Ruth Laura Edlund:
We think somewhat differently. I agree that feelings start with a stimulus, either a sensory perception (external) or a thought. I believe that the stimulus triggers a chemical which in turn gives rise to the feeling, which I would describe for purposes of this discussion as "a perception of a sensation inside the body." (I might further add that I think of an emotion as "a thought about the feeling"). You are thinking that the chemicals ARE the feelings? And that feelings and emotions are the same thing?
the feeling which you here think of an emotion as being a thought about is a passion (an emotion is a thought that 'i' have about an instinctual passion).
what an actual freedom is is the extinction of instinctual passions (via 'my' consensual self-extirpation).
Ruth Laura Edlund:
I am seriously seeking to understand whether AF has anything useful for me, and in order to do so, I need more than a conversational understanding.
it's the unequivocal end of fear and desire, if you find such a thing useful.
Ruth Laura Edlund:
Alcohol as a chemical creates physiological changes, which sounds like those changes would be sensory, and not "feelings" whose definition is still not clear to me. Let me give you a counter-example. Suppose I see a glimpse of a shape that looks like a sabre-tooth tiger. The image goes from my eyes to my amygdala *first* without hitting my cerebrum, and my amygdala sends a message to my kidneys. My kidneys send a squirt of adrenalin into my body. My heart races in response, and I "feel" fear. That's the way I think these things happen. In the passage cited Richard is saying that the feeling produces the adrenalin, if I am understanding him correctly. Hence the confusion.
without the instinctual passions, there would be no 'i' to feel fear in any situation. further, richard's claim, if i understand him correctly, may be that his kidneys would not send a squirt of adrenalin into his
blood (both are his body) in the first place. me, i don't know, but for his perspective on the matter, consider this passage from his archived correspondence:
RESPONDENT: There are 4 brains in the human body: intellectual, emotional, motor and instinctive. Why are the all emotional and instinctive brains’ functions considered as ‘unuseful’ and the others (thinking and moving) as useful? It’s a point I don’t understand.
RICHARD: As all I am pointing the finger at is the instinctual passions and the intuitive ‘presence’ they form themselves into – and not the instincts per se – then in your ‘4 brains’ model it is only the ‘emotional brain’ which is the spanner in the works. A readily observable instinctive reaction in oneself, that is not necessarily affective, is the automatic response known as the reflex action (inadvertently touch a hotplate, for instance, and there is an involuntary jerking away of the affected limb) or the startle response.
A classic example of this occurred whilst strolling along a country lane one fine morning with the sunlight dancing its magic on the glistening dew-drops suspended from the greenery everywhere; these eyes are delighting in the profusion of colour and texture and form as the panorama unfolds; these ears are revelling in the cadence of tones as their resonance and timbre fills the air; these nostrils are rejoicing in the abundance of aromas and scents drifting fragrantly all about; this skin is savouring the touch, the caress, of the early springtime ambience; this mind, other than the sheer enjoyment and appreciation of being alive as this flesh and blood body, is ambling along in neutral – there is no thought at all and conscious alertness is null and void – when all-of-a-sudden the easy gait has ceased happening.
These eyes instantly shift from admiring the dun-coloured cows in a field nearby and are looking downward to the front and see the green and black snake, coiling up on the road in readiness to act, which had not only occasioned the abrupt halt but, it is discovered, had initiated a rapid step backwards ... an instinctive response which, had the instinctual passions that are the identity been in situ, could very well have triggered off freeze-fight-flee chemicals.
There is no perturbation whatsoever (no wide-eyed staring, no increase in heart-beat, no rapid breathing, no adrenaline-tensed muscle tone, no sweaty palms, no blood draining from the face, no dry mouth, no cortisol-induced heightened awareness, and so on) as with the complete absence of the rudimentary animal ‘self’ in the primordial brain the limbic system in general, and the amygdala in particular, have been free to do their job – the oh-so-vital startle response – both efficaciously and cleanly.
Cattle, for example, are easily ‘spooked’ by a reptile and have been known to stampede in infectious group panic.
my own experience has been that i can experience a startle response these days but do not any fear whatsoever.
Ruth Laura Edlund:
Trent H.:
The changes would be both sensory and emotional (for those with emotions); it is not like the alcohol (which would be in your circulatory system) decides what part of the brain to "flood."
Alcohol is a disinhibitor (among other things). As I understand the way that it works, it does not create new feelings, simply makes people under its influence less likely to suppress feelings that are already in existence.
I don't regard nonsuppression as a *change.* Trent H.:
Next, your example makes since to me, and you seem to grasp what "fear" is as a feeling, meaning that you seem to understand the term just fine. I cannot speak to the details of the passage that is causing your confusion, as it was not written by me and, upon close inspection, does not sound accurate to me either for the same reason you mention.
The passage was written by Richard and comes directly from the AF website, FWIW.
as you are interested in what richard has to say on these subjects, you may be interested in the following passage:
RESPONDENT: If they give you one injection of adrenaline, will you be able to control your angriness?
RICHARD: What ‘angriness’ are you talking off? There is neither anger nor anguish in this flesh and blood body ... do you really take an actual freedom from the human condition to be a suppression, or even a repression, of the affective feelings?
Just for the record, however, when I have a dental injection to anaesthetise the jaw I always make sure the dentist uses a procaine mixture which does not contain adrenaline, which most such mixtures do, because its effect is psychotropic (just as caffeine, a chemical cousin to cocaine, is).
Ruth Laura Edlund:
First, I don't know that I would run feelings/passions/instincts/emotions together. Richard has a quite distinct definition of emotion from his definition of feeling. Let's go back to the sabre-tooth tiger, but this time I don't see the tiger. I am sitting by a campfire listening to a story about a sabre-tooth tiger. I look at the big spear next to me, and I have the thought that "I am safe from the tiger," which is a thought that creates a sense of security (not-fear). Second, I personally do not perceive an instinctively felt quality that feelings are "me." My feelings are only one of the aggregates of a "self" which is empty, impermanent, etc. etc. Third, I think that some feelings are associated with a release of tension, not a sensation of tension, although I will grant you that some feelings are associated with tension.
firstly, breaking down feelings/passions/emotions is just a way of being more specific about the affective faculty.. it was useful for me to understand the distinction richard makes between the experience of (being) the instinctual passions and the experience of (having) emotions (both can be called feelings).
secondly, if you do not perceive the quality by which 'your feelings' are 'you', you are either dissociating or are not looking closely enough. the very sense of 'i' is a basic affective experience (it is an inchoate feeling) which occurs concomitantly with the feelings one feels one has (at root, 'i' am nothing but the blur/the swirl formed by the movement of passions).
thirdly (lastly), you're correct in your above assertion but let me modify part of your above sentence slightly so that it reads: '...I think that some feelings are associated with a release of
the sensation of tension...'
Ruth Laura Edlund:
Has Richard eliminated all survival instinct? What would happen if someone pushed his head underwater (sorry that's kind of an odd example)? Would he not fight for air?
i don't know that it's a survival instinct that's eliminated as such, but what is definitely eliminated is
the instinctual passion for survival (experienced as an urge to survive).
tarin