Philosophy of emotions with Dr. Dane Sawyer

Hello, I'm Julianne Good, and this is Psych 101. Welcome. We are here to make psychology more understandable for you, your family, and your friends, with tips to make your lives easier and more enjoyable. Tonight, my special guest is Dr. Dane Sawyer, and we are going to be talking about the philosophy of the emotions. We're going to be taking this on a little bit of a different ride this time. Hello. And hi, Dr. Sawyer. Are you there? Yeah, I believe I am. Can you hear me? Hi. Yes, we can hear you. Yeah. Okay. We jumped on a little bit there, but that's okay. So welcome, Dr. Dane Sawyer. How are you doing? I'm very good. Thank you. And yourself? Excellent. Thank you. Thank you. And it's good to have you on. Dane and I have done a musical escapade before, and the jazz club down in Long Beach, he's a great guitarist and vocalist, so I was honored to work with him one evening for a fundraiser a couple of years ago. So nice to have you back on again. So can you tell the listening audience a little bit about your background? Sure, sure. I mean, first, just let me say thank you for having me on the show as a guest this evening. I'm certainly excited about being a part of the program and look forward to having an evening of both psychological, and philosophical discussion. But a bit about myself, my name is Dr. Dane Sawyer, and I received my doctorate from Claremont Graduate University in 2012 with my dissertation entitled Nothingness and Differance, Sartre and Derrida on Freedom and Responsibility, one of those typical philosophical titles. My research mostly focuses, though, on existentialism and its continued importance in a contemporary philosophical context. Okay. So my most recent publication, is an article featured in a journal called Sartre Studies International, which is actually on the topic of self-deception and taking responsibility for one's life or for oneself. But I also concentrate in the areas of philosophy of mind and philosophy of emotions. And currently, I am a senior adjunct professor of philosophy and religion at the University of La Verne, but I've also taught courses at Claremont McKenna College, Pitzer College, California Lutheran University, and actually even at Claremont Graduate University itself. So I tend to teach courses in what's, I know maybe some of you listeners might not know some of this, but maybe even what's called continental philosophy, existentialism, as I just mentioned, philosophy of mind, philosophy of religion, philosophy of religion in pop culture and film, and even Eastern religions. And I also currently am the co-chair of the philosophy of religion section for the American Academy of Religion of the Western region. So that's pretty, a little bit of a mouthful. I'm sorry, go ahead. Yeah. You've been incredibly busy. Thank you. Thank you. I've been busy since you've graduated. And probably even before that. Yes. You know how those doctorate programs go. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. So what is the philosophy of the emotions? Yeah, sure. So, I mean, probably the best way to sort of back up would be, because some people often say, well, you know, you're a philosopher. What are you really talking about emotions for? That seems something that's obviously psychological. And to be, you know, kind of rather just straightforward. I've actually really never felt much of a reason to really separate philosophy and psychology very much. And actually, if you look at the history of philosophy and psychology, that a lot of these fields that really just in the 20th century really became popular. I mean, anything in terms of anthropology and sociology and psychology, they all found their roots or came out of philosophy in some way or another. So, I mean, really, even just it's the last four or five decades. That psychology has been separated out of philosophy sort of as a science to kind of separate itself. So, I mean, the original point is they're often kind of really brought together. But if I was going to try to kind of give a basic summary of what is philosophy, I mean, I pretty much would just begin with the basic point that we're really kind of all philosophers. And that in some ways that philosophy is a result of the fact that life makes us philosophers in various ways. So, I mean, I think that's a really good point. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think the philosophy is really the ability to predict the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the consequences of the of asking and sort of seeking answers to these grand questions about life, about what we know and about what we ought to do or even believe in. And it's just trying to get to the bottom of things, questioning ideas that a lot of us for most of our, you know, sort of time, we simply take for granted or have never really tried to put into words. You know, so that's kind of the beginning of philosophy, really. Yeah, exactly. So it is just going to another level, another dimension of thinking about thinking. It is the grand scheme of what are we doing here? What am I, you know, what am I thinking? What am I feeling? What does this all mean? What does it all mean? Exactly. And it's really hard to get away from those questions, even if you're doing science or if you're doing psychology or sociology, those questions still keep nagging in the background. So, I mean, oftentimes, you know, people that do science, like to think that they're doing things that are very value free or, you know, we're just studying the facts. But when you look at a lot of psychology, you realize that a lot of the things that people study or do psychological experiments on are really things that are concerned with ethics, which is really one of the big fields of philosophy. So, for example, you think of something as important as child development and how things like attention to a child, people talk about the debates about certain kinds of theories, attachment theory, version of the theory, and so on. And so, you know, it's really hard to get away from those and you realize that, you know, that these are really, really important moral and ethical questions, which is a lot of what fully philosophy is trying to ask. And so, in some way, you can kind of see how even though science and psychology, it wants to talk about sometimes maybe doing scientific experiments, but a lot of what drives a lot of experiments that are really a lot of philosophical concerns. And so, that's why I've always kind of seen these things as kind of