Some people point out that humans have more negative emotions than positive ones. I don’t make much of it, as motivational theories and things related can in fact incline (that, or more of) the idea or view to become more true.

At the functional level, of mechanisms, it may be seen as true, as much of what minds do is inhibitory. If there’s any doubts about this, a brief look at what you haven’t done that you might’ve done, today, or the last week, or year, that you considered doing, or had an inclination to do, and then didn’t, gets you there. Variously whatever disinclined you.

If negative emotions are seen to include or involve necessary inhibitory aspects(forces), then it’s a bit more difficult to see them as so entirely negative, as these inhibitory aspects are necessary. Practical, every-day-essentials of a working mind, a healthy mind.

Of course the we lives in times liberated, so if aversion has you running away from the apparent contradiction much is inhibitory, and repression is involved, don’t be alarmed at the challenges it presents to the normal idea of normal, so liberating.

Anyway, to the neutral zone, the neutral zone civilized people inhabit quite a lot (expressed in their exchanges, and relationships). Not the Star Trek one, though there are conceptual analogies in the themes, ideas related explored in the series.

I think, of mental states, to generalize, people like to inhabit a neutral zone, maintain it. A persons first home (and primary) is in their head. Their mind. Mind’s an old fashioned term, some people don’t like it, but essentially it refers to the home in the head.

So i’m contemplating the offers of liberation from culture, internalized however, that disguise the realities of what’s really more inhibitory, and repressive. That the latter are in-large-part necessary, practical, every-day, even good.

Enjoyable too.

Is living in your own head a bad thing I wonder, I’m pretty self contained prefer my own company to that anyone else and social isolation really doesn’t worry me. I even try to apply logic (or neutral emotion) to what is often an emotional situation, if you approach them that way you can possibly come to a more fair outcome.

transition said:

Some people point out that humans have more negative emotions than positive ones. I don’t make much of it, as motivational theories and things related can in fact incline (that, or more of) the idea or view to become more true.

At the functional level, of mechanisms, it may be seen as true, as much of what minds do is inhibitory. If there’s any doubts about this, a brief look at what you haven’t done that you might’ve done, today, or the last week, or year, that you considered doing, or had an inclination to do, and then didn’t, gets you there. Variously whatever disinclined you.

If negative emotions are seen to include or involve necessary inhibitory aspects(forces), then it’s a bit more difficult to see them as so entirely negative, as these inhibitory aspects are necessary. Practical, every-day-essentials of a working mind, a healthy mind.

Of course the we lives in times liberated, so if aversion has you running away from the apparent contradiction much is inhibitory, and repression is involved, don’t be alarmed at the challenges it presents to the normal idea of normal, so liberating.

Anyway, to the neutral zone, the neutral zone civilized people inhabit quite a lot (expressed in their exchanges, and relationships). Not the Star Trek one, though there are conceptual analogies in the themes, ideas related explored in the series.

I think, of mental states, to generalize, people like to inhabit a neutral zone, maintain it. A persons first home (and primary) is in their head. Their mind. Mind’s an old fashioned term, some people don’t like it, but essentially it refers to the home in the head.

So i’m contemplating the offers of liberation from culture, internalized however, that disguise the realities of what’s really more inhibitory, and repressive. That the latter are in-large-part necessary, practical, every-day, even good.

Enjoyable too.

People do focus more on negative issues.

I prefer to be in the neutral zone than to be in the negative zone.

Negative emotions aren’t negative. Eg. anger is a necessary prerequisite for getting things done.

As for general experience, see my posted list of the hundred or so emotions I recorded in a single day.

mollwollfumble said:

Negative emotions aren’t negative. Eg. anger is a necessary prerequisite for getting things done.

That suggestion makes me so angry I’m going to take an hour off work just to prove how wrong it is.