Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tikal!phred!daveh
From: daveh@phred.UUCP (Dave Hampton)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: language, thought, and culture
Message-ID: <2100@phred.UUCP>
Date: 15 Mar 88 20:45:42 GMT
References: <44@gollum.Columbia.NCR.COM>
Reply-To: daveh@phred.UUCP (Dave Hampton)
Organization: <5776@dhw68k.cts.com>o
Lines: 37
Summary: Classification of Emotion

>
>There are currently discussions going on in sci.bio, sci.med,
>sci.psychology, comp.edu, and here in sci.lang that all skirt
>around the question of the nature of intelligence...
>

  Recent postings have suggested that emotion may be important to
distinguishing us as sentient beings apart from other organisms that
appear to lack feelings.  However, when looking for definitions, I find:

      "Emotion is a poorly conceptualized psychological concept.
   Classification of emotions is inexact, involving subtilties better
   suited to art and literature than to science.  The ageless,
   traditional cateegories of emotion are still widely used and have
   not been replaced by a more accurate classification."
                      Miller, Living Systems

  What is an appropriate classification scheme for emotion?  A
simple intensity-of-a-quality scheme is attractive, and would
serve for continua such as love-like-dislike-hate and delighted-
happy-unhappy-miserable.  What qualities are needed to span the
range of emotions?  Or are there other schemes which work better?

  And what about "drives" such as hunger or curiosity?  These feelings
certainly have the sensation of an emotion , but seem less abstract
in their expression (Consider lust vs. love, for example).  How should
these be handled?

  Any pointers to literature or insightful suggestions are welcomed...

                               David Hampton

-- 
Reply to:  uiucuxc!tikal!phred!daveh {Dave Hampton}
Addr:      Research Division, Physio-Control Corp.
           P.O. Box 97006
           Redmond, WA  98073-9706