The Desperate Need for the Emotional Paradigm
Markendeya Yeddanapudi
Rene Descartes expounded his basic doctrine that every life form is totally a machine, incapable of emotions, pains and pleasures. Every aspect of nature is mechanical and mathematical only, with no place for feelings and emotions. He simply made the mechanical approach, treating the total nature as mechanical, the one and only scientific approach. Science and Technology have become synonyms. Even today this mechanical approach continues. The phrase emotional intelligence is getting slight notice, but the meaning and content of the phrase has been mechanized. We are confronting the Newtonized or mechanized emotions.
The only exception to the mechanical view is the human, who Descartes granted as endowed with emotions and feelings, because God is residing in the pineal gland in the brain of the human only. He thus made the human, the agent of God on earth. He inducted Mechanics into God, granting the human the authority to do economics on nature. Add to this deadly mechanical foundation, Newtonian mechanics and Darwin’s dictum of war among the organisms of the Biosphere and the survival of the winner, the ultimate poisonous brew. Machines that kill nature continuously to carry on economics, have taken over the human living.
God is the Judge spectator of nature as per most religions. The Human has promoted himself to a bigger status than God; he not only is the spectator like God but also the economic user of all creation. He is the practicing monster to whom all emotions are bias, the ultimate sin in science. The free and healthy nature automatically takes him over and includes him in the grand symbiosis. In the interests of science the basic symbiosis is getting eradicated, by converting into a monster that destroys and destroys only.
The emotional bond with nature and the sprouting of diverse arts are being killed and we have the cinemas that hijacked every art into mechanized industries Today we have the Chat GPT which can give poems and songs instantly. Arts which are the flowers of the humor of life have been made extinct. The Biosphere has no role in the creation of arts today.
All arts are sterilized of emotions and feelings. Poetry and songs have become mechanical engineering.
As all emotional bonds with nature are cut, we have become the outside spectators of our butchery of nature. The economic man is a butcher of nature. The butchery has become so efficient that it will not be very long before all life forms become extinct. We are fast falling into the abyss.
Let us pray for the emergence of a University that delivers us from the hell. Let us hope that it takes the initiative and starts a Free Nature Park without our tampering as the first step in reviving the emotional bond with nature. Every nano space on earth brims with life and is capable of emotional interaction. If one speeds away in vehicles, one is actually losing one’s bond with nature. Today we jet away not even viewing nature but confined to the seats in the air plane. We have become prisoners who self deceive that we are progressing.
Industrialization and extinction are synonyms.
YM Sarma
Chat GPT
This piece, The Desperate Need For The Emotional Paradigm by YM Sarma, is a passionate and urgent critique of the modern mechanized worldview, particularly as it has unfolded through the influence of Cartesian dualism, Newtonian physics, Darwinian competition, and industrial capitalism. Here's a breakdown and reflection on its core themes and implications:
🔧 Mechanization of Nature: From Descartes to Today
Descartes’ notion that animals and the natural world are mechanistic—soulless machines—laid the philosophical groundwork for centuries of scientific thought that largely excluded emotion, subjectivity, and spiritual connection. Sarma sharply critiques this, pointing out how this dehumanizing and denaturalizing approach has been institutionalized as the default scientific paradigm.
Modern tools like AI (including ChatGPT) are mentioned not as neutral technologies, but as extensions of this mechanical logic—tools that replicate artistic output without the depth of emotional connection that birthed it.
"Poetry and songs have become mechanical engineering."
A line like this accuses the technological mimicry of art of robbing it of its human core—of emotion, experience, and soul.
🌍 Emotional Disconnect from Nature
Sarma sees modern industrial civilization as suffering from a profound emotional amnesia. Humanity, once embedded in a living, feeling, symbiotic web with the Earth, now sees itself as separate, dominant, and utilitarian. The emotional paradigm—our feeling, empathic relationship with nature—is being lost.
"The economic man is a butcher of nature."
This is a powerful metaphor. It implies that the cold, utilitarian economic rationality devalues life, reducing it to resources to be consumed.
