cutlery: (the Universe is rarely so lazy.)
Sebastian "golden ball man" Michaelis ([personal profile] cutlery) wrote in [personal profile] justttkidding 2015-01-27 04:49 pm (UTC)

FROM: michaelis.sebastian@cdc.org

It is a range, so far as I see it. It accounts for the fact that not all creatures feel all emotions. By the human definition, that would make them deficient, naturally. Those creatures would be monsters.


FROM: michaelis.sebastian@cdc.org

But why is that? Is the capacity to feel necessary? Emotion can head to folly just as much as it can lead to greatness. It is a desire to lack emotion that leads to stories where devils are wholly evil.


FROM: michaelis.sebastian@cdc.org

For if they are wholly evil, then it is not one's personal failings that are to be judged. It is the idea of it being out of their hands that gives them comfort.


FROM: michaelis.sebastian@cdc.org

So to me, emotion is the capacity to feel, certainly. But not feeling things such as grief and empathy does not preclude feeling joy or pleasure.


[ this conversation is turning into plurk where you have to break up a serious discussion into like 10 messages god ]

FROM: michaelis.sebastian@cdc.org

But for something that lacks will and personality... It may, though it would be weak and feeble.
[ and flavorless ] If it is alive, it is always a possibility. But in that area, the distinction becomes difficult.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting