I'm not sure I'd agree with the decision making process "first" dealing with
emotions and then the rational... I'm sure it's all mixed up together. But
then again, I've got no proof, and further to this I read something about
"limbic hijack" which is the phenomenon in which limbic brain activity
swamps forebrain activity, and I can concur with that from first-hand
experience- I'm one of those sad bastards whose mental faculties die on
their butt when I get pissed off. I can actually feel the ideas dying back
to stumps.
I bet limbic processing is a big old chunk of the basis for our cultural
mind judging things "good" or "bad": see, one of the ways an idea can be
inhibited on arrival is if the idea provokes a "negative" emotional
reaction, which would just (in my experience anyway) just hammer processing
of that idea. God, how woollily phrased was THAT?
So Good and Bad become labels for certain limbic responses to ideas. Does
this help tie limbic processing in with "rational" processing (which I'd
rather call forebrain, or cultural processing)?
>Generally we are not very "churchy" in the common sense, but we all pretty much
>agree with the basic moral outlook or "virtues" Reason - Empathy - Vision. You can
>see all this athttp://www.lucifer.com/virus
So why are you called Sodom then? I mean, obviously the Marquis de Sade had
vision, in the broadest sense, but it's arguable as to whether
group-shagging children indicates the exercising of empathy. :)
>I think you will find that as far as churches go, we are pretty lax in most
>respects, but we all seem to make at least one demand - you need to be rational -
>no one seems to last too long if they come in speaking of the wonders of the
>supernatural world and the glory of god. Some try, but with few exceptions, they
>are unable to rationalize their viewpoint.
Well don't worry. My theistic devoutness rating limps in at about zero.
MG