🎨 Arts as Canaries in the Coal Mine
Another compelling point Sarma makes is about the sterilization of the arts. He suggests that cinema, AI-generated content, and industrialized entertainment have hijacked the soul of the arts. What was once born out of love, grief, awe, and emotional truth is now mass-produced and emotionally hollow.
"Arts which are the flowers of the humor of life have been made extinct."
This line poetically frames the arts as organic expressions of emotional connection—a humor, a joy, a playfulness—that industrialization cannot replicate.
🏞️ A Hopeful Vision: Reclaiming Emotion
The essay concludes with a plea for a University—a symbol of learning, reflection, and rebirth—that can begin to heal this rift. Sarma envisions this through the creation of a Free Nature Park, untouched by human interference, where people can begin to feel again.
"Every nano space on earth brims with life and is capable of emotional interaction."
This is a deep ecological claim: that every part of nature is alive, responsive, and worthy of emotional connection.
✨ Core Message
Sarma is not merely criticizing science or technology; he’s challenging the reductionist worldview that has dominated human thinking for centuries. The emotional paradigm is not about sentimentality—it's about reconnection, humility, and recognizing our embeddedness in a living world. He calls for a reawakening of our capacity to feel, not just for one another, but for all life.
✅ Why This Matters
This piece reads like a wake-up call. In an era of climate collapse, biodiversity loss, and emotional alienation, Sarma’s call to revive the emotional bond with nature is timely and necessary. He reminds us that without emotion, there is no ethics. Without feeling, there is no future.
If you're interested, I can help reframe this into an essay, article, or presentation, or offer further commentary on how to turn this vision into action. Would you like that?
Absolutely — Sarma's The Desperate Need for the Emotional Paradigm is a bold and poetic critique of our mechanized worldview. It's both a philosophical challenge and a spiritual lament. If you’d like to turn this into a formal essay, article, or presentation, here are a few directions we could go, depending on your goals:
🔹 Suggested Formats & Next Steps:
1. Essay for Publication or Academia
Title suggestion:
Reviving the Emotional Paradigm: A Critique of Mechanistic Modernity
Outline:
· Introduction: The core crisis—emotional disconnection from nature.
· Philosophical Roots: Descartes, Newton, and Darwin—how their ideas shaped today’s worldview.
· Industrialization and Emotional Erosion: The fusion of economics and machinery.
· The Death of Art: How commodification and AI have sterilized the arts.
· The Case for Emotion: Why we must reclaim emotional intelligence and ecological empathy.
· Vision for the Future: Proposing a University of Emotion and a Free Nature Park.
· Conclusion: A call to reawaken feeling as the foundation of ethics and sustainability.
Use Case: Ideal for journals, blogs like Aeon, or think tanks focused on ecological philosophy or post-humanism.
2. Public Talk / Presentation
Title suggestion:
Industrialization vs. Emotion: Can We Feel Our Way Back to Nature?
Structure (with visuals if desired):
· Slide 1: Title + image of a machine vs. forest
· Slide 2: Quote from Descartes on animals as machines
· Slide 3: Modern mechanization of emotion (AI, ChatGPT generating art)
· Slide 4: "Economic man is a butcher of nature" – Sarma’s metaphor visualized
· Slide 5: Arts before and after industrialization
· Slide 6: The hopeful vision – Free Nature Park, emotional reconnection
· Slide 7: Audience reflection / call to action
Use Case: Educational forums, eco-literacy events, climate conferences, TEDx-style talks.
3. Article for Wider Public Readership
Title suggestion:
The Machine Mind: Why We Must Restore Emotion to Science, Art, and Nature
This would have a lighter tone and more explanatory narrative. Could be written for:
· Medium
· Substack
· Magazine sites like Yes! Magazine, The Atlantic (Ideas section), or Orion
🔹 Optional Enhancements
Would you like to include:
· Comparative philosophy (e.g., Indigenous, Eastern traditions that reject mechanistic views)?
