im pretty sure most of us who frequent this site are north american with a few exceptions, so that narrows down our demographic. saying that our ideas of morals are somewhat parrellel. what's right and what's wrong pretty much coincide. so i dont know what you're getting at, bro, besides some circle talk and passing some time.

Morality, like other sentient factors (language, highly complex mental states [the ability to reason, to think], and highly emotional contexts), isn't just restricted to humanity. Other sentient animals can have moral judgements, but like it's seen across the human world, morality is geared towards a societal function more than a personal function. After, what's right and wrong doesn't necessarily come down to you or to me, it comes down to them. Yes, our moral judgement is going to be pretty damn parrallel, but does that mean that it's a truth? That it's right? That it's universal? No.

We cannot perceive anger with any of our physical senses, yet every human being will agree that anger exists, and will understand what you are describing and recognize it despite language differences. That is what I am getting at.

How can you say that you cannot perceive anger with any physical senses? Can you not clearly see the anger on someone's face? Hear it in someone's voice? Feel it when someone slugs you?

I understand what you're getting at, though. I just thought it was funny the was you said it.

what's right and wrong comes down to a socialogical understanding. 40 years ago do you think average joe shmoe hated the middle easterns or even knew who they were?

as far as im concerned its the indivisuals responsibility. and bro, you're getting into the quadrent where thinkers question time and its value. we're all adults and hopefully we know whats going on. we dont need to define the smallest of points to prove we're right.

homegirl, anger is the easiest emotion to percieve in any mammal. a monkey at the zoo, a child not getting its way, your loved one not getting appriciated for some date that's importent for them, anger is number fucking one. how can you say that?

Wait a minute . . . you said morality is a socialogical understanding? How's that any different than what I said (being a societal function)?

But hey "bro" . . . philosophy is what I do, so don't bash me for that. And, in the realm of philosophy and science, the smallest points always matter.

Oh, and speaking of emotions. What interests me is that there has yet to be a philosophy pertaining to this field . . . why is that? Do people just warrant emotions as a physiological aspect (hence physical)?

sementics suck, get over it.
i guess from your reaction we're both in agreement
the smallest points are the easier to be stepped over
i like ministry, what's your favorite band?

You can see the effects of anger, but you cannot see anger. That is the thing about emotions that most interests me; they have no physical element, yet they affect the physical world. Like gravity, you can easily explain the effects anger has, but what anger itself is is undefinable. This is true of emotions in general.

What kind of philosophy can be attributed to emotions? Other than the philosophies applied to psychiatry (though, I guess you would consider this physical medicine, no?) and ancient mystic buddhist, taoist, etc.?

you cant tell what pisses someone offf?

what do you think psycolgists/phychiatrist do?

Hey, that's what I said.

Often? No, you can't. By and large you can make a reasonable guess as to what will piss someone off; but this doesn't mean we understand anger. We understand that gravity is a force that acts between two objects, for instance, but we don't understand what gravity itself is at all. But this does not mean we must presume that gravity does not exist; likewise, we can see the impacts of emotions, and observe their effects, even if we don't really understand what they are on an intellectual level.

Wait. I thought gravity was a field of attraction caused by large masses in space...

so you're saying gravity doest exist? get to the bloody point, there sweetie. you can tell when you piss somone off, i know. tone, balance, posture, its easy to read. you're making it difficult.

I think she's just saying that it's like gravity in that because something you can't nessecarily see doesn't mean you don't believe in it.

And on that note, I'm out. Later, all.

You are describing the effects and telltale signs of anger. I am talking about the cause for anger, the origin of the emotion that makes people behave in the way we think of as "angry".


I am saying that like gravity, anger exists and is known to exist despite our inability to explain what it is. We have never observed gravity particles or waves. But we can understand it's effects'.