overlapping. But you're definitely right. It's about kind of bumping it up and asking, you know, a bigger question, which is, how do I know that the scientific method helps me bring truth? Or how do I know that this experiment really brings us to something that helps us know the world better or something like that? So, if I was going to sum it up in a really straightforward way, I'd say something like, philosophy asks the kinds of innocent basic questions that children ask. It's just basic, innocent, big questions. But then they try to answer those questions and analyze them with the kind of sophistication that they're trying to answer. And so, I think that's a really important part of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system is really the ability to predict the consequences of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system is really the ability to predict the consequences of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system is really the ability to predict the consequences of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system is really the ability to predict the consequences of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system is really the ability to predict the consequences of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system is really the ability to predict the consequences of the system. I think the ability to predict the consequences of the system. And of course, because it was within their time frame that they could write what can be ageless teachings. But it's still really kind of hard to fathom sometimes. So where do you start as a professor to get people to try to understand, to take into account thinking deeper, putting philosophical teachings into everyday life? No, excuse me. I really couldn't agree with you more. And actually, I would almost kind of criticize some of my fellow philosophers for being so abstract. And there's a lot of intelligent people out there that could understand ideas if you just put them in a more relatable and understandable language and get across a lot of these ideas that you're kind of asking. And that's really where I think, I mean, if you go back to the first sort of philosophers, you know, Socrates, I mean, one of the basic point was to know thyself. Yes. And anyway. You know, once you start there, you kind of realize that that's a psychological question. And so, you know, coming back to kind of the philosophy of emotions of bringing this in, I mean, you're right. It's all about just kind of inciting those kind of questions. I mean, we all have beliefs. We all have ideas. But the question is, why do we have these beliefs? And then you can bring it into psychology and then the emotions of, and how does neuroscience or how does certain kinds? Of studies help us come to know ourselves? And then basically what philosophy is going to do is this is going to try to analyze those even a little bit more and say, and how can we be even clearer? Or how can we analyze this more to make sure that psychology is really accomplishing what it's trying to do? And that's what I think a really important study of philosophy of emotion can really do that. Right. And it's just being able to break it down to for people that there are certain emotions that people feel are very foreign to themselves. Especially within their society. It's like, am I going crazy? Or is this societally correct? Or I'm just having one of those moments where I'm really feeling life deeply and it's okay to do this, you know, in whatever manner they're going to express themselves. So those kinds of questions come into play also. Now, that's a very insightful point. Definitely. And I mean, in terms of. Of just maybe even adding on to that. I mean, it's it's and that's one reason why I found myself so interested in the philosophy of emotions. I mean, for one, to be rather just honest is I'm fascinated by emotions. They're so interesting. But as you were kind of highlighting, you're kind of almost sometimes scared of them. They're frightening you. And sometimes they seem so obviously powerful in our lives. And on the one hand, you think, wow, this emotion is so powerful. But on the other hand, we use words, for example, like don't be emotional. And it's a negative term, you know. And. And yet, ironically, at the same time, we say things like, you know, boy, he really is or she really is passionate. And we mean that in a very positive way. And I think that's such an interesting distinction that emotional sometimes can be considered bad. But yet passionate means that you're committed and devoted and it's a good thing, too. Yeah. I think I caught up in semantics. What is good? What is bad? What is evil? What is powerful? It's that dichotomy. I think that a lot of people have difficulty. With that, they're thinking in black and white terms. Yeah, that's a very good point. I mean, and you have a specific thought you're thinking of in terms of the emotions or. Well, just love. I think love is a good place to start. That's a powerful emotion. That's a fantastic place to start. Right. And it can be as mundane as I love eating pizza or it's like I really love my. Mate, my husband, my child. I mean, there is that that wide array of emotions with just that one word. And it's such a powerful word. Now, that's a really, really that's a that's a fantastic place to start with so much complexity and complexity in terms of analyzing emotions, especially the philosophy of emotions, because on the one hand, you start to see how psychology has really helped us understand, for example, what's going on in the brain. Yeah. People feel certain kinds of ideas. But there's also a point where I think philosophy can add some insight into a concept that, as you were mentioning, I mean, love goes back for so many generations and various, various cultures and in various ways. And there is a question of you could ask whether or not love the way we think of it is universal or if it's just our time period. But but to be just basically straightforward, I mean, I mean, a lot of what often sometimes is studied in in psychology. And in science called love, it sometimes it actually kind of gives us what I would sort of say kind of an impoverished picture of love, because what you're looking for in an experiment is something you can completely measure. And you think of something like the feeling a mother has in stepping in front of a car to save her child, or you you contrast that with with the kind of passion that two lovers have for each other. And and then you think of. An old