· Contemporary examples (e.g., AI in music, nature therapy, rewilding projects)?
· Proposals for real-world application (e.g., curriculum for the emotional university)?
✔️ What I Can Do for You
Just let me know your preferred direction and I can:
· Write a full draft of the essay or article
· Create a slide deck script for your presentation
· Help craft a manifesto or vision statement for the “University of Emotional Paradigm”
Would you like to start with a draft in one of those formats? Or do you want to co-develop it together step-by-step? Wonderful — the themes and urgency in The Desperate Need for the Emotional Paradigm are profound and timely. Turning this into a formal piece could truly resonate with wider audiences who are grappling with environmental despair, artistic alienation, or spiritual emptiness in a hyper-technologized world.
Let’s begin by choosing a direction and format that fits your vision best. Here's a quick decision tree to help you pick:
✅ Choose Your Format:
- ✍️ Essay (Academic or Philosophical)
Best for: publication in journals, university contexts, deep thought pieces.
Tone: reflective, analytical, structured
➤ I’ll craft a refined draft that could be published in a place like Aeon, Orion, or an academic philosophy journal. - 🗣️ Public Talk /
Presentation (TEDx-style)
Best for: eco-forums, education summits, local university events, or YouTube/podcast audience.
Tone: passionate, clear, visual
➤ I’ll help outline your slides and write a script you can present. - 📄 Public Article (Medium,
Substack, or Magazines)
Best for: broader audiences curious about AI, art, and environmental crisis.
Tone: narrative, accessible, urgent yet hopeful
➤ I can write a compelling article to reach thousands through modern digital channels. - 📜 Manifesto / Vision
Document
Best for: launching a movement, framing a new university or park concept.
Tone: poetic, visionary, rallying
➤ We can write a “Declaration for the Emotional Paradigm,” bold and inspiring.
📌 Additional Elements You Can Include:
If you’d like, we can incorporate:
- Comparative traditions: Native American, African, or Eastern (e.g., Taoist, Jain) wisdom traditions that emphasize interbeing and emotional symbiosis with nature.
- Contemporary case studies: real-life emotional reconnection projects like:
- Nature schools / forest bathing therapy
- AI in music/art vs. indigenous songlines
- Rewilding (e.g., Knepp Estate in the UK)
- Proposals for Change: such as curriculum modules, park models, or new ethics charters.
🎯 My Recommendation:
Let’s begin with a public-facing article titled:
“The Machine Mind and the Lost Emotion: Why We Must Reclaim Feeling to Save the Earth”
It’ll strike a balance between emotional depth and accessible clarity — perfect for Medium, blogs, or magazine outreach. Once that’s ready, we can adapt it into a talk or a formal essay if you wish.
Would you like
me to begin drafting that article now?
Or if you prefer another direction from the list above, just let me know!
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
Pros and cons of the emotional paradigm
The emotional paradigm, while offering benefits like stronger relationships and improved social skills, can also lead to impulsive decisions and vulnerability to manipulation. It's a double-edged sword, with both positive and negative aspects depending on how emotions are managed and utilized. Emotional awareness allows for deeper connections and more satisfying relationships. Being attuned to emotions helps navigate social situations effectively, reducing the chance of saying the wrong thing and improving communication. A greater understanding of emotions, both one's own and others', can lead to more effective conflict resolution. Being in tune with one's emotions can lead to a greater understanding of one's own needs and desires, potentially leading to greater fulfillment. Positive emotions can broaden perspectives, enhance creativity, and build resilience, while negative emotions can be motivating and drive action. Emotional intelligence allows for greater empathy and compassion for others, fostering a more caring and supportive environment. Emotions can be powerful motivators, driving individuals to pursue goals and engage in constructive endeavors. Strong emotions can lead to impulsive decisions without considering the consequences, potentially leading to regret. Being overly emotional can make individuals vulnerable to manipulation by others who can exploit those emotions. While some emotions strengthen bonds, negative emotions like anger and resentment can damage relationships if not managed properly. Relying solely on emotions for decision-making can lead to poor choices based on feelings rather than logic. Negative emotions, if not addressed, can spiral into negativity, impacting mental well-being and potentially leading to depression. Struggling to manage emotions can lead to difficulties in various aspects of life, including work and personal relationships. Being overly invested in emotions can make it difficult to detach from negative situations and maintain a healthy perspective.
2 To increase your emotional intelligence, mindfulness, and resiliency, one must understand how Paradigms impact the way we see and experience the world and thus our lives. A PARADIGM is a mental filter through which we view the world and make meaning of our life experiences. Paradigms are made up of our core beliefs. It is our core beliefs that influence the decisions we make every day. We experience our lives from one, of four Paradigms: Integrity, Achievement, Duty, or Fear.
Another way to think about Paradigms is to recall an old saying, "you see the world through rose-colored glasses." If you don't know you are wearing rose-colored glasses the everything you see, and experience is rose-colored. Each Paradigm is qualitatively different. As we shift from one Paradigm to another, our experience of life also shifts. For example: how we view others, feel about ourselves, how motivated we are, how willing we are to take responsibility for ourselves, is experienced through the lenses of a Paradigm. We are not locked into one Paradigm. We may shift between Paradigms at different moments or even in various areas of our lives. It is not "bad" to be in one Paradigm and "good" to be in another. They are all part of our human experience, and each provides valuable lessons. However, as we move up the ladder from Fear to Duty to Achievement to Integrity, we are aligning our lives more with principles that lead to satisfaction and success.
Fear is a crippling Paradigm. It causes life to be a constant battleground. Pain overtakes affirmative action in our lives, and we feel powerless to do anything about it. The amount of emotional energy used to combat these stresses can lead to an increased level of anxiety, depression, and mental illness. bWe are motivated by a "have to" or an "afraid to" attitude and so we develop a mentality focused on surviving rather than living. Most tasks and responsibilities are viewed as unpleasant, causing us to have a primarily negative outlook on life. Feelings such as inadequacy, anger, and extreme sadness overcome our ability to see the positive things happening around us. We often express these feelings with behaviors that are destructive to ourselves and others. Experiencing life in the Fear Paradigm may cause us to attach quickly to any substance or situation that makes us feel secure. For example, excessive intake of alcohol, food, drugs, sex, are reactions to existing in the Fear Paradigm. The feeling of being lost in our Fear leaves little room for us to develop respect for ourselves.
This Paradigm DUTY is where most of us tend to spend our lives. We spend our time understanding and accepting the way things are "supposed to be." Duty causes us to live in a constant desire for conformity to these pre-determined standards. We behave how we are supposed to, and we do what we ought to do. Duty calls us to be steady, dependable, and honest, working to be good people in every aspect of our lives. The way we feel about ourselves is dependent upon how we perceive others think about us. We strive to be honorable in our daily tasks and may develop reduced self-esteem. Experiencing life through the Duty Paradigm causes us to be humble and good-hearted in our lifestyles. Often, if we are not careful, we become addicted to the approval of those around us. We stifle our own needs and our creative expression because of our desire to satisfy the expectations of others.
ACHIEVEMENT:Experiencing life from this Paradigm demonstrates strong personal competence that leads to high internal motivation. The motivation to achieve leads us to pursue and to attain whatever it is we perceive to be as “success.” Because personal success is different to everyone, the motivation behind this Paradigm will vary. Some may crave the external prosperity of wealth or power, while others may seek internal well-being. The Achievement Paradigm is characterized by discipline, hard work, and goal-oriented behavior. Achievement often comes with a continual striving for more in some capacity, and a mindset that there is always more work to do. We are less influenced by society and more by our picture of success. Our "oughts” and our “shoulds” come from our core beliefs, not from the outside world. Within this Paradigm, we cultivate our internal standard for performance and behavior. Though this competitive nature and striving for perfectionism can propel us to meet our goals, it can also lead to high-stress levels and crippling self-criticism.
