well, i shall not explain myself further. i am a nice person actually, but it's just such niggling incidents of misunderstandigns that put me in bad light.
I just suddenly feel like blogging abt something else. it's something philosophical.
What is feeling, and what is intuiton? And is love a feeling or intuition?
The immediate conviction without rational thought/interference. That is my simplified version of the webster's definition of intuition. Yes, i agree and i think that intuition is a primary human response.
Not that i am elitist here or what (i am very stupid really), but i feel that feelings is to a certain extent determined by level of intelligence. Just for example, if you insult someone with Down's Syndrome (just an example), the person will have an intuitive response. I am certain that though he may not show it, he will be intuitively hurt. Maybe it's something psychological, i dunno. But the feelings that he display will not be the same as for a normal person.
Likewise, this can also be proven for someting with even lower intelligece. Birds. Those brainless feathered creatures with wings and ultra-low intelligence compared to man. Birds normally protect their eggs or babies. This is intuition. A human mother will want to protect her kids too. But the different intelligence means that brids will only display their motherly feelings in a single way while the human mother may exhibit her feelings differently, thus the different ways mothers are "protecting" their kids.
I actually suspect (cos it's not for ppl like me) that for ultra high intelligent people, most likely highly intelligent humans(or some incredible living things that we have yet to discover), there's actually a tertiary response after feelings. Maybe it's analysis? so it goes something like this-
sth happen->intuitive reaction->feelings->analysis->feelings again 0_0
Well, i suspect that such people are so intelligent that they can modify their feelings. After the intuitive response and initial feelings, they are able to do a series of analytical crap that allows them to manipulate their feelings. This, i feel and speculate, is highly difficult. All i know , this is all sheer speculation.
I feel that feeling is something that can be suppressed (this sounds familiar rite) because it is more of a secondary respnse. For example, when someone hits you, i actually think that the pain itself is an intuition. You can't control it, it just comes at you. But here's where the distinction becomes blurred and people(including me) have trouble figuring out. Most likely, the indignation is a feeling, aka a secondary response.
Just imagine, for 2 ppl. One is someone who is really friendly and who not mind get hit. While the other is a volatile bastard who would jump at teh slighest provocation. with the same hit, it is plausible that we will get different response. The first guy may just be mildly irritated, while the other guy may turn nasty. This i dunno, but it seems that for the same hit, the intuitive response is sth like a constant while the secondary response (aka feelings) is sth like a variable, that ultimately determines your reaction (i take this as what ppl will observe)
And this leads to another intriguing issue, the question of whether feeligns can be suppressed. Well, i have no prior experience to speak of, but i think it's difficult to see an explicit exammple of this phenomenon in ONE person. It is highly likely that for the same person, a long period of a certain behavior has make a certain feeling (for a certain incident) almost a constant for that person liao. So basically, the person is likely to express the same feelings in similar scenarios.
Though this may seem insignificant, as it seems that i have concluded thus far that the same person is likely to exhibit the same reaction. But it is interesting to wonder that since feeling is a variable and a "fixed" feeling is only a result of repeated experiences, is it possible to permanently change the secondary response of someone on a permanent basis.
For example, for a toddler, is it possible to indoctrinate him with the fact that when someone hits him, he should embrace that person with gratitude (just an example) Sure, at the first physical contact, his intuitive response will probably contrast with this, but i am just wondering if his next respone can indeed be controlled. And if yes, to what extent will it be controlled. Say when someone whacks him REALLy hard, will this forced secondary response still hold valid?
So i would like to conclude this short entry that i personally believe feelings and intuition are 2 different elements. Also, it is highly likely that in the correct conditions, it is possible to modify the feelings of a person, or say suppress it.
And well, i kinda feel like talking abt another issue here. My hypothesis that for someone with split personality, does he have the same intuition but just different feelings. With no prior readings and on this,plus the fact that i want to play games now, i shall probably elaborate abt it another time.. hehe
I just suddenly feel like blogging abt something else. it's something philosophical.