couple who's been married for 50 years sitting on a park bench. And we call all of those things love. And yet you think about what is it psychologically that you can measure as a scientist that really unites all of those things. And that's where I think actually philosophy emotions can kind of then kind of add a little bit of of analysis or sort of a way of kind of understanding love that that sometimes is a little bit lost sometimes or maybe even a little distorted sometimes in the psychology of love, because then sometimes love ends up being. And to be rather straightforward, I mean, sometimes when psychologists sometimes talk about love, they almost talk about as if it's just really only lust or it's some kind of immediate rush of of an insight. And so one of the. Actually, yeah. Yeah. And one of our obsessions is how do you make love last. Right. And really what we're basically saying is love is for the really young and the passionate excitement, you know. And it changes forms depending on what. Age you're at. So, yeah. And recently, I mean, they've been able to track it with like fMRI, you know, but just hooking people up to machines to see what brain changes they go through versus just guessing because it's so subjective. And you can have a subject sitting there and reporting one thing and they could be lying through their teeth, you know, because they're there. There may could be. Sitting right there and they'll say, oh, yeah, I love him and her with with undying devotion. And, you know, and, you know, unless they're hooked up to something mechanically, there's no empirical evidence for that, at least until now. So from a philosophical standpoint, what what does love look like? That's a very good question. So I can break it into kind of two ways. I mean, first, I can say. Well, I can look. I got a little bit historically kind of what do we mean by the word love? And then and then I can probably break it into from there. What I would sort of think is what can we take from that and then say, what is the philosophy of emotion? How can we add that to talk about love? I mean, the first thing is you go back and we use the word love. You are very insightful pointing out. We use it very promiscuously in our culture. Right. You said, you know, I love my sweetie, but I love pizza and love such a positive emotion the way we Americans like to talk about it. But the ancient Greeks actually divided love into three different forms, generally one called Eros, which is obviously where we get the word erotic. And this is mostly what we would call romantic love between two lovers and so forth. And then you have another love called Celia, which basically means friendship. But it would also be the kind of love maybe you have for your family members and stuff like that. And then there's the specific love called Agape, which is that selfless sacrifice. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. that often Christians talk about that, you know, Jesus did, right? Jesus died for you and Jesus loves you. That kind of the idea that Jesus sacrificed for people, you know? And so we kind of conflate all of these together. And I think you made a really good point about how to kind of study it scientifically. And I think one important thing that's really hard to measure in the lab, you give all those things, is when you talk about emotion like love, the first part that I would say that I think a philosophy can add to this discussion is love takes time. Love's a process. Yes, it is. So, you know, the idea is if I imagine if like a person, a student came into my class and said something like, since the beginning of this class, I've been in love, I wouldn't really think the student really understood what the term would mean because you can't be in love for 10 minutes, you know? So there's a sense in which then this love takes time. It involves sort of a story, you know? And so you imagine, we talk a lot about love as being, imagine, you know, a love story. You know, I love the first sight. You know, but really, I think we talk about love at first sight mostly after the fact. You know, I mean, if the relationship works out and you find yourself maybe getting engaged and married, then you look back and you can say love at first sight. But that first sense of sort of excitement, maybe if you're at like a bar or at a club or something, you know, that's probably just really all it is, really excitement. And boy, I had a crush is how you might just distinguish it. But boy, did I get over you quickly or something like that. The rush of endorphins again, yes. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. So when we come back from commercial, we will keep going with that, talking about all of these emotions and, you know, the differentiations between psychological and philosophical. Okay? Sure. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology offers numerous psychology, psychology, behavioral, and health-related science graduate degrees. At three campuses, Los Angeles, California, including branches in Westwood and Irvine, Chicago, Illinois, and Washington, D.C., and online. The Chicago School prepares students to meet the ever-changing mental health needs of society through classroom experience and real-world training. The Chicago School Counseling Centers in Irvine and Westwood provide caring, confidential, and affordable psychological services to individuals and their families. For more information, visit thechicagoschool.edu. And thank you to the Chicago School of Professional Psychology for supporting Psych One-on-One. This is Julianne Good with Dr. Dane Sawyer. We are talking about the philosophy of emotions. And talking about emotions, philosophy actually is the love of knowledge, correct? Correct, yes. Yes. Yes. So. Um. How did you. How did you get into the field? Uh. I mean, probably. But. That's a good question. Uh. I. I think really my entryway into the philosophy of emotions was through a group of philosophers called the existentialists. And what separates the existentialists from a lot of other philosophers is whereas, you know, the history of philosophy is often characterized as sort of this history of reason and reason alone. And it's always about rationality and logic and stuff that the existentialists kind of pushed back and really kind of said that really a lot of what life is about is kind of what I was getting at at the beginning of the show about making choices and making commitments. And it's really about what am I doing with my life and what's the purpose and meaning of my