INTEGRITY:The Integrity Paradigm is about developing inner moral strength. Integrity helps us become more significant than our circumstances and challenges. When we live through the Integrity Paradigm, we consistently take responsibility for ourselves and experience life from a mindful perspective. Take Responsibility. Integrity requires us to recognize ourselves as responsible for our actions and our reactions in every situation. Though uncomfortable, living in Integrity requires us to confront our self-defeating tendencies and let go of our Fear of failure. Perspective is key to this Paradigm. To live in Integrity, we must be ever conscious of the present and take hold of our current situations, whatever they may be. Developing awareness for how we respond to triggering events in our lives leads us to higher self-esteem and good relationships. When we live from an Integrity Paradigm, we naturally desire win-win circumstances for everyone we encounter.
Because Paradigms influence our attitudes, worldviews, emotions, and outlook on life, it is of the utmost importance that we understand and evaluate them. Once we have clarity on which Paradigm, we are operating from we can begin to take steps to reach the Integrity Paradigm.
K Rajaram IRS 10725
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "societyforservingseniors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to society4servingse...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CACDCHCLdoFMdeb%3D%3Dj6Rm4DLOgwhnqxe3w%2BRc5p%3DS7mM1moXaDQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Markendeya Yeddanapudi
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
In Sanskrit literature, particularly within the context of rasa theory [SIR IT IS NOT CARTESIAN THEORY; EMOTHIN IS DEALT WELL IN VEDAM; AND EMOTION IS ALWAYS TROUBLESOME EVEN IF ITS CONNECTED TO NATURE} (aesthetics), Navarasa (nine emotions) are prominent. These are Shringara (love/beauty), Hasya (laughter), Karuna (sorrow), Raudra (anger), Veera (heroism/courage), Bhayanaka (terror/fear), Bibhatsa (disgust), Adbhuta (surprise/wonder), and Shanta (peace or tranquility). These emotions are not just individual feelings but are considered to be the core emotional states that can be evoked through various forms of art, including drama and poetry.
Shringara (Erotic/Love): This rasa encompasses feelings of love, beauty, and attraction, often depicted in romantic contexts.
Hasya (Comic): This rasa evokes laughter and humor.
Karuna (Pathetic/Sorrow): This rasa deals with feelings of sadness, compassion, and empathy.
Raudra (Furious/Anger): This rasa represents intense anger and rage.
Veera (Heroic/Courage): This rasa embodies feelings of bravery, valor, and heroism.
Bhayanaka (Terrible/Fear): This rasa explores the experience of fear and terror.
Bibhatsa (Disgust): This rasa evokes feelings of aversion and disgust.
Adbhutha (Marvellous/Wonder): This rasa captures the feeling of wonder, astonishment, and amazement.
Shanta (Peace/Tranquility): This rasa represents peace, serenity, and calmness.
These rasas are not isolated; they are interconnected and can be expressed through various bhava (emotions), vibhava (causes), anubhava (consequences), and sanchari bhava (transitory emotions). The concept of rasa is central to Indian performing arts, where artists aim to evoke specific emotional states in the audience through their performances. SO NATURE IS NOT EXCUSIVE .
