Reality seen from the Eyes of a TRIBalance.
The BBC ecstatic and delighted with
Nazi Ice Shit (About Freedom of Emotions).
I will not be using styles for this page.
You know, to Me, sometimes or most of the time
the BBC News is just Shit. Yes, shit, like the kind
of shit you would normally see in a Toilet. And I
don't like to try and sculpt that, because that is
gross. I only do so for Scientific Research, like
a Scientists that does a Faeces Exam. I strongly
suggest that People do not read the BBC News.
The reason I put the following piece of Media
Excrement it to comply with Scientific Ethics
and show why I reacted the way I did as a
Common-Limit to something I found gross. You
are not required to read, contemplate or
consume the following News Excrement. To Me
it's like looking at a Vomit, next to the Toilet,
in a Public Bathroom while desperately wanting
to use the Toilet to shit.
The following has been labelled: Toxic Shit.
Included only for argument purposes.
Use with Precaution.
A new way to look at emotions – and how to
A new theory of emotions reveals just how easily our feelings
can be shaped by context – offering some powerful ways for
dealing with stress.
By David Robson
12 October 2017
One day at graduate school, one of Lisa Feldman Barrett’s
colleagues asked her out on a date. She didn’t really fancy him,
but she had been in the lab all day and felt like a change of
scenery, so she agreed to go to the local coffee shop. As they
chatted, however, she started to become flushed in the face, her
stomach was churning, and her head seemed to whirl. Maybe she
was wrong, she thought: perhaps she really did like him. By the
time they left, she’d already agreed to go on a second date.
Still feeling somewhat giddy, she got home, put her keys on the
floor, and promptly threw up. It wasn’t love, after all; it was
flu. She spent the next week in bed.
How could someone mistake the rush of an infection for the fever
of love? A psychologist at Northeastern University in Boston,
Massachusetts, Barrett has spent her career examining the ways
we construct emotions, culminating in a recent book –
How Emotions Are Made – and her experience on that date
is just one of many examples that illustrate the ways our
feelings can confound us.
Although we may believe strongly that we know how we feel, she
shows that the sensations of anger, anxiety, hunger, or illness
are not nearly as distinct as we assume – and we may sometimes
misinterpret those signals with profound consequences.
Fortunately, Barrett’s theories also offer us some practical
ways to gain control of our feelings, and to live a calmer and
more productive life.
It’s quite a departure from the centuries-old assumption –
popularised by Charles Darwin’s book The
Expression of Emotions in Man and Animal – that we display
emotion “fingerprints”. This theory suggested that each emotion
creates a specific combination of facial expression, body
language, and other physiological cues such as heart rate or
Yet the scientific research was never quite so clean cut, and
Barrett’s detailed analyses of the findings now suggest that
there is no such thing as an emotion fingerprint. Each emotion
may be represented by a whole range of reactions in the brain
and the body, and there is a huge amount of overlap between each
one. Instead, she points out that the way we interpret our
body’s signals – and whether we actually feel excited or anxious
as a result – depends entirely on context and circumstance, and
it can be easily shaped by our expectations.
"For her piece de resistance, Barrett mashed up
baby foods and smeared it on (clean) diapers
As a simple comparison, she describes a “gross foods party” she
threw for her daughter’s 12th birthday. When her daughter’s
friends arrived, she served them the usual party food like pizza
and fruit juice: but she smeared the cheese with green fruit
colouring to make it look mouldy, and she served the juice in
medical urine sample cups. For her piece de resistance, she
mashed up baby foods and smeared it on (clean) diapers.
As you might expect, the children were suitably disgusted. “Many
guests could not bring themselves to touch the food as they
involuntarily simulated the tastes and smells,” she writes.
“Even though the guests knew the smears were food, several
You can see BBC Future’s attempt to re-enact the experiment in
the video below. And although our colleagues had stronger
stomachs than the average 12-year-old, we can safely say that
few enjoyed the experience.
We can probably all identify with their reactions. The serious
point, though, is that the brain was constructing the
experience: the mere thought of the baby poo was causing them to
completely reinterpret the smell of the food in front of them,
triggering the disgust response.
It may seem a trivial example, but Barrett argues that the same
thing happens with our broader emotions. Consider her date.
Those few physical sensations – the churning stomach and flushed
face – might have been (correctly) interpreted as ‘feeling ill’
if she’d been at home, in bed, with a thermometer in her mouth.
But since she was on a date, her brain instead constructed an
entirely different emotion – a genuine feeling of romantic
attraction – from exactly the same physical responses.
(According to the classical view, in contrast, the two feelings
should have been easily identifiable thanks to their own unique
A stomach ache, similarly, might signal a gut infection – or, if
you were away from your family, might be confused with feelings
of homesickness and longing. A rushing heart beat could be
interpreted as fun and excitement on a rollercoaster, or acute
anxiety if you are giving the speech at a wedding. Or it might
simply signal that you’ve drunk too much coffee, but
physiologically, there may not be much of difference.
