It seems that we have been conditioned to believe the classical view of emotions. Barrett offers a different theory- the theory of constructed emotion. Of these two, which one do you believe to be the most plausible? If neither, what do you think?
Barrett refers to the classical theory of emotions as ‘intuitive’ and ‘comfortable’, how do you feel about it? How do you feel about the constructed view?
Barrett discusses how, when asked about their emotional states, people often use the same terms, ‘angry’, anxious’, ‘sad’, to refer to different emotional states. What does this mean for the study of emotions in philosophy, if we tend, as a whole, to experience and label our emotions differently?
If we can say with certainty that each emotion does not have a diagnostic facial expression, then why do we tend to make the same or similar faces when confronted with the same or similar emotions?
Barrett refers to emotions as emotion categories, broad groups of emotional events that share commonalities. Do you find this approach useful? Is any meaning or utility lost in the terminology shift?
Shared by: Hunter and Madison
Image Credit: Credit to