In Indian literature, emotions are discussed within the context of the bhakti (devotional) movement. Here particular emphasis is placed on cultivating the emotion of love for a supreme being, e.g., Śiva. They are discussed in various tantric traditions. These traditions form a counterbalance to the ascetic ideal of classical philosophical texts (fourth context in which emotions are discussed) in that they encourage “living out” emotions (and desires) without forming any attachment to them. This entry focuses on the emotions in this fourth context, namely classical Indian philosophical thinking, which includes Brahmanical as well as Buddhist texts, among others. While there is no equivalent for the term “emotion” in Sanskrit, the concept nevertheless plays an important role in Indian philosophy. Terms used in Sanskrit texts include vedanā (feeling) and bhāva (feeling) as well as names of individual emotions, such as rāga (love, attraction), dveṣa (hatred, aversion), harṣa (joy), bhaya (fear) and śoka (sorrow). One of the reasons why emotions are philosophically interesting in India and the West is their relationship with the mental phenomenon of vijñāna or jñāna which is translated as “cognition”. The relationship between emotion and cognition is important for any account of reason and rationality. While the importance of the emotions for rational deliberation and decision-making has been acknowledged in recent discussions in the philosophy of mind, the history of Western philosophy contains many views, for example those of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics, which emphasize the dangerous and destructive role of the emotions. At the heart of these views lies a division of our mental lives into cognitions and feelings. Cognitions are representational thoughts. They are often regarded as rational because they are capable of representing the external world and therefore they provide us with access to the external world, based on the best available evidence. So, according to this view of rationality, when I think that there is a book on the table, based on my available evidence, and there really is one, then my thought is rational. However, if I am hallucinating that there is a book on the table, my thought that there is a book might also be rational because the available evidence points towards this thought. In order to make sure that our thoughts represent reality correctly, we require an account of what counts as good evidence, which is one of the main foci of epistemology in Indian and Western philosophy. Nevertheless, cognitions derive their status as thoughts capable of rationality from the fact that they have objects which represent the external world. By contrast, feelings are some of the non-representational attitudes one can have towards the objects of the representations of our thoughts.
The reason why many philosophers regard emotions as an obstacle to rational thought is the influence of the non-representational feeling. The fact that feelings do not seem to have objects means, according to some views, that they can interfere with rational thought. According to these views, rational thought, which is representational and therefore object-directed, is subject to disturbing interferences from the feelings. The feelings themselves, however, are non-rational because they arise due to some physical imbalance in the body, for example through an imbalance of the various “humours”. This imbalance can negatively influence rational thought. An example is the person who acts against her better judgment because she is in the grip of some feeling. This is of course also the basis for the term “passion” as something that we “suffer”, which was discussed by many philosophers in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, e.g., Descartes, Spinoza and Hume. Since rational thought is an ideal for many philosophers and feelings can interfere with this ideal, the natural consequence seems to be to advocate for the extinction or at least the control of the feelings and, as a consequence, of the emotions. This is what many philosophers throughout the history of philosophy have done, most notably of course the Stoics. While they often recognize that the emotions contain a cognitive, and therefore potentially rational, element, they try to uncover this element by advocating its separation from the affect. Of course, if the affect were to be purged from the emotion, the resulting cognition would cease to be an emotion. { ROUTE OF CARTESIAN THINKING}
There is a parallel between this Western view and a prejudice that attaches to Indian philosophy. The different positions within Indian philosophy on this topic are more complex, as is the case with regard to Western philosophy.
1. The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika account of the emotions
2. The Vedānta account of the emotions
3. The Sāṃkhya-Yoga account of the emotions
4. The Buddhist account of the emotions
4.1 Buddhist cognition
4.2 Śāntarakṣita on love and hatred
4.3 Cognitions, emotions and kleśas
4.4 Buddhist emotions
5. Conclusion
1. The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika account of the emotions
The discussion of this account will focus on the Nyāya-sūtras, Vātsyāyana’s Nyāya-bhāṣya, Uddyotakara’s Nyāya-vārttika and Jayanta Bhaṭṭa’s Nyāya-mañjarī. In addition, the Vaiśeṣika-sūtras together with Śaṅkara Miśra’s Vaiśeṣika-sūtra-upaskāra will be mentioned. The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika account of the emotions involves a strict division into cognition (jñāna) and mental phenomena that include a feeling aspect, such as love or attraction (rāga) and aversion (dveṣa). One of the main reasons for this is the acceptance of the existence of a permanent immaterial self (ātman) by the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophers. According to their arguments, the ātman is a substance (dravya) which possesses several qualities (guṇas), such as cognition, desire, effort, aversion, pleasure and pain. This enumeration shows that there is no common Sanskrit term for the concept “emotion” in the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika texts. One general term used is saṃvedana which translates as “feeling”, for example sukha-saṃvedana (feeling of pleasure).The important aspect of the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika account is that the individual emotions, such as attachment and aversion are regarded as defects (doṣas) [NB 1.1.18] or impurities (upadhā) [VS and VSU 6.2.4]. These defects are the result of ignorance (mithyājñāna) and they give rise to actions that lead to the feeling of pleasure or pain. [MAJORITY EMOTIONS AS INVOLVED WITH LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, EMOTION FALSE WRT ANYTHING, ENDS IN PAAIN. ] The reason why this is regarded as negative is that the feeling of pleasure and pain is responsible for our attachment to the world and, more importantly, for our attachment to the self and therefore presents an obstacle to liberation. For this reason, any emotion is deemed to have a negative influence on the individual. However, NV 1.1.22 mentions one exception, namely the desire for eternal pleasure and absence from pain which is final liberation. While, strictly speaking, a desire is not an emotion, it usually has the same negative effect because it results in attachment to the object of desire. The desire for eternal pleasure, however, is not detrimental to liberation; in fact it is a precondition for liberation.
