The Intricateness of the Narrative and Cognition

Emotions are often complex and, have within it many parts, and features. Some of which are more important than others. However, it does not stop these emotions from being complex. As Peter Goldie explains in his book The Emotions, his book explaining his view of emotion theory, that "An emotion is complex in that it will typically involve many different elements: it involves episodes of emotional experience, including perceptions, thoughts, and feelings of various kinds, and bodily changes of various kinds" (12). Some of the components are more what shapes the emotions, and others the concept. Some speak of some of these elements, others about other elements. However, the difference between these two kinds of discussions is in as, The Ancient greek philosopher Aristotle states, "One applies the form and the concept, the other the substance" (10). However, it is impossible to focus on all elements when talking about emotions easily, as they do not all deserve equal value, and it would take me more than an essay to discuss all the complexities in an emotion. As it would require much more of a novel length master piece to achieve this end. So, here, I will be focusing on the component that is argued for mainly by Martha Nussbaum and Peter Goldie, but also by others, This is the intentionality personal, cognitive, and how such emotions are a type of narrative.

Emotions Are no mystery to any human beings that exist on this planet. Some people would even argue that emotions ais no strange concept to some forms of animals. All conscious, and living human beings has in his own mind sole, and body, experienced some sort of emotions, before. So As rene Descartes a modern mechanical philosopher claims in his book The Passions, People have no need to be confused about emotions or what emotions are generally, as "everyone has experience of the passions within himself, there is no necessity to borrow one's observations from elsewhere in order to discover their nature: (21). Descartes suggest that to know about our emotions all you need to do is look inside and think about what you had felt in the past. However, we still tend to ask what emotions are, because while we know how they feel, we have no idea what they constitute or why we feel such emotions at certain times. To begin with, It's most of all what Goldie claims our emotions are a complex system of a interwoven "structured in that it constitutes part of a narrative -roughly, an unfolding sequence of actions and events, thoughts and feelings-in which the emotion itself is embedded" (13). This is a very broad statement, however. To elaborate the thoughts and events that occur within an emotions are seen by some as nussbaum states a narrative of emotions "an emotion, I shall argue, is the story of judgements about important things, judgments in which we acknowledge our neediness and incompleteness before those elements that we do not fully control: (271). The ancients had a similar view as aristitle holds that the emotions are a narrative and this narrative involves cognitions, as The situations can ofen influence "one's condition to become so transformed that his judgment is affected, and which is accompanied by pleasure and pain" (6). Now we have what emotions are generally, we can elaborate on the fat that all of this is personal and creates a narrative, and that all this is somewhat some sort of rational judgement.

the other side of this discussion supported by such people as William James and Antonio Demasio which focuses on the body, and feelings that relates to it. Some believes that it is mostly bodily and then we feel and think after the fact, such as jamess, and some are focused on how emotions are brain states. Paul Ekman believes that it is affect programming and that it's heavily based on genetics.

On Thee other hand, proponents who support a cognitive theory as the name suggest naturally prefer to think that the emotions takes place at least primarily in the sole and brain, in the conscious sense. As Descartes States there are some perceptions and things that only belongs mainly to the soul, and these "perceptions which we relate solely to the soul are those whose effects we feel as though they were in the soul itself, and as to which we do not usually know any proximate cause to which we may relate them: such are the feelings of joy, anger, and other such sensations, which are sometimes excited in us by the objects which move our nerves and sometimes also by other causes" (22/23). Descartes continues in this train of thought and thinks that the perceptions of these passions are not the only thing which belongs to the sole, but the emotions or passions themselves. Descartes feels that in fact to call them perceptions is wrong and that "more accurately call them emotions of the soul, not only because the name may be attributed to all the changes which occur in it-that is, in all the diverse thoughts which come to it, but more especially because of all the kinds of thought which it may have, there are no others which so powerfully agitate and disturb it as do these passions" (24). Descartes is not the only one who voice these views. Nussbaum agrees with Descartes, as Nussbaum feels that bodily feelings and emotions are quite different, and she does not really believes that bodily emotions counts for too much. as she claims that the "members of this family are distinct, both from bodily appetites such as hunger and thirst as well as from objectless moods such as irritation or endogenous depression" (274). She separates feelings from emotions, one which just belongs to the body, and the other which belongs to the mind and is intelligent. They are separate, because bodily emotions are not intelligent, maybe able to make sense of but they can not make sense of their own movements in such body parts. While she does not reguard The second types of feelings as very important, she explains why she thinks the others might defend it by saying that "This view is connected with the idea that emotions derive from the "animal" part of our nature, rather than from a specifically human part-usually by thinkers who do not have a high regard for animal intelligence" (274).

