What is emotion? Have you ever heard a definitive answer to this question? Chemical reactions... well, yes, but what purpose does it serve? Fight or flight, human bonding for procreation... ok, but obviously it's more nuanced and influential than that.
I'd like to submit an idea for your review: Emotion is personal guidance. It exists as means for evaluating the merit of our thought.
Emotion is intrinsically linked to thought; it is a reaction to thought. You may be watching TV, feeling emotionally neutral, until you remember the big test, interview, or presentation tomorrow morning. Immediately upon having that thought, a flood of anxiety fills your body.
And thought need not always be overtly conscious. Sometimes there are lingering thoughts just behind our conscious awareness; thoughts that have not undergone the formality of being mentally vocalized, but are present nonetheless. In this case, the emotion will get our attention, even when the thought doesn't. We call this experience a "nagging feeling". Emotion is serving its purpose - cluing us in to the nature of our thoughts.
Humans are motivated by emotion. All human action is an effort to move to a more pleasing emotional state. Our political views are rooted in this effort as well. We perceive that if this massive construct affecting our lives called "government" operated in a way more in line with our desires, we would feel happier, safer, have more pride in our country, etc.
Here I will provide a chart that outlines the "Emotional Guidance Scale" (courtesy of Abraham Hicks). Items higher on the scale denote better-feeling emotions, while items lower on the scale denote worse emotional states:
Sometimes this phenomenon is not so obvious, like in the case of the person who abuses themselves. But upon closer inspection, we can see that the person is trying to move from feelings of guilt, for instance, to the relief experienced by the feelings of revenge against themselves. Even moving from one negative emotion to another negative emotion is motivated by the desire for improvement.
Unfortunately, much of our political views are born of a fear. Fear of what the opposing party will subject us to; fear of what foreign powers will unleash upon our country; etc. This is a very low emotional state, and though improvements sought through rage and resentment may serve to ease our pain temporarily, they are hardly the most desirable emotional states to reside within on an ongoing basis. We can get trapped in a negative loop without a concerted effort to move higher on the scale.
Since emotional improvement is the motivation for all action, and all emotion is a reaction to thought, we can see that thought is the realm of causality. This means that we purposefully defer action (verbal or physical) and remain in the realm of thought, progressing upward along the scale via self-talk before taking action. In other words, we can wait until we're in a better place before expressing ourselves through actions which have the power to shape our world.
And since emotion clues us in to the merit of our thought, the better feeling emotions reflect thoughts that are more in alignment with ultimate truth in some way. In this way, knowledge and understanding lead to better-feeling emotions, and ultimately wisdom, or right action. This can be difficult to discern. But when we feel rage against the opposing party, something about our thought is misaligned with truth. Maybe it's because we are seeing these people as evil, when in reality, they are only trying to seek higher states of emotion just like us. Their motivations are good in this sense, and so our perception of them as evil enemies with vastly different goals is inaccurate on a deeper level.
There is so much more to say, but I will not impose upon your patience any longer in this post. Use this scale to assess what you are feeling, and what emotional state you are trying to achieve by your actions. Use it to evaluate others. See if the described phenomenon accurately corresponds with your own experience and observation.
Thank you for considering these ideas, I hope they offer some preliminary insight into how this "thought --> emotion --> action" dynamic plays out in the political landscape.
It's not a new concept, actually Republican's have used fear to get elected.What is emotion? Have you ever heard a definitive answer to this question? Chemical reactions... well, yes, but what purpose does it serve? Fight or flight, human bonding for procreation... ok, but obviously it's more nuanced and influential than that.
I'd like to submit an idea for your review: Emotion is personal guidance. It exists as means for evaluating the merit of our thought.
Emotion is intrinsically linked to thought; it is a reaction to thought. You may be watching TV, feeling emotionally neutral, until you remember the big test, interview, or presentation tomorrow morning. Immediately upon having that thought, a flood of anxiety fills your body.
And thought need not always be overtly conscious. Sometimes there are lingering thoughts just behind our conscious awareness; thoughts that have not undergone the formality of being mentally vocalized, but are present nonetheless. In this case, the emotion will get our attention, even when the thought doesn't. We call this experience a "nagging feeling". Emotion is serving its purpose - cluing us in to the nature of our thoughts.
Humans are motivated by emotion. All human action is an effort to move to a more pleasing emotional state. Our political views are rooted in this effort as well. We perceive that if this massive construct affecting our lives called "government" operated in a way more in line with our desires, we would feel happier, safer, have more pride in our country, etc.
Here I will provide a chart that outlines the "Emotional Guidance Scale" (courtesy of Abraham Hicks). Items higher on the scale denote better-feeling emotions, while items lower on the scale denote worse emotional states:
Sometimes this phenomenon is not so obvious, like in the case of the person who abuses themselves. But upon closer inspection, we can see that the person is trying to move from feelings of guilt, for instance, to the relief experienced by the feelings of revenge against themselves. Even moving from one negative emotion to another negative emotion is motivated by the desire for improvement.
Unfortunately, much of our political views are born of a fear. Fear of what the opposing party will subject us to; fear of what foreign powers will unleash upon our country; etc. This is a very low emotional state, and though improvements sought through rage and resentment may serve to ease our pain temporarily, they are hardly the most desirable emotional states to reside within on an ongoing basis. We can get trapped in a negative loop without a concerted effort to move higher on the scale.
Since emotional improvement is the motivation for all action, and all emotion is a reaction to thought, we can see that thought is the realm of causality. This means that we purposefully defer action (verbal or physical) and remain in the realm of thought, progressing upward along the scale via self-talk before taking action. In other words, we can wait until we're in a better place before expressing ourselves through actions which have the power to shape our world.
And since emotion clues us in to the merit of our thought, the better feeling emotions reflect thoughts that are more in alignment with ultimate truth in some way. In this way, knowledge and understanding lead to better-feeling emotions, and ultimately wisdom, or right action. This can be difficult to discern. But when we feel rage against the opposing party, something about our thought is misaligned with truth. Maybe it's because we are seeing these people as evil, when in reality, they are only trying to seek higher states of emotion just like us. Their motivations are good in this sense, and so our perception of them as evil enemies with vastly different goals is inaccurate on a deeper level.
There is so much more to say, but I will not impose upon your patience any longer in this post. Use this scale to assess what you are feeling, and what emotional state you are trying to achieve by your actions. Use it to evaluate others. See if the described phenomenon accurately corresponds with your own experience and observation.
Thank you for considering these ideas, I hope they offer some preliminary insight into how this "thought --> emotion --> action" dynamic plays out in the political landscape.