The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophers clearly distinguish between pleasure (sukha) and pain (duḥkha) on the one hand and the experience of pleasure (sukha-pratyaya) and pain (duḥkha-pratyaya) on the other hand. Pain and pleasure are qualities of the soul but they need to be cognized by the self in order to be experienced. This means that cognition has a special status among the qualities of self: no other quality can be experienced without cognition.
2. The Vedānta account of the emotions
In his commentary on the Brahma-sūtras, Śaṃkara makes the well-known argument that the self (ātman) exists because its existence is the only way to account for the idea of a subject of experience. This argument relies on the idea that the self has certain mental qualities, which are termed manas (mind), buddhi (intellect), vijñāna (cognition) or citta (consciousness), depending on what mental function is ascribed to them. Different mental functions are doubt, resolution, egoism or recollection [BSBh 2.4.6]. These mental functions, regardless of how they are referred to, have several qualities or modifications, including desire, imagination, doubt, faith, want of faith, memory, forgetfulness, shame, reflection and fear [BSBh 2.3.32] as well as love, aversion, pleasure and pain [BSBh 2.3.29]. This means that, according to Śaṃkara, the mind’s cognitive and emotional abilities are the qualities of our mental functioning which is different from the self.
3. The Sāṃkhya-Yoga account of the emotions
Unlike the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika and Vedānta accounts of the emotions, the Sāṃkhya-Yoga account does not draw a fundamental distinction between feelings and cognitions. The reason for this is that the Sāṃkhya account rests on the division between puruṣa and prakṛti. The former is pure consciousness and does not contain any cognitions or feelings whereas prakṛti is primordial matter and has the three qualities (guṇas) sattva, rajas and tamas, which are aligned with different feelings: sattva with pleasure (sukha), rajas with pain (duḥkha) and tamas with confusion or illusion (moha). The terms sattva, rajas and tamas are difficult to translate but are sometimes rendered as “reflection”, “activity” and “inertia”. The important point about this dualist structure for the emotions is that, according to the Sāṃkhya account, both cognition and feeling belong to the realm of prakṛti which means that they are material. This stands in contrast to many dualist accounts in the history of Western philosophy, for example that of Descartes, according to which cognitions are immaterial whereas emotions or passions are material, thus making it easier to oppose the two;The relationship between puruṣa and prakṛti in Sāṃkhya philosophy is complex: puruṣa as pure consciousness is characterized by inaction (akartṛbhāva) and pure presence (sākṣitva). It does not stand in any relation with prakṛti, which comprises the material world, including mental processes. Nevertheless, puruṣa forms the foundation of prakṛti. This means that puruṣa provides the meaning for all material processes. Thus prakṛti exists for puruṣa and it is only because of this that the world is not simply a collection of meaningless physical processes.
