1). The book discusses different perspective on emotions. Which perspective - of what combination of several - makes the most sense to you? Why? Explain how the perspective you favor gives you insight into emotions that you don't get from other perspectives.
I think the perceptual view of emotions makes the most sense to me because I believe we have to attach emotions to physiological reactions. Like the example in our textbook, "We might interpret trembling hands as a symbol of fear...Alternatively, we might interpret trembling hands as signifying joy on graduation day" (Wood, 174). I definitely agree with this because we have so many physiological reactions that can mean different things. I have felt so excited i was shaking but i've also felt so scared that i was shaking as well. This gives me more insight into emotions than the organismic view of emotions because while the organismic view can be true, the perceptual view allows us to define the process of interpreting the emotion clearer. Yes, it's true that the organismic view can be correct because when we feel that knot in our stomach, it could be a sign of sadness but it can only be interpreted through the perceptual view of emotions. The organismic view is based on reflexes while the perceptual view is based on interpretation, which i think is more precise.
I agree, the perceptual view makes more sense to me as well. I do think that physiological responses do play a role in our emotions but I don't believe that emotions are physiological responses. For instance, if my heart starts racing it could mean any number of things, but it's my perception of what's happening (the external phenomena) that creates the actual emotion I feel. Or as you pointed out in your post, shaking hands can represent both excitement or fear depending on what the stimuli present were. Or if you get a knot in your stomach it can be because you are experiencing a moment of excitement or anxiety.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, overall great post :)
Fallacies are bad thoughts that creep into our mind, and when we nurse such thought in our heads, it leads to sabotage realistic appraisals of ourselves and our feeling. The most time I get this belief or fallacies, is when I just finish taking any exams. I start to pre assume I would not do well especially when I hear some of my class mates having a conversation on how they went about their own exams. I get this feeling that I may I have missed some steps in the exam and that would lead to me getting a bad grade. Anytime I find myself doing that, I try to encourage myself that I did good and the exam will come out successful
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your posting. Like you, I also felt that the perceptual perspective made more sense to me than the other ones that were discussed in the book. I have encountered situations where psychological reactions have meant something different. For example, I have had tears of happiness when I have cried because of something amazing that has happened, but then I have had those tears of sadness when something awful has occurred. This perspective gives us insight and helps us perceive every event the way we want to perceive it negatively or positively. I really liked how you said that this perspective, “allows us to define the process of interpreting the emotion clearer”, very well said.
ReplyDeleteI am the same way as you where I have reactions to my feelings. But I won’t be shaking. I would be responding in a more sensible way instead of a physical way. For example when I am upset or angry and my partner try to talk to me and find out the problem I would start crying first before anything. Then he would think to himself if he did something wrong to me. I know that is kind of wrong when he didn’t do anything but that would be my first reaction. But the organismic view of your physiological reaction and perceptual view of your physiological reaction is explained in well details.
ReplyDelete