Doyle,

in general, I'd say that it's hard to separate intellectual and
emotional matters.

On 3/18/06, Doyle Saylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings Economists,
> I missed this in my first response.  This in my view corrects my error,
> but is actually a much larger point than the one I responded to.
> On Mar 18, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Jim Devine wrote:
>
> > no, I think it's a personal thing. I get pissed when people don't
> > understand even small things that I'm not committed to. I am committed
> > to trying to clarify thought (my own, others', in that order)
>
> Doyle,
> JD asserts that his feelings are not just about 'commitments' but a
> general sense of clarifying.  I believe JD therefore shows an error in
> my estimate of emotion structure.  I am seeing emotion structure sort
> of in the sense of intention and strong emotions and JD says for him
> that's only true sometimes and not others.  This indicates then that
> emotion structure is actually not functioning in the way my basic
> understanding of intentions might say.
>
> I accept the correction and think this most important at least to my
> basic understanding of how emotions might work.  It challenges on some
> level 'intentionality'.  By that I mean that one feels pissed whether
> or not the subject is something one felt strongly about or committed to
> emotionally from prior history.  I need to examine the literature to
> see if this has been talked about before about intention.
> thanks,
> Doyle Saylor
>


--
Jim Devine / "There can be no real individual freedom in the presence
of economic insecurity." -- Chester Bowles

Reply via email to