Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How to write a textual analysis essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
This paper will examine Robert C. Solomon's Emotions and Choices article, to best identify what anger is, and to what extent a rational human being is responsible for their anger. Firstly, Solomon's argument must be described. A quick summation of Solomon's argument can be found in the following four points: Emotions are judgements, emotions are chosen, emotions serve a purpose, and emotions are rational.1 To quote Solomon, he explains that “Emotions are not occurrences, and do not happen to us. They ... may be chosen like an action.”2 To further elaborate, Solomon suggests that emotions are normative judgements. An emotion is a marker of value to an object, action, or situation. Furthermore, in his writing, Solomon is very careful to distinguish a feeling from an emotion, feelings are not emotions. Solomon explains this discrepancy though the following reasoning: Firstly, emotions (and not feelings) are about something. Secondly, emotions cannot be distinguished into feelings. Third, emotions can last while no feelings do. Finally, feelings may persist beyond the experiencing of an emotion.3 That is, for example, anger (a feeling) may be felt in reaction to a negative event or stimuli such as loss of an item (Solomon uses having his car stolen as the most prominent example in his article), a misunderstanding, or a lack of sleep. To use Solomon's example of the loss of a vehicle, it can be shown that the choice of being angry at the situation (the voluntary feeling) fits all for aspects of Solomon's argument. Firstly, feeling anger at the loss of a vehicle, is the feeling being experienced by an individual. This is distinct from the emotion felt which is brought on due to the negative event occurring, possibly for a more comp... ... middle of paper ... ...vate the framework of a person, allowing them to respond with a particular feeling. This feeling is therefore voluntary, and if something is voluntary it must be chosen12. If something is a choice, it must have been considered and weighed, and is therefore rational. Therefore, in extending Solomon's argument to anger, is can be stated that anger is a reaction chosen by an individual when prompted by an outside factor, and therefore because anger is rationally chosen by an individual, one is directly responsible for their own anger in is entirety. “It is clear our emotions are our own doing.” - Robert. C. Solomon. Word Count: 1161 Bibliography Solomon, Robert. "Emotions and Choice (1973)." Solomon: Emotions and Choice. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lormand/phil/teach/p&e/readings/Solomon%20-%20Emotions%20and%20Choice%20(highlights).htm (accessed April 5, 2014).
survival, as well as the survival of the wild. He explains that anger occurs when we defend
...ticle, Solomon has an unpleasant attitude of blaming others and complaining about the issue without proposing any real solutions. It also seems that he divides people into two categories: readers (good) and non-readers (bad), and he look down upon those who do not read. This will cause the readers to be emotionally uncomfortable and to reject his arguments and opinions because of the bias behind it.
As mentioned earlier I would start my discussion with a very prominent emotion called Anger. Anger is defined as a person’s response to a threat or the perception of a threat against an individual or group. Anger is an emotion that is often difficult to control because of the intense physiological reactions involved in the fight or flight response that triggers anger. The fight response is a response triggered naturally by the body to protect itself against the instigating situation (Lazarus, 1991). In the novel The Great Gatsby Fitzgerald narrates two important incidents that stand as a fine example for expressing anger with violence i.e., 1) Tom hits Myrtle 2) Wilson kills Jay Gatsby.