Furthermore, emotions are also sole and thought driven and are judgements, because you can have feelings towards things. As goldie points out one has ffeelings or emotions towards and those emotions have a target.. That target as goldie says is "the object of an emotion is that onto which one's thoughts and feelings are typically directed, and to which they typically return" (17). These objects that one's emotions is directed towards is often belief or desires that one has about something but it could also be an object or a person. Goldie explains what feeling towards is by stating that "Feeling towards is thinking of with feeling, so that your emotional feelings are directed towards the object of your thought" (19). Goldie is by far not alone in this thought. Nussbaum agrees with this assertion by saying that "object is an intentional object that is, it figures in the emotion as it is seen or interpreted by the person whose emotion it is" (275). She is saying how the emotions of a person is all about one's interpretation or judgement of something. They have to believe or think something to have an emotion. Aristotle has a similar claim as he discusses anger. Aristotle says that this feeling of anger has a object it targets, as "anger of the angry person is necessarily always directed towards someone in particular, ... also of necessity is that this individual has done or intended to do something to him or one of his friends, and that accompanying every outburst of anger is a certain pleasure derived from the hope for revenge" (6). This feeling towards is cognitive becausen one has to rationally think with feeling and aim one's sole and mind towards an object.

Belief in itself is also very essential, in order to feel you must have a judgement of something you believe is true either by experience or by some good reasons. For example descartes Gives an example with fear by stating that "if this figure is very strange and frightful-that is, if it has a close relationship with the things which have been formerly hurtful to the body, that excites the passion of apprehension in the soul and then that of courage, or else that of fear and consternation according to the particular temperament of the body or the strength of the soul, and according as we have to begin with been secured by defence or by flight against the hurtful things to which the present impression is related. (25). Some People like goldie doesn't agree that a emotion is one and the same with emotions but rather as goldie claims that "The relation between an emotion and the beliefs involved is not a contingent one; that is to say, there are conceptual relations between an emotion and the beliefs which ground it. (20). Some who also agrees that beliefs are important as Nussbaum does think that the beliefs are much more one with the emotions. as Nusbaum states "there is something marked in the intentional perceptions and the beliefs characteristic of the emotions: they are all concerned with value, they see their object as invested with value" (276). Sometimes we might believe somethings but can't identify our emotions. The bbeliefs and thoughts are essential here, when we are lost for a explanation for what we feel, we need only look in to our rrationality to get us started. As goldie claims that "It is often through detailed consideration of the thoughts which can be involved in an emotion that we come to see what sort of emotion it is that we are experiencing; this is what is profoundly right about the view that the emotions are intentional" (24).

WE must involve these feeling towards aspects of emotions as they help explain things as was demonstrated. But as goldie points out rightly that we should not forget the feeling part of feeling towards. As goldie explains that "feelings, and in particular feelings towards the object of the emotion, are central to emotional experience, and to exclude these feelings from an explanation of emotion or of action out of emotion is to over-intellectualize them" (41).

The judgements all play in to a story of our lives called a narrative, which consists of different episodes and events, along with our thoughts and emotions. These events are a continuous sequence. Goldie explains this by explaning that "Emotional experience is, in this sense, more like the unfolding of events in history than a sequence of events in nature" (145). These things that are part of our narrative is not necessarily and most of the time not part of the emotion, though emotions is certainly also part of the sequence. Some things as goldie states such as "The actions which we do out of an emotion, and the various ways of expressing an emotion, are also seen as part of the same narrative, but not themselves as part of the emotion itself" (13). None of these things can be separated from the narrative, and still make sense, by itself, Looking At a narrative will give a basis for all that is in one's narrative, especially emotions. Goldie points to this by pointing out how this integratedness of the emotions "tends to get forgotten in discussion of how one can understand and explain a person's emotions, as if an emotional experience or a disposition can be understood and explained by detaching it from the narrative in which it is embedded, and holding it up for examination as one might hold up a section of bone tissue in a laboratory" (16). Aristotle also makes similar claims but additionally points out that one must tell emotions in a convincing narrative to bee believed by saying "It is clear that in his speech the orator must create m his audience a temperament suitable for anger and establish his adversaries as those to be held liable for what makes his audience anger and as the sort of men at whom they should be angry" (9). In this way emotions all lead back to a narrative and connect to one and is inseparable from one.

In conclusion. Our feelings are not just bodily unthinking and instinctual movements and feelings that we must act upon by a process of unconsciousness. I hope that we mean more than such trivial things, and we are which, is why feelings are so cognative and why it is all so woven in to a narrative structure.