Rationality and Emotions

Our decisions are driven a large part by pent up emotions. The most critical decisions are made in the moment of catharsis- a moment of a release from suspended feelings. Most people's view their decisions as rational, justifiable and strategic. It is at the end of the day, a release from the multitude of emotions- the decision insofar is to eradicate this suspended emotion.

Therefore bouts of jealousy, envy, rage, dictates therefore our decision in removing this moment of suspense. Society has insofar kept these emotions in check via means of social order, culture and symbolism. Hence our pent up emotions does not reveal itself and is kept in check by means of denial, eating, laughing and transposing. These are socially acceptable means by which emotions are released or kept in check.

But the question begs that is emotions therefore rational? Hence, is anger, envy and jealousy therefore the result of real injustice or inequality being done?

Have you seen a dog that is affectionate and loyal- hence therefore is the dog's emotions rational in this case? And if so, where does this rationality comes from? Therefore if a dog's emotions are rational, then what is the difference therefore between a dog and a human?

Therefore it is my belief that the difference lies in the proportion of which a dog and a human is able to approximate his emotions with that of his actions. The greater therefore the grievance- injustice or inequality done- the greater the action. Hence a person who acts beyond the justification of the emotion often commits a sin or a wrong. Hence we feel guilty for kicking an animal or ill-treating a child out of anger- because the action does not approximate the emotion.

Therefore we have release our emotions via actions quite disproportionate to that of the emotions. Hence therefore we do feel guilt, a sense of doubt and a lingering unsettled uneasiness in spite of the release.

Since emotions therefore in this case can be structured in the sense to create a release therefore at the critical moments to influence the decisions and therefore the outcome. It is therefore an excuse to justify a emotional decision in the name of a rational one.

Music in shopping centres, movies, magazines and the television are all avenues of which these emotions can be created and yet be released. It would then appear insofar that it was rational but yet these release are often strategically placed to ensure an outcome- creating a suspense and thereby providing an outlet via a decision. The creation of these mediums can then calibrated to ensure a favourable outcome at critical moments and to cause a frenzy or a panic- since very often, we experience very similar emotions. It then ultimately have made the frenzy or panic seems almost rational.

Since emotions in itself is invisible and cannot be prosecuted- since private properties needs an endorsement and does not say anything about the arise-ment of the contract in the first place- it would then can be said to put it bluntly as a point- a science of theft- isn't it. The reason henceforth is that I might not have bought or made a decision had one not covertly placed mechanisms of which to manipulate my decisions and therefore influence the outcome to the interest of the perpetrator. Hence in such context, this decision is therefore questionably rational.

To put it plainly, I might not be writing this piece had i not been spurred by emotion- which perhaps that of release created by a certain event- since for example, say I would not be writing this piece had I say been stuck in a dessert for some time.

Therefore to say that our decisions are purely rational is to say that we are truly independent of these influences and if so, I would like to meet these guy of which I would seek counsel in all matters.