Callwood uses terms with negative connotations to create an uneasy feeling or even fear in readers and inspire them to consider forgiveness. The idea the "heart attacks occur more often" (164) in people who hold more anger leads readers to believe that being unforgiving can potentially be physically dangerous. An increase in anger, which Callwood explains is the "polar opposite of forgiveness," (162) is stated as a contributing factor to worldwide ethnic and religious conflicts, as well as those of a
The road taken by Warren, that emotionality requires self-observation and integration, is far too polar in that it completely negates the hormonal influence on emotionality. Emotionality ought not be defined in either of these ways because when doing so one wrongly restricts different form of emotionality. This would be the equivalent to defining a dog as a four legged animal, or a domesticated carnivorous animal with four legs, long snout, fur, canine teeth, and a tendency to bark or whine. The former definition sets the bar too low in that every four legged animal can qualify as a dog whereas the latter sets the bar too high in that some dogs may not actually qualify as dogs using that definition. For this reason the definition of a dog has to be somewhere in the middle. Thus when extending this example to emotionality it becomes clear one should take an Aristotelian approach in defining emotion because it would not be polarizing. The emotions we feel (happy, sad, angry, etc) is partly influenced by hormones such as dopamine and partly influenced by our own self-observation of markers. Integrating hormones and self-observation ensures we cover the spectrum of emotionality. This further ensures that the capability of
Watson, J. B. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. The American Psychologist, 55(3), 313-317. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/
...levator, and The Hitchhiker by, all show that emotions can influence a person’s reality. In Monster by Walter Dean Myers, Steve sees everything that happens around him as a movie so he can escape his reality. In The Tall Tale Heart by Edgar Allen Poe, the main character is so uncomfortable with the old man’s eye that he murders the old man. In The Hitchhiker, Adam is so convince that the old man is a ghost so he is afraid of him when really, Adam is the ghost. Due to those stories, emotions can affect someone’s reality very significantly. In The Elevator, Martin thinks that the old lady is going to eat him, but she’s just looking at him. Emotions even change people’s perceptions in real life too, an example is when you’re home alone and you hear a random noise in your house, because of these reasons, emotion can, and do change a person’s perception about reality.
Plutchik, Robert (1980), Emotion: Theory, research, and experience: Vol. 1. Theories of emotion, 1, New York: Academic
People are angry or furious but when the time passes they do not even remember their anger. Should they be angry at the moment or should they accept it as Martha C. Nussbaum says in the “Anger and Forgiveness” book? In the Middle Realm, anger is the “domain of life” (p. 138) and how we spend our life. Nussbaum says that we deal with people who we meet temporary: at work, at the store or in the street on a regular basis. In addition, she points out that in this realm we do not get into a deep relationship with these people, and this is a short term situation. Furthermore, Nussbaum says that she find it easy to transition herself to a non-anger situation with people who she loves. On the other hand, she finds it harder to transition from this
Analyze – Emotions such as anger, hatred are somethings we can control but be hold on to it until we separate ourselves from them by creating a barrier. But once we let go that emotions, we truly feel the pain within our hearts.
Sentiments such as beauty, revenge, pleasure, pain, create moral motivation, and action, and are immune to falsity and truth. They are the foundation for which morals are built, and exist apart from any reasoning. Thesis: In moral motivation, the role of sentiment is to drive an intrinsically instilled presence within us to examine what we would deem a moral act or an immoral act, and act accordingly, and accurately upon the sentiments that apply. These sentiments may be assisted by reasons, but the reason alone does not drive us to do what we feel is necessary.
LeDoux, J. (1998). The emotional brain. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. (Chapter 4 will go on LN).
By assessing the personal meaning of events, emotion comes up. What’s more, positive emotions have not only a role of marking happiness, but also a function to continue
From the moment they wake up, people experience events that trigger certain emotions. How people react to these events may depend on that person feels during that event. In terms of whether our emotions control us or we control our emotions, I believe that to some extent emotions control us. Because we cannot change how we feel in response to certain stimulus, emotions control us. However, people have some control over whether or not they act on their emotions. Emotions at that given moment can influence our actions. If people can control their reactions, then to some degree we are controlling our emotions. However, the prompts raises several important questions. How can one’s emotions alter other ways of knowing such as perception or reason?
ABSTRACT: In Albert Camus' 1950 play Just Assassins, terrorists are at work in nineteenth-century Russia. They kill people, and they all believe that there is a superior moral reason for doing so. But they also know that killing is wrong. In their own view, they are innocent criminals; innocent, because their action is justified, but criminals, because they kill. So tacitly they conclude that they deserve punishment that will remove the regret from their shoulders. Their execution, by the same despotic authorities they are attacking, completes their actions: regret, caused by justified killing, gets its counterpart. Regret is an interesting mental phenomenon. Some people say that feeling regret is irrational, or even that it is immoral. But surely the usual opinion is that in some situations regret is an appropriate way to react. An interesting question is what it means to say that sometimes it is 'appropriate' to feel regret. Do we have a moral obligation to feel regret sometimes? How could one have an obligation to feel anything, since, at least seemingly, feelings are not voluntary acts. If we do have a moral obligation to feel regret in some cases, does it follow that all good people are emotionally "hot," while "cool" persons, who are not able to feel deep regret, are bad?