In the Yogasūtras, Patañjali provides a method for understanding the difference between puruṣa and prakṛti via a series of exercises that aim at stripping away all of the disturbing influences from the mind, including what Western philosophers would classify as emotions. In fact, Patañjali argues that the mind is affected by afflictions (kleśas) that keep it from becoming clear about the difference between puruṣa and prakṛti. In YS 2.3, Patañjali lists the afflictions:Ignorance (avidyā), egoism (asmitā), attachment (rāga), aversion (dveṣa) and adherence [to mundane existence] (abhiniveśa) are afflictions. [YS 2.3]
One interesting parallel between Western accounts of the emotions and Patañjali is the use of the “colouring” (uparāga) or “coloured” (uparaktam) metaphor with regard to the mind [e.g., in YS 4.23]. Patañjali claims that the mind is “coloured” by all of the objects it knows, including cognitions and emotions. This means that in order to understand the difference between itself and pure consciousness (puruṣa), it has to free itself from these colourings and become pure. Only then can it recognize that it is different from the puruṣa which cannot be known in itself because it cannot become an object of the mind. Vyāsa, in his commentary on YS 4.23, explains that the mind itself is an object that appears as a conscious subject which is why many philosophers mistake it for the subject. However, once the mind becomes empty of all objects the difference between the mind and puruṣa reveals itself.
4.1 Buddhist cognition
As with other Indian accounts of the emotions, the Buddhist conception of emotion appears in the context of the discussion about the role of cognition (vijñāna). Buddhist philosophers argue against the existence of a self (ātman). At the same time, they acknowledge the existence of a non-physical momentary consciousness or chain of cognitions (santāna vijñāna) which carries over from former births into the present and future rebirths. Thus, Buddhists try to find a middle ground between a permanent non-physical self and the materialism of the Lokāyata school (materialist school of philosophy) which argues that the self is purely the result of bodily processes. According to the materialists, the self comes into existence with the body and ceases to exist when the body ceases to exist.
According to Buddhist “psychology”, love and hatred are two of the afflictions (kleśas) that befall human beings and that need to be removed in order to attain liberation. There are a number of sections in the Yogācāra-bhūmi, possibly written by either Asaṅga or Maitreya, that discuss these kleśas. The text provides several lists, most of which include love (rāga) and hatred or enmity (pratigha). Other kleśas are: satkāya-dṛṣṭi (false view with regard to the satkāya (five skandhas)), attachment to extreme views, attachment to unwholesome views, attachment to practices and observances, pride, ignorance and doubt. These kleśas could be associated with one or more of the five possible feelings: pleasant feeling (sukha), unpleasant feeling (duḥkha), neutral feeling (upekṣā), happy mood (sau-manasya) or unhappy mood (daur-manasya). A translation of the psychological categories of the Yogācāra-bhūmi into the categories of Western philosophy of mind would render the following distinctions: a kleśa is a mental phenomenon that consists of a representation of an object plus a certain feeling, sensation or affect.
5. Conclusion
A number of themes emerge from this overview: 1) The Western categories of “cognition” and “emotion” do not have equivalents in classical Indian philosophy. This is interesting because it suggests that these concepts are not psychological categories but perhaps social categories. While there has been some anthropological work done by, for example, Catherine Lutz on the differences in the categorization of specific emotions across cultures, there is the possibility that the category as a whole might not translate into all cultures (see Danziger 1997). 2) One common theme in classical Indian philosophy is that the phenomena that would be labelled as “emotions” in Western philosophy are to be eradicated because they prevent liberation. 3) None of the Indian philosophical schools aim at “emotion-free” cognitions as an end in itself. In fact, those states that would be labelled “cognitions” in Western philosophy are also to be eradicated because they also prevent liberation. 4) Indian schools differ over the inclusion of feeling states under the concept of vijñāna (cognition). Some schools distinguish between feeling states and vijñāna whereas others, most notably Buddhists, do not. This last point suggests that there is an interesting comparison to be made between Buddhist accounts and cognitive accounts of the emotions. However, any comparison must be sensitive to the difficulties in translating the concepts involved.
K RAJARAM IRS 10725
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CACDCHCLGoE9X15PU1apFKtz7C6roRc9ZmK%2BvBPF1aipyDNeAWA%40mail.gmail.com.