"Particular concepts like ‘anger’ or ‘disgust’
are not genetically pre-determined
Barrett’s theory has many implications. For one thing, she
argues that we learn those interpretations from others.
“Particular concepts like ‘anger’ or ‘disgust’ are not
genetically pre-determined,” she
writes. “Your familiar emotion concepts are built-in only
because you grew up in a particular social context where those
emotion concepts are meaningful and useful. Other cultures can
and do make other kinds of meaning from the same sensory input.”
Our parents and friends, TV and books, and our own past life
experiences, our brain have all taught us how categorise
particular situations, the sensations they bring, and the ways
we should respond – and those concepts will, in turn, determine
how we feel in the future. But two people, with different pasts,
may therefore come to categorise sensations very differently.
This is a direct contrast to thinkers like Darwin, who had
argued that emotions like ‘anger’ and ‘disgust’ are universally
expressed and recognised by everyone across the globe. Barrett’s
lab visited a group of Himba people from Namibia, for instance,
and asked them to sort photos of facial expressions into
different groups according to similarity. She found
that their categories were markedly different from those the
average Westerner might make, and their interpretations of the
pictures were similarly diverse. One picture of a wide-eyed
stare tended to be considered fearful by Westerners, for
instance: but the Himba described it as a tarera (‘looking’)
face instead. And her lab found the same results when they asked
the Himba to categorise the sounds of different vocal
"The smiles we recognise today – broad, toothy,
and with crinkling at the eyes – only became more common in the
18th Century, as dentistry became more accessible
Barrett offers many other examples of variation between
cultures; Utka Eskimos appear to have no clearly
defined concept of anger, for instance, while Tahitians seem not
to share our concept of sadness. We can also see how emotional
concepts have changed throughout history. She points out
that the ancient Greeks and Romans did not seem to
smile spontaneously with big broad grins, for instance –
suggesting that their expressions of pleasure and positive
feelings could have been quite different from ours. (Apparently,
the word smile does not even exist in Latin.) Instead, it
appears that the smiles we recognise today – broad, toothy, and
with crinkling at the eyes – only became more common in the 18th
Century, as dentistry became more accessible.
As Mary Beard, a classicist at the University of
Cambridge, puts it: “That is not to say that Romans
never curled up the edges of their mouths in a formation that
would look to us much like a smile; of course they did. But such
curling did not mean very much in the range of significant
social and cultural gestures in Rome. Conversely, other
gestures, which would mean little to us, were much more heavily
freighted with significance.”
Weathering the storm
This is not merely academic curiosity: Barrett’s book suggests
some ways that we could all ride the tides of our emotions a
little more wisely.
The fact that states like hunger, fatigue, or illness, all
produce the same signals as emotions like anger, anxiety,
sadness, or anxiety, emphasises the importance of looking after
your body as a way to stabilise your mood. That can include
things like a healthy diet and regular exercise, but Barrett
also emphasises the importance of comforts like a good massage,
which can reduce inflammation in the body. Such pleasures are
not just luxuries – they may be a simple, practical way of
keeping your mood in balance.
Mindfulness meditation, meanwhile, should encourage you to
observe and deconstruct those bodily signals: understanding the
physical origins of the emotions can help you to regulate the
feelings. “Many things that seem unrelated to emotion actually
have a profound impact on how you feel, because of the porous
boundary between the social and the physical,” she says.
Barrett also emphasises the benefits of a good emotion
vocabulary. As her work has shown, our emotion concepts are not
hard-wired, but learnt – and some people have many more nuanced
ways of reading their bodily signals and describing how they are
making them feel in a particular context. Rather than simply
describing yourself as happy, for instance, you may distinguish
whether you are “blissful” or “inspired”; rather than just
feeling “sad”, you might say you are “dejected” or
The result is a deeper understanding of the situation you are
in, perhaps helping you to savour your pleasure with new relish,
or, conversely, to reframe your unhappiness so that it no longer
feels so all-encompassing. It may even cause you to reconsider
the source of your discomfort, and remind you of ways that you
have righted your mood in the past.
As a result of these benefits, people with greater “emotion
granularity” (as Barrett calls it) tend to do better at school,
drink less and recover from a stressful situation more quickly.
They also seem to be in better health: they visit doctor less
frequently, take less medication and are less likely to be
hospitalised for illness.
She says that there are many ways to learn new emotion concepts,
such as reading widely or watching stimulating films. You could
also try out new experiences, pushing yourself out of your
comfort zone and then observe how it makes you feel. “Try on new
perspectives like you try on new clothing,” she says. “Just like
painters learn to see fine distinctions in colours, and wine
lovers develop their palettes to experience tastes that
non-experts cannot, you can practise [emotion] categorising like
any other skill.”