life. And so you have philosophers like Kierkegaard saying things like, well, the really the core of life is having a kind of passionate inwardness. And you have people. Like Heidegger saying things like that, you know, you have to commit yourself with the realization that one day you're going to die. And so these moments are precious. Or you have people like Nietzsche saying that life's all about these grand passions and sort of giving style to your character and kind of cultivating who you are. And so this really kind of this emphasis on passion and sort of the passionate life kind of naturally led me into kind of thinking about how, you know, we tend to talk about, you know, we talk about emotions and we often talk about emotions as being very irrational, stupid, right? Sort of, you know, getting us in all kind of trouble and emotions are dangerous and this kind of stuff. But my studies have actually kind of taken me into different directions, kind of different conclusions concerning the emotions rather, being quite different than what is often our common sense perspective on them. Right. Well, and it contributes to the whole. Wholeness of life. And there's been more studies recently that are going towards you need to incorporate your emotions on a daily basis. You can't just shut them off and compartmentalize them because that actually does you more harm than good. You need to incorporate them into your decision making. You know, it's that emotional intelligence that Daniel Goleman was writing about several years ago, which is really popular. And. In the business world that, you know, it it just it adds depth to life that you really need to have on a regular basis. Yes, Daniel Goleman's book is was kind of a landmark for people like me in terms of putting that idea out there, right, to have emotional intelligence. And the idea sounds like a contradiction in terms, you know, kind of the old joke about economists. You know, if. You know so much about the economy, then why aren't you rich? It's good. I mean, if emotions are so intelligent, then why often are they so stupid? Right. I mean, that's that's kind of the the joke about all this kind of stuff. But but interestingly, even though Daniel Goleman, you know, gave a lot to the field, I would actually what he kind of wanted to argue was that there's the rationality or intelligence in the emotions. But as you were highlighting, I think the important. And people are starting to realize this. It's not just recognizing that there's actually rationality in emotions, but it's very important for us to have emotional intelligence about the emotions that we kind of come to a healthy understanding of what emotions are, how they fit into our lives, how they contribute to our well-being, our flourishing. And actually, interestingly, just even how they even help us make rational choices, you know, as opposed to thinking that rationality is completely removed from emotions. How often we make the choices. I make the most emotional sense. Right. You know, I'm working with people with substance abuse problems. And it's really interesting to see once they start getting sober that if they were really emotional, they start getting a little more into their thinking cognitive brain. If they were really, you know, very intellectual, all of a sudden they're they're they're flipping into their emotional side and incorporating. Right. I sat with one of my clients today and he was kind of almost arguing with me. It's like I'm having these emotions and I don't know what to do with them. And it's really uncomfortable. I'm like, this is a part of the process of healing up that you're allowing those voices to come in. You're allowing those stirrings to happen. And he almost looked at me like, uh, it's really uncomfortable. I don't know. don't want to go there. I said, sorry, you're a human. You get to go there. Yeah. And, and one of the things I think that they really piggyback on that is, is as you were highlighting is just the uncomfortability sometimes. I mean, you, you think of the idea of, of being emotional implies that you're not being reasonable, right? When we say that, um, or all these kinds of things, but, uh, but I, I would actually argue that there's a lot of sophistication and a real sense of insight you can get from analyzing specific emotions and realizing kind of what's going on in terms of the structure of them and how they relate to, for example, our making judgments about the world and our own self worth, uh, and, and so forth. Yes. And let's talk a little bit about the, the judgment part of it, because you had written a bit about that in your email. And I thought that, that was really interesting. It's the, uh, judgment and envy and where that all comes into play philosophically. Sure. I mean, I think probably the best way to sort of, of make this point is, is, I mean, basically what I would argue is that emotions are actually pretty intelligent and they involve what is what Fosher's often called is the golden mind or what's called intentionality, which basically means that they're, they're always about something. And that actually does imply, I kind of judgment now I I'm not implying that, that emotions are thoroughly reflective as if we just think about them. In fact, as you're kind of highlighting about the, the, the person you were talking to one of your, uh, uh, patients that, uh, that often, you know, we're completely unaware sometimes of, of the feelings that we feel, but there is no doubt that there are judgments there. And sometimes it can really show a lot of the sophistication of them. So, I mean, like one basic example. So you think of, um, a family of emotions, for example, you have irritation and then you have anger, and then you have another emotion like indignation. Now, sometimes people would characterize these as, these are all based on the same family, but they're different levels of intensity. And I would actually suggest something a little bit different than that. Actually, I would suggest that there's a lot of sophistication that goes on. So when, for example, when someone says something like, you know, I'm really angry. No, no, actually, I think I'm just irritated. I'm just irritated. Sort of as a philosopher, kind of the wonder opens up. And what I would sort of argue is that people just don't realize how sophisticated of a change that actually is. So, I mean, you think of something that's irritating is just bothersome to you, you know, and so you make a judgment of some kind, and I don't mean judgment as in like I'm judging you, but just you make a judgment or a recognition that something's bothersome. But when you're angry, you recognize that something's actually personally offensive to you. Somebody, or something has offended you. And then you think of like indignation, that's kind of like something that's morally infuriating. And what's really interesting about these three emotions, for example, is when you take something like, like, like, you know, moral indignation in terms of like contempt. I mean, there's a reason why that, that use of the emotion is used like in the court of law. You think of the contempt, the judge that's standing up over you and looking down on you and judging you from a superior position. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, so when you talk about contempt, I mean the idea is there's a up and down relationship. Someone who's superior looking down. Um, and of course there, there can't be an upward contempt. You know, my, my favorite example of that is something like the three Stooges, but I don't think it'd be the will will will will keep it simple. But That sounds interesting. And three Stooges. Okay. But the opposite of that. Sorry. Go ahead. No, no, no. I was just, I just wanted to make mention that that sounds interesting, but that's probably a negative. I just wanted to make mention that that sounds interesting, but that's probably another show. Yeah, exactly. Definitely. Definitely. But the opposite of contempt would be like resentment, right? I mean, you're looking up at someone and you notice, I mean, when people feel resentment, it's towards someone that they feel is superior because they're more powerful or they're luckier or they have more kind of some kind of social status, you know? And so you have this contempt where you look down on somebody and you're judging someone from a morally superior position. And then you have resentment, almost the exact opposite. You're looking up at somebody, you resent someone who's superior, and then you kind of have hatred just like right in the middle, you know? And it's interesting because hatred is kind of like the good versus evil, or if I was going to characterize this, it's always in those traditional old stories of, I guess, the black knight versus the white knight. You know, they're kind of like equals in some way. Yes, they are. Most definitely. Most definitely. So now, like with envy. Envy. As you were writing, it's you're looking out at somebody else, again, as you had stated previously, that they have something that you don't have and they're superior to you. You internalize it as an inferiority complex of sorts. It depends on how intense it is. But it's a double emotion going out there where it's one of those rare emotions that you're projecting out, you know? You're superior and I'm inferior. And it's both as detrimental, unless you can sit there and look at it as to what is the purpose of this. No, yeah. You say, I mean, I don't think it's a surprise that envy is one of the seven deadly sins, right? And, you know, I mean, yeah, you really captured it. I mean, it's this idea of envy. And probably the best way to kind of highlight what's unique about envy is almost contrasted with jealousy. But, I mean, it's... And envy, you know, this person is... You tend to see this person as a distance, you know? And they're higher than you. And, yeah, they have something that you don't have. And simultaneously, the odd thing about envy is it also puts yourself down, right? Because when you're envious, you don't feel gratitude. You know, you tend to see yourself as there's something wrong with you, right? I mean, I wish I had, you know, his height or his athletic ability or I wish I had her hair. And it's simultaneously. It's admiring from a distance somebody else. But it's simultaneously a kind of putting your own self down. And so, yeah, I mean, and yet, ironically, right, a lot of American advertising and a lot of even sometimes our capitalistic-driven culture is kind of like to ignite this envy, right? That it's, you know, it's what makes you go buy things, right? If you were happy with yourself, you know, and you've helped a lot of gratitude towards life and the things that you have and who you are. You might not go buy the next thing to make you better. Exactly. And then it also fuels the atrocities of war. Oh, of course. Yeah. You think of people wanting what other people have and those kind of things. Yeah, definitely. That's a very good connection as well. Yeah. It's the most extreme form of it, isn't it? Definitely. Yeah. Or sometimes, again, kind of one of those as a counterpoint. I was talking about the difference to me. I mean, I mentioned, but I didn't really go into it, about the difference between envy and jealousy. You know, so we often conflate the two in our culture. You know, we'll say things like, you know, you're going to a concert. Oh, I'm so jealous. Or we sometimes even will say things in sort of sometimes in a catty way. Like, oh, I hate that person. But what you're really expressing is a kind of envy. But, you know, probably the best way to kind of highlight this is jealousy kind of often implies that you actually have something already that you are. You have a fear of losing. You know, so you think of like seeing your lover dance with a really attractive person and makes you, you know, in one sense maybe insecure, but you feel that jealousy because, hey, that's my girlfriend or that's my husband or whatever. And you kind of have that sense of that fear of losing somebody, something that you think is yours, you know. And so versus envy, right, where you're kind of, you know, it's something that you wish you had, you know. So, I mean, you can really hear this. When you have like a sentence, when you say something like, it sounds really odd to say something like if I was watching my wife dance with a really attractive man and I said, boy, I envy him. That sounds kind of odd. It would be something, you know, like, oh, you know, I'm so jealous. And you can kind of see how the distinction really rings true. And that's really hard to, again, going back to the kind of psychology aspect. I mean, how would you measure that distinction? There's a real sophistication there. And yet we can recognize those distinctions between. Something like envy and jealousy. And yet there's something related to them. But you can see how there's a different sort of logic to them. There's a different judgment to them. There's a different rationality to them. Exactly. And different pathways neurologically also. So it makes