This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Randall · 26-30, M
The really esoteric answer is that these are metaphysically different things.
Love, broadly speaking, is a connection to a thing or set of things. Disappointment is a disconnection from something.
This is hard because self-awareness is tricky. Our brains are basically like iced cream sundaes, with the newer (intelligent-making) layers stacked on top of the older (primal) parts.
What we call love is often the result of a pretty complex interaction between the primal and the intellectual. Disappointment, generally speaking, is more visceral. It's not a fuzzy, obscure feeling the way love sometimes is.
In my personal experience, it's pretty easy to say why I'm disappointed in myself, because the feeling comes rocketing to the surface. "I didn't say what I should have said then." or "I didn't think she was the type of person to say that."
Hopefully you can make sense of my ramblings!
Love, broadly speaking, is a connection to a thing or set of things. Disappointment is a disconnection from something.
This is hard because self-awareness is tricky. Our brains are basically like iced cream sundaes, with the newer (intelligent-making) layers stacked on top of the older (primal) parts.
What we call love is often the result of a pretty complex interaction between the primal and the intellectual. Disappointment, generally speaking, is more visceral. It's not a fuzzy, obscure feeling the way love sometimes is.
In my personal experience, it's pretty easy to say why I'm disappointed in myself, because the feeling comes rocketing to the surface. "I didn't say what I should have said then." or "I didn't think she was the type of person to say that."
Hopefully you can make sense of my ramblings!
Randall · 26-30, M
@SW-User I hesitate to call it knowledge, because it's the result of me making connections for myself.
There's a concept in philosophy called Animalism. The thesis of this concept is that human persons are animals. I subscribe to this idea, and so I'm extremely interested in what makes human persons different from (and similar to) other animals.
So broadly speaking, the answer to your question is that I'm obsessed with thinking about humanity.
More specifically, the bit about our brains being like an iced cream sundae comes from various articles in psychological journals. I read one that even suggested that this structuring of the brain is why we enjoy music so much -- because it satisfies both the primal parts of the brain, and the intelligent, pattern-recognizing parts.
The claims I make about what love and disappointment are come from a few places. I studied a lot of metaphysics and phenomenology in college, but there's actually a pretty robust literature into how our use of language creates inclusion and exclusion (or belonging and shame) and disappointment. In fact, this is basically what the discipline of rhetoric is focused on. This is why I get mildly upset when people talk about rhetoric as being a negative thing, still.
I hope this answered your question! Feel free to keep them coming!
There's a concept in philosophy called Animalism. The thesis of this concept is that human persons are animals. I subscribe to this idea, and so I'm extremely interested in what makes human persons different from (and similar to) other animals.
So broadly speaking, the answer to your question is that I'm obsessed with thinking about humanity.
More specifically, the bit about our brains being like an iced cream sundae comes from various articles in psychological journals. I read one that even suggested that this structuring of the brain is why we enjoy music so much -- because it satisfies both the primal parts of the brain, and the intelligent, pattern-recognizing parts.
The claims I make about what love and disappointment are come from a few places. I studied a lot of metaphysics and phenomenology in college, but there's actually a pretty robust literature into how our use of language creates inclusion and exclusion (or belonging and shame) and disappointment. In fact, this is basically what the discipline of rhetoric is focused on. This is why I get mildly upset when people talk about rhetoric as being a negative thing, still.
I hope this answered your question! Feel free to keep them coming!
Randall · 26-30, M
@SW-User No pardons needed! I actually subscribe to your definition of knowledge, in part. The reason i don't want to say I know these things is because I don't understand them adequately enough to know them to be true.
If you're interested, the Phiosophical study of how we know what we know --
or when we can say that we "know" something, is called Epistemology.
There's also lots of work in rhetoric being done with respect to how narrative and other forms of language create knowledge. If you're interested in this topic, you might look at Michael Foucault's concept of the discursive formation, or read Paulo Freire's work, The Pedigogy of the Oppressed.
Great discussion. Cheers!
If you're interested, the Phiosophical study of how we know what we know --
or when we can say that we "know" something, is called Epistemology.
There's also lots of work in rhetoric being done with respect to how narrative and other forms of language create knowledge. If you're interested in this topic, you might look at Michael Foucault's concept of the discursive formation, or read Paulo Freire's work, The Pedigogy of the Oppressed.
Great discussion. Cheers!