What is feeling, and what is intuiton? And is love a feeling or intuition?
The immediate conviction without rational thought/interference. That is my simplified version of the webster's definition of intuition. Yes, i agree and i think that intuition is a primary human response.
Not that i am elitist here or what (i am very stupid really), but i feel that feelings is to a certain extent determined by level of intelligence. Just for example, if you insult someone with Down's Syndrome (just an example), the person will have an intuitive response. I am certain that though he may not show it, he will be intuitively hurt. Maybe it's something psychological, i dunno. But the feelings that he display will not be the same as for a normal person.
Likewise, this can also be proven for someting with even lower intelligece. Birds. Those brainless feathered creatures with wings and ultra-low intelligence compared to man. Birds normally protect their eggs or babies. This is intuition. A human mother will want to protect her kids too. But the different intelligence means that brids will only display their motherly feelings in a single way while the human mother may exhibit her feelings differently, thus the different ways mothers are "protecting" their kids.
I actually suspect (cos it's not for ppl like me) that for ultra high intelligent people, most likely highly intelligent humans(or some incredible living things that we have yet to discover), there's actually a tertiary response after feelings. Maybe it's analysis? so it goes something like this-
sth happen->intuitive reaction->feelings->analysis->feelings again 0_0
Well, i suspect that such people are so intelligent that they can modify their feelings. After the intuitive response and initial feelings, they are able to do a series of analytical crap that allows them to manipulate their feelings. This, i feel and speculate, is highly difficult. All i know , this is all sheer speculation.
I feel that feeling is something that can be suppressed (this sounds familiar rite) because it is more of a secondary respnse. For example, when someone hits you, i actually think that the pain itself is an intuition. You can't control it, it just comes at you. But here's where the distinction becomes blurred and people(including me) have trouble figuring out. Most likely, the indignation is a feeling, aka a secondary response.
Just imagine, for 2 ppl. One is someone who is really friendly and who not mind get hit. While the other is a volatile bastard who would jump at teh slighest provocation. with the same hit, it is plausible that we will get different response. The first guy may just be mildly irritated, while the other guy may turn nasty. This i dunno, but it seems that for the same hit, the intuitive response is sth like a constant while the secondary response (aka feelings) is sth like a variable, that ultimately determines your reaction (i take this as what ppl will observe)
And this leads to another intriguing issue, the question of whether feeligns can be suppressed. Well, i have no prior experience to speak of, but i think it's difficult to see an explicit exammple of this phenomenon in ONE person. It is highly likely that for the same person, a long period of a certain behavior has make a certain feeling (for a certain incident) almost a constant for that person liao. So basically, the person is likely to express the same feelings in similar scenarios.
Though this may seem insignificant, as it seems that i have concluded thus far that the same person is likely to exhibit the same reaction. But it is interesting to wonder that since feeling is a variable and a "fixed" feeling is only a result of repeated experiences, is it possible to permanently change the secondary response of someone on a permanent basis.
For example, for a toddler, is it possible to indoctrinate him with the fact that when someone hits him, he should embrace that person with gratitude (just an example) Sure, at the first physical contact, his intuitive response will probably contrast with this, but i am just wondering if his next respone can indeed be controlled. And if yes, to what extent will it be controlled. Say when someone whacks him REALLy hard, will this forced secondary response still hold valid?
So i would like to conclude this short entry that i personally believe feelings and intuition are 2 different elements. Also, it is highly likely that in the correct conditions, it is possible to modify the feelings of a person, or say suppress it.
And well, i kinda feel like talking abt another issue here. My hypothesis that for someone with split personality, does he have the same intuition but just different feelings. With no prior readings and on this,plus the fact that i want to play games now, i shall probably elaborate abt it another time.. hehe
posted by VITALISM at 5:16 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home