it a little tricky. Most definitely. So we are going to take a break and we will be right back with Dr. Dane Sawyer. Are you searching for answers and insight to life issues? Is the behavior of family or friends questionable or concerning? Find tips and possible solutions from the convenience of your own PC, cell phone or tablet at therapycable.com. Therapy Cable has the most comprehensive library of contemporary therapy videos online. Help may be as easy as a few clicks away. Therapy Cable offers comprehensive therapy videos ranging from addiction to self-care and contact information for more information. For qualified providers. Find the answers to your life challenges at therapycable.com. Welcome back to Psych 101 with Julianne Good and Dr. Dane Sawyer. And we're talking about the philosophy of the emotions this evening and kind of breaking it down in a different sort of format. Kind of comparing it with psychological breakdown of emotions. And just thinking. Thinking about what you're feeling I think sometimes is really helpful. Science is researching this more and that it is actually more conducive to your health if you incorporate emotions. So the next time you feel like crying, go ahead and cry. Next time you feel like laughing, go ahead and laugh. Of course, it depends on the context of where you're at and everything else. But, you know, those expressions. You know, those expressions of emotions are really healthy for you. Versus sitting there and trying to dampen them down. Or forget about them. Just sweep them under the rug. That's not very healthy either. So wouldn't you agree, Dr. Sawyer? No, definitely, yes. I mean, we often don't sometimes understand exactly the kind of pressures that we get socially. I mean, we often think that emotions are so personal. And they are personal. But they're also social in the sense that they're all kinds of what a lot of philosophers will call display rules. You know, right? There's certain ways that you're supposed to express your emotions. And unfortunately, because as I was kind of highlighting from the very beginning, a number of people in our culture have often just this very negative view of emotion. I mean, they're irrational and they're dangerous. You know, and so as a result of that, we've almost just shut all these feelings down. And as a result of that, any kind of feeling whatsoever is pushed down. But it's definitely a very, very important element of kind of recognizing that sometimes these display rules are actually stifling in order to help us kind of recognize our own well-being, as well as our ability to flourish and live the good life. Right. And I think also with the advent of YouTube. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. this new pushing towards let's push the envelope emotionally in front of the camera, you know, to the detriment of who knows. Well, of course, the person that is expressing those, you know, too many emotions just to get some attention. No, that's a very good point. And, yeah, I mean, there's no doubt that the emotions can even be used to get certain kinds of attention. I mean, one of the other big arguments in false emotions is that emotions are actually strategies. You know, so you think of, I think a good example you're talking about of displaying emotions, and a good example of this would be anger. You know, so you think of anger is probably one of the best candidates for often is considered a negative emotion. But you can also see how in some cases it might be a negative emotion, maybe not the best strategy, but you also can see how often it can actually be a pretty powerful strategy. So you think of, for example, in the beginning of the sort of the beginning of the feminist movement here in America in the 1970s, you know, and I remember one of the things I didn't actually go up during the time, but the things I've heard people talk about the era was that women had to learn that they had a right to be angry and to be able to express their anger about the oppression and injustices towards women. And that they also had to learn how to be angry, too, that there was a right to be angry. And that there was a right to be angry. And that there was a right to be angry. And that there was something to be angry about, you know, because as I was highlighting earlier, I mean, basically, if you think about what's the judgment that anger really recognizes is that someone's offended you or humiliated you in some way. And so anger in the right time and the right context and with the right degree can actually be appropriate. Yes, it can be. And it should be displayed then, as you had stated, with the women's movement. I remember growing up and seeing many of those broadcasts, you know, Gloria Steinem getting on and being passionate about, you know, women need to have equal rights and they need to get out of the house and, you know, start making their own living. And, you know, I mean, there was just such a movement towards the late 60s, early 70s and that whole realm. And it was it was inspiring. And, yeah, I, you know, that was a. Huge social movement during those times, you know, so many things were changing and they needed to change. They needed to come to light. You know, the repression was enough for so many different groups of people. It was just it was a time that was just phenomenal. And I completely changed the world for how many people came up and said, that's it. We've had these injustices and we're not going to live with this anymore. So I agree with you. Yeah. And a lot of people would say that that's a very good point. I mean, it's a lot of people would say that, you know, anger is always irrational. But but there's an element of anger that's very powerful. And that is it's a way of kind of taking hold of the situation. You know, right. And and so where whereas before, you know, someone is in a situation where they might feel humiliated or whatever. But anger kind of takes hold of the situation and actually puts you in a superior position. Right. I mean, anger is usually tends to be in from a position of of judging. And so it allows people in that sense. It's a good strategy as you're talking about, like for social change. It's not a coincidence, for example, that that in politics that people often are trying to incite kind of anger to help fuel movements. I know Donald Trump is definitely doing that right now, right? Yeah. And again, that's a very good example of somebody who is who is, again, going back to like, you know, inciting what is anger. And the idea is, is, I mean. If you're someone out there who's angry with Donald Trump, it's like because he's offending you in some way, you know, and that's what anger is. When you when you're offended, you're likely going to get angry. And that's kind of like the idea of one of my favorite philosophers of the emotions. Robert C. Salmi talks about that emotions are engagements with the world. Right. We they in Tunisian into the world in such a way that when something it's not as if you think to yourself, I have this emotional response. And and I see that it's like on top of reality. But like you just see someone as offensive or someone just simply offends you and you can just observe it, you know, in terms of the emotion. Right. So it needs to be wielded and it needs to be used appropriately and not just impulsively and destructively. No. Yeah. I'm really actually glad you said that because because there's a big difference in what you could call crude anger and we could call refined anger, you know. And and you think of a lot of examples where. You know, someone commits a crime of passion or does something regretful in terms of of just an initial burst of anger. And you think of someone like Picasso who channels that anger into beautiful artistic expressions. And ancient Indian philosophy has a nice difference between the say they distinguish emotions because they're called Babas versus Rasa. And Babas are just these, you know, impulses or these sort of strong sense of. Emotions. And then Rasa is a is a cultivated, refined emotion. And that's a bit of what also leads me to emotions is I don't want to just understand emotion. I'm saying them philosophically. But I think when you get down to it, it's really important to understand of of how we think about emotions and what we should think about emotions. Yeah. And get control over them before they get control over us. Right. I mean, befriend your emotions. They're here to teach us something. They're here to they have their own secret language almost. You know, it's just we have to get quiet enough to sit there and tap into the intelligence of our emotions, period. No, definitely. And they I mean, and there is a sense of rationality built into them. So so when you study them, you start thinking about you start to see how like you can ask yourself questions like, well, actually, let me back up and say so. I mean, as you're. You're highlighting. I mean, it's not as if we just talk about emotions as just judgments, but we're also we also evaluate emotions. So, I mean, anger is probably one of the most common ones. One of the best examples of this is, you know, as we've been talking about this, I mean, people will often say things like, hey, you know, you need to calm down because you don't have a right to be angry here. Or I mean, I think a good example of this is I imagine maybe somebody who I think has stolen my keys and I'm getting really upset about it. And then someone who says, hey, your keys are right here. Yeah. He didn't take your. Keys. And then and then you realize, oh, wait a minute. I don't have a right to be angry. And that's a real sophisticated change, because now you realize if if sometimes anger is wrong, that means it also can be right. But learning as you're kind of highlighting, learning the distinction between the two when emotions are wrong versus when emotions are right in terms of their judgment is an important step to take. So, I mean, a good example is, I mean, anger can be irrational anger. I mean, I might, for example, be in a situation where. My employer has frustrated me. But obviously, if I go home and I take that that anger out on a child or the dog or or my spouse, I mean, that's irrational anger. You know, it's anger would be in the appropriate situation in the appropriate time and at the appropriate object. You know, if you're going to think about it from an ethical perspective, too. And I think that takes a bit of of of reflection and figuring that out. And that's why I would encourage people to start thinking about this a bit more to recognizing. Of what it means to sort of have the emotions and sort of the structure of them and how they fit into our lives and give our lives meaning, but also how they can be refined as well. Exactly. So that, you know, the next time a person has an emotional outburst, say, they're not embarrassed by it. They're not feeling guilt and shame. They're actually going, oh, well, maybe I shouldn't have done that. And then, you know. Go. Go. Go back and, you know, hopefully apologize to the, you know, the the people that they threw that anger out to, you know, or at least an explanation of it. And then go back and sit there and try to sort through it. So how could I have done that? How could I have responded to that situation better so that I don't get that kind of response next time instead of repeating that same cycle and actually learning? But then just throwing it out and thinking that, well, the world owes them or, you know, as you had said, Dane, I have that right to feel that emotion versus, you know, seeing how it's affecting everybody. Now, that's a very good point. I mean, the way our emotions affect people and the way that we think about emotions, I think are really, really important understanding. what to do about them. And, you know, you mentioned the idea of kind of hinting at emotions and responsibility. And one of the things that sometimes I think is a detriment of some of the scientific studies of emotions is they tend to portray emotions as being too mechanical, you know, as if there's just the kind of neurological syndrome and it triggers off this response. Kind of behavioral therapy. I have to throw that one in there. It's very mechanical. And I, you know, we use that all the time for, you know, as basic therapy, as teaching tools. But we have to go beyond that. And actually science is starting to, again, incorporate emotions in there. Anyways, go ahead. No, no, you're right on the exact same point I was basically getting at. I mean, on the one hand, the behavioristic tradition really kind of got psychology going as a science. But as you're highlighting, it's talking about emotions. Emotions in terms of, for example, feelings and things that happen to us. Often then, of course, if we think about emotions in that way, then, of course, you think to yourself, there's nothing I can do about them. All I really do is suffer my emotions. But if you recognize, for example, that emotions are something that you do, and this is kind of one of those areas where different philosophers would disagree, and I tend to