Given that other cultures can categorise their feelings in
different ways, you might also benefit from borrowing terms from
other languages. Schadenfreude, for instance, is a now-familiar
addition to the English language that encapsulates the
bitter-sweet feelings that we may feel at another’s misfortune.
But there are many more, often highly specific terms we could
all learn – as we recent discussed in our feature on the
untranslatable emotions you never knew you had.
Eventually, you may find that you are able to categorise a
situation with wonderful precision. Barrett, for instance, lists
“gezellig”, the Dutch “feeling of togetherness”, “age-otori”
from Japanese, which apparently describes “the feeling of
looking worse after a haircut” and “litost”, from Czech culture,
which refers to “the torment over one’s misery combined with the
desire for revenge”. As she puts it: “Each word is another
invitation to construct your feelings in new ways.”
Barrett recognises that these steps may seem a little simplistic
for someone in the midst of an emotional crisis, and she doesn’t
claim that they are an immediate solution to any problem. “Can
you snap your fingers and change your feelings at will, like
changing your clothes?” she writes. “Not really. Even though you
construct your emotional experiences, they can still bowl you
over in the moment. However, you can take steps now to influence
your future emotional experiences, to sculpt who you will be
David Robson is a freelance writer. He is @d_a_robson
Join 800,000+ Future fans by liking us on Facebook,
or follow us on Twitter.
If you liked this story, sign up for the weekly bbc.com
features newsletter, called “If You Only Read 6 Things
This Week”. A handpicked selection of stories from BBC Future,
Earth, Culture, Capital, and Travel, delivered to your inbox
What is the Point of Freedom of Expression if it is
going to be against the Freedom of Emotions in all it's Integrity?
Some People seem to be less concentrated in what
People want and more concentrated in what they want to Impose and that
is not Democracy.
The Old German Nazis are just an expression of a
Problem that is as Antique as the Human Race:
Nazis for Me are: An Emotion Controlling, Hypocrite and Corrupt
Can also be called Pharisee (It's Antique Name).
Their Dream, that of the Nazis is to ensure that People are more
Controllable, like Cattle. And if some are molesting the Corrupt
Plutocracy then those should be removed with little fuss, like Cattle.
In order to Prevent the Control of the Emotions of the General
Population and in order to ensure the "Land of the Free People (that
enjoy free will)" all forms of Royalty and Nobility have been removed
from the Country "United States of America" by Law.
You usually cannot have an [Emotion Control Obsession on the General
Plan for Integrity] and [Respect for the Free Will of the People] at the
same time, in the terms that the BBC News is contextualized in.
The BBC News does not want to respect the Free Will of the People, it
wants to Control the Emotions of the People and teach People to want to
be more like Cattle with a Fascist Media that weakens their Free Will.
In General Terms I do not
support Emotional Control if
it might hurt Free Will in the Scope of Corruption.
The Chat Systems, the Cruise Ship Game, the Cruise
Ship Social Network, the Social Network for any
with Jobs or not and the Space
Games all depend on and even sell the Idea of more FREEDOM OF EMOTION and Free Will.
Why do I always appreciate Delta Goodrem's and
Emma Hewitt's company and I tell them that I love
them every time I close a session, aside from the
fact that we all get stronger in the long term?
Because I want some Freedom of Emotion for all.
Why do I complain that Taylor
Swift gets into Media
Troubles looking like a Marionette incapable of
thinking and having an Opinion on her own?
Because I want some Freedom of Emotion for all.
Why do I insist Paris Hilton should go
and have Fans that can think, have an Opinion, share
and feel emotions about the Paris Hilton Celebrity?
Because I want some Freedom of Emotion for all.
Why do I still consider Nadia Ali a Guest at My House
even if she does not say a word in Twitter and seems
to be totally retired even if she can still channel a lot
of Emotions with her Music and why do I insist she
fights Google Rape?
want some Freedom of Emotion for all.
Why do I seem to try to convince Katy Perry to
become a Social Network Celebrity with her own
System like Lady Gaga has so that what Katy and
her Fans feel matter a lot more for their Group and
for a Democratic Society?
Because I want some Freedom of
Emotion for all.
Why do I want to see Journalist Social Networks
where having a Job is not a requirement where
professional, Graduated Journalists can use their
Freedom of Expression even if the reality is that
most Journalists that Graduate as such do not
get a chance to do the Job they graduated for?
Because I want some Freedom of Emotion for all.
Freedom of Emotion is an Essential Part of not only much of the Systems that I
design for the General, Common Public, like the Chat and Ship Games, but also
for the Exercise of Free Will in a Democratic System and
in a Democratic Society.
I stand for Free Will, the
Freedom of Emotion as a part of it and the
Democratic Will of the People and as you
could see and are free to judge about it, the BBC News
does not, as it insists People should be more controllable, like Cattle,
with it's Mary Beard and all.
I would not support Media that tries to control your
emotions and thus suppress your Free Will for the Benefit of a Corrupt and
Unaccountable Elite that enjoys treating People as Programmable Slaves.