some of what I was preaching before I left, and I took a much-needed break from the board so as to devote my energies to more productive endevours (like earning a living and doing random acts of kindness in real life).

However, I did mis interacting with you and certain others here.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Runtu]

Since empirical evidence is, in and of itself, meaning/value neutral, we see the need for "feelings of conviction" so as to settle things in a meaningful and valued way.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Feelings of conviction are also meaning/value free unless someone assigns meaning and value to them. Come to think of it, the same is true of empirical evidence.

I would think that "feelings of convictions" would be a function of meaning/value, rather than the other way around (where value and meaning are assigned to the conviction). But, as with Schmo, I am open to learning how it may be otherwise. Can you please provide me with a reasonable example of a meaning/value-free "feeling of conviction".

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Sure, a feeling of conviction is just a feeling. It does not take on any meaning until a human being takes that feeling and assigns meaning to it. That is how we function as humans.

I see a blue sky. It only means that my brain has been taught to interpret the visual stimuli as meaning that the sky is blue. Similarly, if I'm, say, reading the scriptures and have a powerful feeling, I have to decide what that feeling means. If I'm LDS and the scripture I was reading is the Book of Mormon, I'll probably interpret that as the spirit testifying that it's true. If, however, I'm an Evangelical, I'm likely to interpret it as something from Satan. In short, the feeling has no meaning or value until the recipient assigns it.

[_wenglund]

Sure, a feeling of conviction is just a feeling. It does not take on any meaning until a human being takes that feeling and assigns meaning to it. That is how we function as humans.

I see a blue sky. It only means that my brain has been taught to interpret the visual stimuli as meaning that the sky is blue. Similarly, if I'm, say, reading the scriptures and have a powerful feeling, I have to decide what that feeling means. If I'm LDS and the scripture I was reading is the Book of Mormon, I'll probably interpret that as the spirit testifying that it's true. If, however, I'm an Evangelical, I'm likely to interpret it as something from Satan. In short, the feeling has no meaning or value until the recipient assigns it.

When reading the scriptures, what do you believe is generating, and the essence of, the "powerful feeling" if not, to some degree, pre-assigned meaning and value--particularly if the "powerful feeling" is one of conviction? (I personally believe the "power" is derived from pre-existing meaning and value)

Granted, I can see how such "powerful feelings" can, as you suggest, have some meaning and value assigned after the fact. But, I don't see how they could occur absent at least some measure of pre-existing meaning and value. How can one have conviction at all, let alone a powerful feeling of conviction, prior to any meaning or value being assigned? Please explain.

Try taking most any emotion and divesting it of meaning and value, and see if the emotion will actually occur. For example, if you just happened to see the word DDDDDD on an otherwise blank page, and you didn't have a clue what it meant, would it envoke happiness or anger or any other emotion in you?

It wouldn't invoke any emotion in me.

However, were you to be informed that DDDDD was either a high compliment from a dear friend or an eminant death threat from a local murder directed specifically at you or your loved-ones, would you then experience some emotion?

I certainly would.

In other words, it was the meaning and value that were pre-assigned to the word or symbol that envoked the emotion, whereas absent the meaning and value, the emotion would not occur. Correct?

(By the way, this cognitive connection to emotions is at the heart of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Cognitive Science)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Jersey Girl]

Runtu

I see a blue sky. It only means that my brain has been taught to interpret the visual stimuli as meaning that the sky is blue.

Is it always blue?