agree with people like Robert C. Solomon, that there's... There's a sense in which the way we talk about the emotions often influences the way we respond to them. Yes. So if we think to ourselves, yeah, this is just an automatic response, there's nothing I can do about it, then we're likely not to take much responsibility for it. But if we recognize, as you were kind of saying, that these emotions are me and their processes and their judgments, and there's a sense in which I have sort of cultivated certain kinds of habits in my life, you can ask yourself the kind of questions of, what kinds of habits or emotions... Emotional temperaments can I work on to kind of develop the right kinds of habits where I have a very healthy emotional sort of integration in my life? And then go and teach somebody else the same. Model that behavior. Model healthy emotions versus getting angry at the drop of a hat. No, exactly. And that's where, again, you know, going back to the emotions, like emotion like anger can be right on the target. But again, if something that should imply a kind of mild irritation involves an explosion of anger, then you realize that the person's got the emotion wrong in that particular occasion. But that takes a learning process. You kind of have to be willing to be honest with yourself and reflect on it and all this kind of stuff. And that's definitely an important point. Right. And take ownership of what you're saying. And take control of what you're feeling. It's, you know, and learn how to express that in a healthy manner and not like your five-year-old inner child. Because there's a lot of people that are five-year-olds that are wounded. They're walking around in adult bodies and causing a lot of destruction on this planet, period. Mm-hmm. And yet, you know, there's a sense in which we really learn that behavior. I mean, my wife used to work for a hotel, a boutique hotel. And, I mean, one of the things that she would just get is, I mean, we have this sense in which our culture creates this mentality of that the customer is always right, right? So, of course, anger is the way then to get your way, right? You just get really angry, really angry. And this, again, goes back to kind of an argument that, again, trying to say that emotions seemingly can be irrational, but you can see how they can be really sophisticated strategies, too. I mean, getting angry, and standing up tall, and getting your voice loud can be really intimidating, right? And there's a sense in which you can imagine an easy scenario where someone learns, maybe even, obviously, unconsciously, probably, over time, that, wow, you know, getting angry really works, and I get my way here. And sometimes the person gets frustrated, and that doesn't work, but often it does, you know? Yeah, and all I can say is, bullies, you know, you know, there is karmic justice, I think. Sooner or later, they do get, you know, get, back what they put out, so, that's not a great way to live. But, as we are wrapping up, Dr. Sawyer, do you have any other comments? I'm trying to think if there's anything else, really, really trying to dive into, but, actually, I guess, are there any basic questions you might have for me, as some final thoughts? It would be really nice to have a nice, philosophical, aspect of love, to end the show. Sure. I mean, probably, if anyone's interested, by the way, I'd say, the first place to go, if you want to, is to get a philosophical introduction to love, is to read Plato's Symposium. It's about a, just a bunch of guys, that, have, gotten, they're just, handing around the wine, and they're drinking, and then they decide to all give a bunch of speeches about love, and they give a bunch of different, versions and stories, and interpretations of it. That's probably the best place to go. That's probably the best place, to sort of begin with. And, and my favorite story of those, and even though the story's a, a myth, and kind of ridiculous, and, and, in one sense, it's a nice metaphor, but it also kind of gives us a good picture to think about, and that is, that, there's a story by Aristophanes, and basically what he says in the story is, that originally human beings were, you know, born, you know, twice as tall, with two heads, four arms, and four legs. And because of that, they were twice as intelligent, which means they were twice as arrogant, and so they offended the gods twice as much, and so, and so Zeus was, infuriated with this, and so he split us in half. Right? So that now, obviously we have the form of one head, and two arms, and two legs, and so forth, and, and that the idea is that we spend the rest of our life trying to find our, other half. Yes. You know, and it's a, it's a, it's a nice story, obviously it's, it's a little bit perfect, but the idea is that there's a sense in which, love does complete us, and we find, not only, uh, sort of, love in other people, but, we also love the fact of how we are when we're with, certain other people, and so, while it's, he uses the images of like, cutting an apple in half, and then putting the, the pears back together, it's probably more like, putting two apples, crudely cut, and then trying to grind them to get them together, you know, right, in terms of finding a nice love relationship, but, but there's no doubt that, uh, that there's a sense in which other people really do complete us, and we need other people, in order to, for us to come to a full understanding of, of who we are, and, and to, also to, be able to open ourselves up to, empathy, and that we are bigger than ourselves, even though we live in an individualistic society, and that love reminds us that, uh, that we need other people, and other people need us, and, we really can't completely do it alone. I love that. Thank you so much, Dr. Dainshart, and if anybody would like to contact you, your quick email? Sure, yes, uh, the easiest one, probably get a hold of me, would be, D, Sawyer, D, S-A-W-Y-E-R, at Laverne, dot E-D-U, Laverne is spelled, L-A-V-E-R-N-E, dot E-D-U. Excellent, thank you so much. I learned so much about philosophy this evening, and I hope you also did out there too, so, thank you. You bet. And, and thank you so much for tuning in to Psych One-on-One. This has been Julianne Good. If you would like to contact me, my email is, J-G-O-O-D-E-8, at Verizon.net. My office number is, 5-6-2-2-3-4-4-6-5. 5-0, and my office is in Irvine, California. Thank you so much. Take care of yourself. Take care of each other now. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.! Thank you. Thank you.