Re: CCAT: EMOTIONS
phayes@cs.uiuc.edu (Pat Hayes)
Message-id: <199411282157.AA05802@dante.cs.uiuc.edu>
X-Sender: phayes@dante.cs.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 1994 15:59:32 -0600
To: Don Dwiggins <dwig@markv.com>
From: phayes@cs.uiuc.edu (Pat Hayes)
Subject: Re: CCAT: EMOTIONS
Cc: fritz@rodin.wustl.edu, srkb@cs.umbc.edu, wisdom@mcs.com
Sender: owner-srkb@cs.umbc.edu
Precedence: bulk
At 9:28 AM 11/28/94 -0800, dwig@markv.com wrote:
>Pat Hayes writes:
>> BUt how can they not be? If someone can be more or less angry, and more or
>> less afraid, etc., then there is a linear vector space being defined right
>> there. Maybe only a subset of it is biologically possible, and maybe
>> behavior is best predicted by some complicated kind of surface or subspace
>> in this vector space, but what other kind of description COULD be given of
>> emotional state, if we decide to set out by listing the emotions? What
>> other ways to proceed are there?
>
>You might start with the psychological literature, to see if there are any
>generally accepted models of emotional states or complexes. One that occurs
>to me is Kubler-Ross' model of the progression of emotions following a
>severe loss (something like denial-> anger-> depression-> bargaining->
>acceptance, if my memory serves).
I think we are at cross purposes. My point was essentially a logical one.
If we can list emotions - eg anger, depression, etc (is acceptance an
emotion?) - and say that people can be more or less in them, then we have
a vector space. Add time and its a more complicated vector space and no
doubt there are preferred manifolds in it and so forth, but Fritz
originally objected to the very idea of a vector space as being a suitable
framework. I have some sympathy with this intuition, but can't see what
kind of model would not be naturally describable as a vector space.
Still, looking at the literature would probably be a good start, I have to
admit.
>> <You know, email needs a new punctuation mark. I need to be able to
>> distinguish a rhetorical question from a sincere, genuine question. That
>> was a genuine question, not a rhetorical denial.>
>
>How about ";?" The semicolon is used in smileys as a wink.
NIce idea. I wonder how we can get people to use it ;?
Pat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Beckman Institute (217)244 1616 office
405 North Mathews Avenue (217)328 3947 or (415)855 9043 home
Urbana, IL. 61801 (217)244 8371 fax
Phayes@cs.uiuc.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------