‘The human mind has no knowledge of the body.’ –Spinoza
The relationship between emotions and rationality is one that has preoccupied man for thousands of years. As the ancient Stoics said, the emotions typically involve the judgement that harm or benefit is at hand (Sorabji 2006). Already, then, there was thought to be a relationship between emotions and ‘judgement’, the latter implying a degree of rationality. But Sorabji, a philosopher, also points out that the mere intellectual appreciation of benefit or harm does not constitute emotion, but there must be some physiological disturbance: disembodied emotion is not meaningful. Yet the physiological reactions involved in emotions are typically thought of, since the development of evolutionary theory, as something of more primitive origins than reasoning. One reaction to this would be to argue that emotions govern actions that are urgent and essential to survival, whereas reasoning is dispassionate and calculating. (…)
To understand the usefulness of neuroscience in examining the rationality of decision-making, it is worth looking at an example. Current neurological research shows that people with orbitofrontal cortical lesions have difficulties in anticipating the negative emotional consequences of their choices. People with healthy brains, however, seem to take account of these emotions, which are mediated through and are consistent with counterfactual thinking in the assessment of choice alternatives (Bechara et al. 1994). More generally, results from psychological and neurological research show that emotions and affective states are not just sources of biased judgements, but may also serve as essential functions leading to more appropriate choices.
{ Alan Kirman, Pierre Livet and Miriam Teschl | Continue reading | More: Theme Issue ‘Rationality and emotions’ | The Royal Society B }
photo { Ansen Seale }
