Re: [stoics] Is Stoicism Practical?
- On 01/12/2007, Grant Sterling <gcsterling@...> wrote:
> If A. is right, then it should be _impossible_ toInsult is a good example. If you are insulted in a foreign language
> prevent an emotion from arising merely by reasoning that
> the emotion should be uncalled-for. When I hear the insult
> I should immediately experience anger, and all reason could
> do would be to prevent me from acting on it. So in this sense
> one counter-example _does_ prove something, or at least
> constitute serious evidence for something.
you don't speak, you don't feel insulted and you don't get angry. In
fact, even if you understand the language in question, it often
doesn't produce the effect because you haven't earlier subscribed to
the belief that if someone calls you X, they have harmed you. For
example, when a Turk calls me "Eşeğoğlueşek" ("Donkey, son of a
donkey") I just burst out laughing.
"First things first, but not necessarily in that order" - Dr. Who
In normal everyday conversation, the word ‘emotion’ crops up regularly and ordinary people have no trouble understanding the meaning.
My impression is we just don’t take the time and trouble normally to question each other about what we mean exactly especially in everyday conversation. How would I know that other people have no trouble understanding the meaning of any words; that the impression in their minds is clearly the same impression as in my mind? Big assumption there. Misunderstanding is the source of much unnecessary strife. Most of the back and forth here on this list is clearing up misunderstandings not serious disagreements.
What’s wrong with this, Steve [Gich’s definition of emotion, SM]? This was intended as a ‘lead in’ to some discussion, but you seem to have ignored it.
Nothing. Perfect. Ok, I guess I was distracted by your medical definition and you had indeed put up your own in a different spot. Do not worry, it will lead to some discussion, but I’ll do that in that thread.
PS. I didn’t realise I was obsessed, Steve. :(
An unfair rejoinder on my part. My apologies.
You did not respond to my speculation that what really concerns you about definition is the lack of certain knowledge in making practical choices; we cannot know what _is_ the virtuous choice exactly. If this is your thought then I agree with you, but it is not a problem with formal definition.
PS Gich, thanks for hanging in there despite some bumps. This thread on emotion that you instigated has been one of the best discussions on this forum in a while. Happy Holidays to you and yours was well, but I will continue with our discussion J.